July 31, 2014, 03:09:05 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 - Robert Welch

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6
Lenses / Re: 24-70ii @MFD quality concerns. Please help
« on: October 05, 2013, 11:07:01 PM »
Maybe someone else knows, but I'm unsure what MFD is referring to?

I've never seen any test that show anything less than stellar performance from this lens. But not sure what it was you are referring to.

Lenses / Re: Is it worth to try to use Canon FD Lenses with EOS system ?
« on: September 23, 2013, 10:40:12 PM »
There is one advantage with the FD lenses is the manual focus control is easier to use, this is an advantage for videographers. If the AF isn't good enough for a videographer to use on a particular body, then the use of manual focus lenses with an adapter is preferred by a lot of videographers.

I use both at weddings, but mostly I'll use one or the other, I'm not switching bodies a lot. For the ceremony, I'll switch back & forth a little, maybe the first dance. But most of the rest of the time I'm using one body or the other primarily.

I do like having both because there are strengths to each camera. The 6D is lighter and more 'nimble' to use, so I like it for the reception when I've been shooting for many hours, it helps reduce fatigue. Also, the low light AF is so great, I can get accurate in-focus shots in practically no light at all. Just this weekend, I was at a reception at a private residence, people were all around the house, many in the lower level where there was little to no lights. I was following the bride and groom around using the 5D3 and it was having a hell of a time locking focus. I was finally able to switch cameras, and suddenly the 6D was instantly locking focus where the 5D3 would hunt for 5-10 seconds. It's literally night/day difference between those two cameras in that situation.

I do wish they had put dual card slots in the 6D, though, it was the one feature that made me think I didn't want to bother with the camera. I'm glad I rethought that, though, it is a great camera.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: IQ comparison; or how meaningful is DXO
« on: September 05, 2013, 11:22:26 PM »
When it comes to applying the DXO ISO ratings to actual usage, I once heard someone suggest to round their ISO rating up to the next standard ISO setting (i.e. 1000 to 1600, 2000 to 3200), then double that. The result will generally be a reasonable high ISO to use the camera on with decent results for many applications.

In my experience, this translation has applied pretty well for the cameras I've owned, to some degree. My 40D & 7D are DXO rated about 700, and I generally don't like to use them much above 1600 if I can help it (the 7D does a little better if pushed higher, but some of that may be because of the higher resolution, meaning enlargement isn't as high). My 1DmkIII is rated about 1000, and while I feel at 3200 it's being pushed a bit, it is usable there, but I try to keep it no more than 2000-2500 if I can. The 6D & 5Dmk3 are both rated just above 2000, and both those cameras work very well at 6400. So, in broad strokes, this method seems to have some validity.

EOS Bodies / Re: Another 6D v 5D3 body battle...
« on: September 05, 2013, 12:51:18 AM »
I use both the 5D3 and 6D extensively and about equally for weddings.  I'm very happy with both.  The 5D3 is better overall -- it is superb, especially the AF -- but also heavier & costlier.  The 6D's center point is a bit better for very low light AF, and I appreciate the lightness of the camera.  Image quality is pretty much equal.  You really can't go wrong with either, unless you specifically need what one has and the other doesn't have, such as dual cards in the 5D3 or wi-fi in the 6D.

I could say exactly what Zlatko has said here the same for me.

I would add that the 7D will quickly fall out of favor for you should you pair it with either of these cameras. The image quality will be lacking, and you'll not want to use the 7D soon after pairing it with either the 6D or 5Dmk3. I got the 5Dmk3 and paired it with the 7D, but I found I couldn't use the 7D in place of the 5D3 ever, so there was no point to keeping both. If you can afford it, get the 5D3, sell your 7D and use that to pay for much of the cost of a 6D. These two together make a nice pair. The 5D3 has many great features and will be the more versatile camera. The 6D will prove to be a very handy 2nd body, especially when you need the better low light AF and want to go a little lighter in weight. I can use either of these cameras in almost any situations, although there are some situations where one is clearly preferred. The 7D just doesn't have the image quality to ever be used instead of either of these cameras. Once you get one of these, you'll be looking to ditch the 7D as soon as you can.

EOS Bodies / Re: 6d
« on: August 29, 2013, 10:15:23 PM »
Yeah! Baby!...the 6D is 'shaggadelic'! It's got the mojo. It's groovy, baby, oh behave.

Oh, I'm sorry, did you want some actual specific comments about the camera? Well here's one, If you don't like it, then there is no pleasing you.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6d Highest Usable Iso?
« on: August 29, 2013, 09:56:02 PM »
I think Canon (and any other sensor manufacturer) will need to make a major technical breakthrough to seriously increase high ISO image quality in cropped sensor cameras from where they have been the last couple of years. From what I can tell, Canon hasn't done much to surpass the high ISO quality of the 7D, which is a 3 year old camera at this point. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the 7DmkII to be seriously better at high ISO than the current lineup of cropped sensor cameras, whether it's the 70D, 60D or 7D you are comparing it to (except perhaps for improved in-camera JPG NR processing, which is not a true improvement to my way of thinking).

The 6D (or 5DmkIII) are significant improvements in this respect, there really is no comparison. It will be interesting to see if there are improvements to be had in the next generation of the 5D series, which we may not see for a couple years yet. So, realistically, if you want improved high ISO performance today or in the foreseeable future, the 6D is the logical choice, hands down (or the 5DmkIII if you want more features).

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 29, 2013, 09:04:52 PM »
I haven't read all the comments on this thread, heaven help me if I had that much time. But I feel like, after looking over the DXO info on the 70D, that Canon really hasn't advanced their sensor by a very great amount in the last 3 years, or since the 7D was introduced. From what I could tell with the DXO report, it appears to me that there might be very little noticeable difference in IQ between the older 7D and newer 70D.

Now that might be testament to the IQ of the 7D (although comparisons to Nikon's 7100 might temper that opinion some), but it also might be that Canon is less concerned with the IQ of the cropped sensor cameras, perhaps figuring--and possibly rightfully so--that those who are really concerned with IQ will probably go toward a full frame like the 6D anyway. So, with the 70D they focused on other features, and from what I can tell they did a fantastic job introducing new features that videographers in particular will be thrilled with. That was probably smart on Canon's part, as that is probably where they will see the biggest benefit from a sales perspective. How many photographers are going to upgrade from a 7D/60D to this new camera anyway? Many more videographers will, most likely.

I'm in the former group of photographers, I mainly shoot full frame bodies. I do have a 7D (and older 40D) just for odd things, which I was looking at the 70D to see if perhaps it might offer something that I would be willing to upgrade for. However, it appears there would be no real benefit for me to do so, as I'm not using these cameras for video. I will see what happens with the eventual 7DmkII release, but I don't really expect it to have anything that will really make me want to go there either. The 7D is a well rounded camera, as demonstrated by it's longevity and continued success. It looks like it will still be awhile before we see significant improvements with the cropped sensors, at least for photographers.

Lenses / Re: Canon primes
« on: July 31, 2013, 02:40:02 AM »
Besides a variety of zoom lenses (17-40L, 24-70L, 24-105L, 70-200L IS) I also have several primes, the 28/1.8, 50/1.4 & 85/1.8, which I enjoy using for a different look than the slower zooms. I'd love to replace them with the L counterparts (except the 28, which there is no L version of), but it will still be some time until I'm able to.

The question of whether to wait and get a L lens later, or get the non-L version sooner is easy to answer. Especially if you are willing to buy used, you can just about re-sell the lens for what you paid for it, or at worse take a 10-20% loss if you buy the lens new. But even in the later case, having the opportunity to use one of these lenses sooner, rather than waiting a long time without the use of any lens of this type makes it easy for me to suggest you get the lens you can afford as soon as you can afford it. Then look to upgrade later. This gives you the opportunity to take more photos with a prime lens, and also gives you the chance to see how much you will actually use a particular prime focal length, to help you decide if you ever do want to upgrade. You may find, for instance, that a 35mm or 85mm lens just isn't a focal length that you find you care to use very often. Since you didn't invest in the more expensive lens, you may find that for the amount of use you get with that focal length, you are not interested in spending more money on one. If you find you use it a great deal, and want to upgrade to the L version, you can still use the non-L version until you are ready to spend the extra money. That's a no lose scenario, IMO.

Upon further contemplation, another issue that I think affects the value of the 1DmkIII is the number of these that have been reported to have AF issues. Many of us own models that don't seem to have this problem. One would think that if we have one that isn't, it should be worth more money (if you can prove that it doesn't). But, the over all reputation of this camera for many was that it does have AF issues, and the market reflects this perception by depressing it's value. From what I can see, I'd probably do well to sell my camera today for $1000. Not much more than a used 7D. About 1/3rd a mkIV or 5DmkIII. That is a very depressed value for the camera, which to my mind makes it one of the best values on the used camera market. If you are looking to buy the best camera you can for $1k or less, I can't think of a better one than the 1DmkIII. As an owner of one, that makes me unwilling to part with mine, it's cheaper to keep her.

I have both mkIII bodies, so I guess I'm qualified to comment. First, I'll say one advantage of the 1DmkIII is the higher flash sync speed. This is not trivial for someone who needs it. The other advantages of build quality have already been mentioned.

The 5DmkIII is my most used camera, but there are situations I still love to use the 1DmkIII, often for use when I need the extra sync speed. But also to keep some of the shutter count down on the 5DmkIII. They both have dual card slots, so that is important to me. For that reason, the 1DmkIII is my backup for the 5DmkIII should it ever need to go to the shop.

It's a matter of what works, the 1DmkIII has excellent IQ, quite good enough for most all situations, except where very high ISO or extra MP for cropping is desired. When I get a good 10MP image from the 1DmkIII, there is very little I can't do with it in terms of printing large prints, etc. So bottom line, it's functionally very useful, and is very pleasing to use.

Would I sell it to replace it with another camera? I've thought about it, but for the money I can get for it, I don't think it's worth selling. I'd rather keep it than sell it for what they are fetching these days. I agree with the original post, dollar for dollar, the two MKIII cameras are pretty much on par with each other, given that the older camera is valued on todays market at less than half what the newer camera sells for. In my opinion, it's well more than half the camera.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Announced
« on: July 02, 2013, 12:26:09 AM »
Looks like they have left room for a 7D replacement, with a more robust-weatherproof body, dual card slots, better AF (i.e. 5Dmk3/1Dx AF system), and dual processors to allow 9-10fps shooting speed. Maybe at a sub-$2k price point, about where the 6D is? It could bridge the gap left when they took the 1D series to full-frame only.

EOS Bodies / Re: Pick between two options for the Canon 7D II
« on: June 25, 2013, 03:17:20 AM »

...ISO 6400 is not really usable on 5D3, so on 7D2? Not gonna happen... I guess this comes down to the definition of "usable". My shooting style is to avoid high ISOs especially when it's dark....

This is the first I've ever seen this opinion, I find 6400 quite 'usable' on both my 5Dmk3 and 6D. I do agree that one must define 'usable', and if you don't want to see any grain in your photo when you view it at 200% on a monitor, then perhaps you won't find it 'usable'. However, if you want to make nice looking prints, even at rather large sizes, a well exposed file at 6400iso from these cameras should do nicely. As far as avoiding high ISOs when it's dark, well that simply makes no sense at all. I suppose when it gets dark you lower the ISO? Well, no comment.

As for the 7DmkII, or whatever it will be called, I'm not too keen on cropped sensor cameras anymore. My 7D may be the last one I'll own. I think the cropped sensor has 2 places, for cheaper cameras like the Rebel series, and perhaps for a high performance sports/action camera where the longer effective focal length of tele lenses becomes an advantage. For the later, high FPS and good high ISO would be be important, so the 2nd option would be preferable. I should think that 'usable' 3200 iso would be reasonably easy to achieve these days with current technology. The 7D really isn't that bad at 3200, it just loses detail when compared to it's full frame alternatives because of heavy handed NR. They just need to get the high ISO detail retention up, and improve the AF to the accuracy of the 5D3 and it will be attractive to sports and other similarly minded photographers. For portrait/wedding photographers like myself, I feel the cropped sensor cameras are no longer of value.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D as a Compliment to 5DMkiii
« on: April 02, 2013, 01:09:14 PM »
I picked up a 6D originally as a camera for my wife, since it was a compact size and weight I thought she could handle it easily (she currently uses a 7D, the 6D is actually smaller). I also wanted to test it and see how I liked it as a 'second' camera to my 5D3. I must say, I like it a lot. I find I go to it often instead of the 5D3, it's very nimble and easy to handle. I just use the center focus sensor, and recompose when needed. I find that center sensor to be extremely reliable, and more sensitive in low light than the 5D3. The camera is a pleasure to use, not a replacement for the 5D3 obviously, but a nice and very usable camera. My biggest gripe with the camera would be it doesn't have dual card slots, I would prefer that.

Don't overlook the 30D either, there were probably more of those made and it's not that much less of a camera than the 40D. I've still got one of each, don't see a point in selling them as they just won't get me enough money to make it worth selling. I use them when I can, just to keep them operational, and they will serve as emergency or beater cameras when needed. Whenever I do use them, I marvel at just how good they were for the time, and still quite good unless you need high ISO performance (higher than 800 at least).

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6