September 15, 2014, 11:36:33 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 - marinien

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Post your HDR images:
« on: July 11, 2013, 05:35:46 PM »

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Spec List [CR3]
« on: June 28, 2013, 12:45:57 PM »
I predicted this like a year ago.

60D AF ----> Rebel.

7D AF ----> 70D

5D3 AF ----> 7D2

Everything got an upgrade to a better older system.

Well, the last one at least is impossible to my understanding. You can't take a FF AF system and put it in a crop body. Or can you?

I'd say it's not impossible. The 1Ds series and 1D series had the AF coverage surface of 8x15mm. The 1D X has the AF coverage of 8x19mm. It's still smaller than the Canon APS-C sensor size, but not much.

I hope someone could enlighten us on this question.

EOS Bodies / Re: Is This the EOS 3D?
« on: June 17, 2013, 02:39:50 PM »
Sadly, the strap appears to be based on the same technology as the last several generations of straps.

Agreed.  The blacks are no blacker, the whites are no whiter, therefore no improvement in strap dynamic range.  Plus, still the same issue with oversaturation of the red channel.

Thanks Neuro! You made my day  ;D

Lenses / Re: Why Does the 100-400L Sell So Well Still ?
« on: June 06, 2013, 05:03:11 PM »
200-400mm f/5.6L ?  :o  :o  :o

This is impossible for Canon! It would compete with the 200-400 f/4L !!!

If a 200-400mm f/5.6L is impossible for Canon because it'd compete with the 200-400mm f/4L, a 100-400mm f/5.6L would kill the 200-400 f/4L, and a 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L should never exist! Oh wait ...  ::)

Lenses / Re: I have just lost confidence with Canon Rumors & B&H
« on: April 17, 2013, 03:00:47 AM »
I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.

It's "bigger rebates on select lenses". Are you sure that the 24-70II is on the list  ;)?

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
« on: April 16, 2013, 12:26:24 PM »
Not a macro/close-up photo  ;). This one was taken last sunday. The big buggy (hpi-racing, 1m long) was driven by my friend.

Site Information / Re: Minimum CR Forum IQ?
« on: April 11, 2013, 05:19:28 PM »
Rather than a straightforward minimum IQ score, I propose the following criterion for forum participation:

(IQ score / your camera's DR score) > 9

The smaller denominator gives more of a chance for us dumb Canon shooters to participate in this forum.   ::)

Brillant  ;D

Ahhh, good to know that you're one of those people who think the sensor is the sum total of a camera.  I bet that DxOMark T-shirt looks great on you!  ::)

I understand there are many other important components to a body - but I still dont see any great "leap" from a say 550d to the 60d ?

Do you see any great leap in sensor from the Nikon D3200 to the D7100?  Oh wait ... I forgot the D5200 ;D.

Hi - Anyone with Kenko TC experienc, would you be able to suggest
Which one of these provide better iq and overall better ?
5D mark III w/ 70-300mm L with Kenko 1.4 tc
5d mark III w/ 70-300mm L cropped
40d w/ 70-300mm L (considering the 1.6x crop factor or APSC)

I have all the three except the TC. Wondering if it is worth spending the money on kenko when I have the other two options. I heard mixed reviews abt kenko when mounted on the 70-300


Hello, juste out of curiosity, did you compare the IQ of the 2nd and the 3rd solutions? Keep in mind that "reach" is about pixel density. A 5DIII image cropped to the PoV of a Canon APS-C sensor will have about 8.7MP, so a little bit more than a 30D image and a little bit less than a 40D's. I'd say that the 5DIII has slightly more reach than the 30D and a little bit less than the 40D, but a cropped 5DIII image should have better IQ than a 40D's, given the difference in technology  ;).

So to me, it is just stupid to not match your primary competitions sales bullet when you can do so for zero investment.

Does the Nikon D3200 have AFMA?  ???

Lenses / Re: 17-40mm advice please!
« on: March 14, 2013, 04:41:44 PM »
Although the 17-55mm F2.8 IS is the full frame equivalent of 27-88mm F4 IS

The 17-40mm is 27-64mm F4 on crop

Just to avoid some confusion:
The 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is the full frame equivalent of 27-88mm f/4.5 IS.
The 17-40mm f/4 is equivalent to 27-64mm f/6.4 on crop.  ;)

You don't lose a stop and a half by cropping. You must mean 'as it pertains to DOF'. Just to avoid confusion.

Furthermore, I think this example can't be quite right for even DOF. Note that the o.p. says:
The 17-55 is the full frame equivalent of 27-88 f/4.5 IS; AND
the 17-40 f/4 is equivalent to 27-64mm f/6.4 on crop

but how can the equivalent f/stop for DOF purposes increase both when you move to full frame and when you move to crop? Or am I missing something?

Oh sorry! I wanted to use the same words as tomscott. He certainly understands the conversion, I think he had juste typed too fast  ;). A longer statement would be:
The 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is the full frame equivalent of 27-88mm f/4.5 IS on crop (I ignored the "on crop" in the previous post because the 17-55mm is a lens for crop bodies).
The 17-40mm f/4 is the full frame equivalent to 27-64mm f/6.4 on crop. 

@3kramd5: thanks for the added detail, yes, I meant DoF equivalent.

Lenses / Re: 70-400/ f4.0-5.6 Zoom ... Canon, where are you?
« on: March 05, 2013, 05:40:18 PM »
So go ahead and switch to Nikon already. They're a reputable company that makes good products. You obviously prefer theirs to Canon's, so what on Earth is keeping you as a Canon customer?

hehehe .. the usual fanboy crap, wehn they up against the wall.
No I do not want to switch to Nikon. I want a new, improved EF 100-400/f 4.0 (!) - 5.6  L IS II with MTF like the new nikon and at a price not higher but preferably lower than the new Nikon. To go along with the other Canon stuff I got.

Where is my Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6 L IS Mk I???  ;D

Technical Support / Re: Teleconverter and DOF
« on: March 01, 2013, 10:35:25 AM »
Yes it is different, I think Neuro has made a small error.

The subject magnification stayed the same (the framing) the apparent aperture is the same (the hole in the lens stayed the same physical size) so the dof is the same.

Sorry PBD, but Neuro made no mistake. If you want the DoF on the 140mm stay the same, it needs to be at f/2 (supposing that the 100mm is at f/2). However, the 140mm is at f/2.8, so the DoF is deeper.

Let's exaggerate a little bit: do you think that for the same framing, the 50mm @f/1.0 will have the same DoF as the 500mm @f/10?  ;)

Lenses / Re: 17-40mm advice please!
« on: March 01, 2013, 10:08:36 AM »
Although the 17-55mm F2.8 IS is the full frame equivalent of 27-88mm F4 IS

The 17-40mm is 27-64mm F4 on crop

Just to avoid some confusion:
The 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is the full frame equivalent of 27-88mm f/4.5 IS.
The 17-40mm f/4 is equivalent to 27-64mm f/6.4 on crop.  ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Black AF points...NOTHING + Spot-meter?
« on: February 18, 2013, 09:05:36 AM »
Just a print screen of Top 100 in Switzerland

Who's list?

I had a look at The list does look similar. However, I did not fine the ranking of sales. The list that have the D800 and the D600 on top is ranked by popularity. Popularity in such a site does not necessarily mean sale figure. It can be, for example, the number of searches  ;D.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6