December 18, 2014, 11:17:56 PM

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 ... 54 55 [56] 57 58 ... 291
826
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony RX100 MIII
« on: June 24, 2014, 05:18:42 PM »
I checked with my local dealer today, they could not even find the MK III in their system.  That's strange, since they sell a lot of cameras at their two local stores as well as operating a big online store (onecall.com)
 
I was in Seattle last week and stopped at Fry's to see if they had the MK III.  What a disaster.  They had only two Canon DSLR's, which were two 70 D kits, one Nikon DSLR Model, and a Sony or two.  The other 90% of their display was empty.  Same for P&S cameras, no high end ones and lots of empty spaces. 
I'd say that they are in big financial trouble from the look of things.

No sale tax + free shipping: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1049537-REG/sony_dscrx100m3_b_cyber_shot_dsc_rx100_iii_digital.html

Washington State requires that I pay sales tax, and my accountant makes sure it happens.  Just because B&H does not offer the convenience of handling tax for me, does not mean that its due.

Sounds like you doing it for living

827
any chance they will bring back the split screen focusing aid?

You might as well create a poll for that.

828
Lenses / Re: Why do fast primes not have IS?
« on: June 24, 2014, 03:02:29 PM »
I'm sure I'll get throttled for this comment but here it goes: typically, I don't stop down my f/1.2 lenses a whole lot. Sort of negates the point of having them. Therefore I tend to use pretty decently fast shutter speeds relative to the focal length. Others may use theirs differently of course.

+1.......I don't see the point buying f1.2 lens and shoot at f4. On Canon lenses, I like to turn down the dial twice - hit sweet spot everytimes ;)

829
Abstract / Re: Textures...
« on: June 24, 2014, 02:54:11 PM »
Field of foxtails 2

I really like this one. Just downloaded to my screen saver. Hope you don't mind.

830
only 54MP? My PC is dying when PP A7R files

Dylan...I was wondering, is that why you moved off of the A7R and got the 1DX?  Sorry if I missed the discussion in another thread....

Still have the 7r. The X handles larger lenses better.

831
only 54MP? My PC is dying when PP A7R files

832
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS Shipping This Week
« on: June 24, 2014, 01:06:48 AM »
Now I just have to decide whether to keep the 16-35/2.8L II or sell it and buy the 16-35/4L IS.

You already know that you must buy the new f/4L. It's just too sharp and convenient. The question is whether or not you also keep your f/2.8...
Doesn't make sense to me. I sold my 16-35 f/2.8 II
Since 3 days I own the 16-35 f/4. Haven't used it extensively but enough to say that it is a better lens - for me - and it was a good decision to sell the 16-35 f/2.8 II. Why keep both?

Well, this is fairly simple.  The 16-35 f/4L IS is not a better lens than the 16-35 f/2.8L II, it is a different lens that is better at some things and worse at others.  The f/4L IS may be a better lens for you, but it is definitely not a better lens overall - just different.

Specifically, if you use the 16-35 f/2.8L II to do event photography, such as crowded dancefloor shots at dim receptions or indoor sports - all of which will likely require at minimum 1/100 shutter speed - the 16-35 f/4L IS will be virtually unusable in this situation compared to the 16-35 f/2.8L II.  At events with dim lighting f/2.8 is the bare minimum you need to get by to both avoid motion blur and get enough light, as flash is not always possible or desirable; sure you could use the f/4L IS in this situation, but it will look horrendous with the five-digit ISOs it will need to keep up.

On the other hand, the 16-35 f/4L IS is much sharper in the corners from f/4-f/8, and a bit sharper at f/11 than the f/2.8L II - meaning the f/4L IS would probably be a better bet if you did landscapes only.   Although that being said, I like the sunstars on the 16-35 f/2.8L II better than the sunstars on the 16-35 f/4L.  Still, overall for landscape the f/4L IS will be the better bet for most.

So, in short:
Event photography: 16-35 f/2.8L II is a much better bet than the the 16-35 f/4L IS in most situations.
Landscape: 16-35 f/4L IS is much better than the 16-35 f/2.8L II from f/4-f/8, and a bit better at f/11.

In other words, if you want the "best" 16-35 lens, you need to buy both.  Well played, Canon ;)

Without flash, what is the IQ looks like at f2.8 on 16-35 f2.8 II? Even with crowded dance floor, 24-70 II still a better choice on FF.

833
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony RX100 MIII
« on: June 24, 2014, 12:52:05 AM »
I checked with my local dealer today, they could not even find the MK III in their system.  That's strange, since they sell a lot of cameras at their two local stores as well as operating a big online store (onecall.com)
 
I was in Seattle last week and stopped at Fry's to see if they had the MK III.  What a disaster.  They had only two Canon DSLR's, which were two 70 D kits, one Nikon DSLR Model, and a Sony or two.  The other 90% of their display was empty.  Same for P&S cameras, no high end ones and lots of empty spaces. 
I'd say that they are in big financial trouble from the look of things.

No sale tax + free shipping: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1049537-REG/sony_dscrx100m3_b_cyber_shot_dsc_rx100_iii_digital.html

834
Here comes the lens cap story

835
Abstract / Re: Textures...
« on: June 23, 2014, 08:26:55 PM »
Standing under asian melon plants

836
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: June 22, 2014, 11:16:43 PM »

Clue:

Depth of field :)

Yes, at f/2.8 one or the other should be in focus, definitely not both at that distance.

So stacked Images, at least two, the f/2.8 keeps the Bokeh in the background, nice, if you can get the subjects to play the Game & keep still, well done Menace.

The attached was shot at f/5.6 with the 200-400, the Big Guy in the background wasn't Happy so getting them together long enough for stacked shots wasn't an option.

AMAZING

837
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS Shipping This Week
« on: June 22, 2014, 10:40:27 PM »
Now I just have to decide whether to keep the 16-35/2.8L II or sell it and buy the 16-35/4L IS.

Must be a weekend joke. It's time.

838
Makes me wonder if I should return my 1dx and wait since I have the time.

Couple things to consider. It's CR1. If this rumor is true, we looking at least 1yr or more before we get to hand on X2.

We both bought the X at discount price. We might lose $500-$700 when ready to upgrade. It still cheaper than rent. I'm keeping mine until I see real thing  ;)

839
EOS Bodies / Re: 1DX2 5D4 to be announced in January/ February 2015
« on: June 22, 2014, 04:23:23 PM »
I'll take one if X II native 52,000ISO = 12800ISO current X

Dylan77: What will this mean for the 5D4 in "native" ISO? In nightphotography tests, the 1Dx was recommended without hesitation for ISOs 8k to 12.8k, while the 5D3 was referred to as an ISO 5k cam due to its pixelcount. Can we expect about 3/4 to one stop improvement in high ISO in RAW with the 5D4? I hope Canon will remain with the +/- 22 MP. As I guess, that real improvement in high ISO IQ happens along with improved sensor tech and same MP count, otherwise we'd endup with an "evolutionary" new body only.

If Canon can implement these into X2:
1. All 61 AF points = double & dual cross
2. Slightly higher MP(20MP)
3. RAW, 25K ISO = 12K ISO current X
4. keep 12-14fps RAW
5. Add little more DR to the "NEW" rumor sensor. I'm going to get nailed for this :P

I might be in the minority here, but these might help current X owners to upgrade. Current X is really solid.

840
EOS Bodies / Re: 1DX2 5D4 to be announced in January/ February 2015
« on: June 22, 2014, 03:51:07 PM »
I'll take one if X II native 52,000ISO = 12800ISO current X.
 

Pages: 1 ... 54 55 [56] 57 58 ... 291