December 22, 2014, 02:24:04 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Dylan777

Pages: 1 ... 115 116 [117] 118 119 ... 292
1741
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Amazon Rocks
« on: December 20, 2013, 12:57:49 AM »
I would love amazon even more if it didn't collect sales tax.

+1...I would support local camera stores IF ONLY there is no sale tax. With my recent purchase, 400mm f2.8 IS II price tag + .0775% sale tax =   :'( :'( :'(

What happened to the 300 f/2.8 II?

Love everything about 300mm(from IQ, light weight, AF-speed) just little short for my shooting. Decided to go with my original plan, the 400mm. According to MTF chart, the 400mm is good as 300, with 1.4x TC is slightly better. I'm speaking on paper data of course.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-400mm-f-2.8-L-IS-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

1742
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Amazon Rocks
« on: December 20, 2013, 12:37:38 AM »
I would love amazon even more if it didn't collect sales tax.

+1...I would support local camera stores IF ONLY there is no sale tax. With my recent purchase, 400mm f2.8 IS II price tag + .0775% sale tax =   :'( :'( :'(

1743
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: December 19, 2013, 04:32:14 PM »
The "compression" from the 200 is exactly the same as the compression from the 85 if shot from the same place, to get the same framing then just crop the 85 shot. The 200 f2 will give you narrower dof than the 85 when wide open at the same subject distance, and give you more pixels on target, but so does a 200 f2.8.

Not saying the 200 f2 isn't an awesome lens, just pointing out that lenses do not make "compression" that is perspective, and perspective is made by position alone.

I don't get that, a telephoto compresses the subject and background more than a wider lens, no? A tree in the background seem closer to the subject with a tele than with a wide angle. I thought that the compression of the subject  and perspective has very much to do with the focal length?

The persepctive to me, wouldn't look the same with the 85 shot closer, but maybe I just don't get you meant..
If you make the shot from exactly the same position with the two lenses and crop the 85 image to match the 200 image, they would look exactly the same. But if you move in closer to the subject with the 85, to get exactly the same framing, the perspective would be wider with the 85.

Ah, takker Eldar. That is a half truth though, you would have less of those superb pixels on the subject. Btw is the 85 shot at f2 or f1.2 in that scenario. And wouldn't the 85 show more background at f2 than the 200 at f2 even if the perspective is the same?

I'm no expert in this, but it looks like f1.8 on 85L II. Here is the background on 85L II @ f1.8.
That is one concentrated little painter. Very nice image indeed!

Thanks Eldar,

1744
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: December 19, 2013, 03:55:45 PM »
The "compression" from the 200 is exactly the same as the compression from the 85 if shot from the same place, to get the same framing then just crop the 85 shot. The 200 f2 will give you narrower dof than the 85 when wide open at the same subject distance, and give you more pixels on target, but so does a 200 f2.8.

Not saying the 200 f2 isn't an awesome lens, just pointing out that lenses do not make "compression" that is perspective, and perspective is made by position alone.

I don't get that, a telephoto compresses the subject and background more than a wider lens, no? A tree in the background seem closer to the subject with a tele than with a wide angle. I thought that the compression of the subject  and perspective has very much to do with the focal length?

The persepctive to me, wouldn't look the same with the 85 shot closer, but maybe I just don't get you meant..
If you make the shot from exactly the same position with the two lenses and crop the 85 image to match the 200 image, they would look exactly the same. But if you move in closer to the subject with the 85, to get exactly the same framing, the perspective would be wider with the 85.

Ah, takker Eldar. That is a half truth though, you would have less of those superb pixels on the subject. Btw is the 85 shot at f2 or f1.2 in that scenario. And wouldn't the 85 show more background at f2 than the 200 at f2 even if the perspective is the same?

I'm no expert in this, but it looks like f1.8 on 85L II. Here is the background on 85L II @ f1.8.

1745
Landscape / Re: Sky on Fire!
« on: December 19, 2013, 07:49:08 AM »
Seriously, none of these qualify as "sky on fire".


Since I'm saying that, I suppose I should post something that I liken more to "sky on fire".

Attached is something that I'd consider closer to "sky on fire" but even then, it is just an "auto-tone" out of Lightroom (no crop or manual saturation, etc, changes)  but even then, there may be a couple of better ones I've got.

Well, if attachments work... :/

My Samsung Galaxy S4 takes better picture than that :P

1746
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: December 19, 2013, 07:36:45 AM »
Merry Christmas and happy new year to everyone from me as well.

Here's a shot from yesterday , 200 @ f2. Spring weather in December, not complaining!



I like the bokeh. It looks like 85L II

1747
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: December 19, 2013, 07:33:49 AM »
Appreciate all the comments, my last until after New Year, to all you CR people & your families, have a wonderful Xmas and may the New Year bring you all that you wish for (I'm wishing for a 1Dxs, Thanks Santa).

1Dx 400f/2.8 II + 1.4x, Shot @ 560mm f/4 & 1/1000th ISO800

As always, beautiful photo eml58 ;)

With 400mm f2.8 IS II, I think I'll be thinner end of next year. Another way to lose weights ;D 

1749
Lenses / Re: Should I choose the 70-200 2.8 II?
« on: December 18, 2013, 04:31:14 PM »
Dear all,
How difficult life can be. This afternoon I want to make a decision. I will visit the shop and go for the Mark5dIII.
There is a little voice in me whispering why not the 6d? Well, I think go for the 5dIII because you neer know what to shoot in the future.
I've read so much about the 70-200 2.8 (new version). Heavy, but sharp. I know this will be my longest zoom and, visiting Scotland and Shetland, in the nearby feature I will buy extenders to give it a bit more reach.
Should I buy this lens, because the lens will be fast enough with the extenders or should I pick the f.4?
Or is the lens really to heavy and will stay at home too much?
Thank you for reading!

Congrats on your toy :)

70-200 f2.8 IS II is Canon BEST zoom. Weight and size shouldn't be a huge issue compared to f4 or 70-300mm L. Your 5D III body is bigger than 6D, therefore, the 70-200 f2.8 IS ii feels better and more balance.

If budget is not issue, f2.8 version II is the way to go. IQ on current 70-300mm L & 100-400mm L is NOT considered as "Wow" yet.

1750
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Unthinkable: Swapped out 5D3 for 6D
« on: December 17, 2013, 12:48:00 AM »
I am assuming you are happy with these ?

Was that a statement or question? Yes, I'm happy with those photos

I was wondering why you posted them in this thread..... shots like these could have been taken with a 6D you decided to use an outer focus point which is fine but you could have quite easily used the centre point either with BBF or not!!

Really? Mind posting a few images?

Okay I was trying to be civil, I was wondering what point you were trying to make posting mediocre images in this thread!! Was it to illustrate how superior you think the 5D3 is because if it was i think you failed miserably!!

XD that's cute, with your little tantrum. I'd re-read what you just wrote because its ludicrously funny.

Calling someone else's images mediocre while raising yourself with no images makes you look very bad and of sub-par IQ. ;D
I have posted superior images to those in the appropriate thread and they were taken with a 6D, I did not post them and try to make a silly point on someone elses post!! But hey if you are happy with them then good luck!!
You haven't posted any photos on CR. Your attachments bin is empty. XD quite hilarious. perhaps we can see your photos because after all these photos are "mediocre" to your high standards.

Please link us to the threads because perhaps you posted from flickr.
I went into the 6D Sample images post and type in my name, here is a link.... http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,11600.msg301685/topicseen.html#msg301685

You have any photos taken with 6D with subject moving around, exp. kids?

1751
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Unthinkable: Swapped out 5D3 for 6D
« on: December 17, 2013, 12:27:57 AM »
Just playing devils advocate here for a second, and I am not interested in a bitch slap contest.

While there is absolutely nothing wrong with the images Dylan777 posted here http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,18417.msg347711.html#msg347711 as an example of AF performance they are not particularly convincing images. , also there is no depth of field at play here, the dancers are so far away and close enough together to be well covered even when shot at f2.8, certainly going by the sizes as displayed here. Indeed as displayed both the footlights and the curtains seem acceptably sharp.

The photos were resized to post here.

I agree with you about distance and DOF. My point was - since 5D III has 41 AF points(dual cross & cross), why not frame and shoot with one of outer points especially I'm interested keeping the last girl on the right in focus.

In regard of - "The dancers are in white against dark green curtains, this provides very good contrast, an easy target for AF" - you think 6D outer AF point(s) be able deliver same sharpness?

1752
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Unthinkable: Swapped out 5D3 for 6D
« on: December 16, 2013, 09:30:42 AM »
I am assuming you are happy with these ?

Was that a statement or question? Yes, I'm happy with those photos

1753
Lenses / Re: Need Your Help on My Next Lens--Yes, the Lens Questions Again!
« on: December 16, 2013, 12:50:35 AM »
No question 24-70.

It is the only single lens I could easily shoot an entire wedding with.
Agreed! You are not going to have the time to go swapping lenses in and out as the bride walks down the aisle...

+1...24-70 II & 70-200 f2.8 IS II is killer combo for wedding shooters. Next move, sell the sig 35mm and use the money toward 85L II.

1754
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Unthinkable: Swapped out 5D3 for 6D
« on: December 16, 2013, 12:10:32 AM »
Oh my, I won't get into an argument with you, but this is sooooo unreasonable - with a faster lens like f2.8 which you'll often use for portraiture, the 6d's center point is non-cross, meaning you carefully have to focus on an appropriate contrast part or you'll get af (micro)-misses. The bit of 6d less noise (if any) certainly doesn't compensate for that.

Agreed. It is these kinds of comments, that the 6D is superior to the 5D III "for most scenarios", that is so wrong. The 6D is superior "technically, in a FEW areas", but in EVERY respect and in every scenario, the 5D III is the superior camera that will perform superiorly and produce better images.

Definitely agreed regarding actually making images. I loved my 5d3 for the fact that it made getting the shot easier for me. I am definitely getting more misses and need to be much more mindful of the AF. Did a 4 hour shoot on Friday that would have definitely been easier with the 5D.

Results based on glass used:

24II was off a lot. Not completely. But definitely was not focusing critically most of the time. Yes, it has been run through FoCal with the new body.

24-70II was having a hard time capturing focus at all but was decent when it finally hit.

70-200II worked perfectly. But it was also solely used in the outdoor portion of the event

50L was performed on par with how it was on the 5D just based on memory (surprisingly).

8-15 fine as expected just due to the type of lens
My focus point was the last girl on the right. With 5D III + 70-200 f2.8 IS II, I took almost 200 photos with outer AF point, because I wanted to frame the group & stage. Didn't even miss a single shot. 1st photo at f3.2 and 2nd at f2.8

Not to mention, I was about 150' or more away from stage.

1755
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony RX100 MKII accessories?
« on: December 15, 2013, 11:46:20 PM »
I'm planning on purchasing the Sony RX100 MK II, and I'm looking for some advice on a LCD screen protector and lens filter. 

I'd like to purchase a LCD screen protector, and I'm considering the Giottos SP83015 LCD screen protector, which is supposed to fit the RX100, but the reviews on the B&H website state that the SP83015 does not fit the LCD screen exactly.  Is there a different Giottos model number that will fit the RX100 MK II better...how about the SP8306?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/746398-REG/Giottos_SP83015_Aegis_Multi_Layer_Screen_Protector.html

Also, does anyone have a recommendation for a lens filter for the RX100 MK II, or should I go without one?

Thanks

I bought the original Sony version, couldn't be happier: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/907016-REG/Sony_PCK_LM15_LCD_Protective_Cover.html

Dylan, thanks for the reply.  Does the Sony LCD protector have an anti-reflective coating i.e. how does it perform on sunny days with glare/reflections? 

I was leaning toward the Giottos LCD protector, because it has an anti-reflective coated, which is supposed to help cut down with the glare in sunlight.

thanks

I'm not sure it has anti-reflective, but I see fine outdoor.

Pages: 1 ... 115 116 [117] 118 119 ... 292