March 04, 2015, 11:10:30 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 - Z

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13
EOS Bodies / Re: From NL: NDAs expiring on the 2nd of March
« on: February 21, 2012, 12:55:39 PM »
... Best Video quality in a DSLR ...

Assuming the 5D III will be announced in the next month or two, would Canon really trump the video on the 1D X before its release?

EOS Bodies / Ziv Koren on shooting with the EOS-1D X
« on: February 17, 2012, 12:43:56 PM »
Made aware of this story by

Link Ziv Koren's experiences with the 1D X:

Bear in mind this is an "interview" with Canon Professional Network, so just treat it as an advertisement really.

Still, he does mention (and more importantly, they do print)

From my testing, and looking at the images I produced, I think that [ISO] 25,600 is about the same in terms of noise performance as the EOS-1D Mark IV is when shooting around 4,000 to 5,000 ISO. As such, I’d be totally happy to shoot at ISO 25,600 on the EOS-1D X without having to worry about it. Even if I had to go higher, I wouldn’t see it is a major problem because the files really are that good.

But of course, this is in JPEG only...

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 1DX sample photos posted
« on: February 15, 2012, 10:30:04 AM »
In image 1 you can see the model's contact lenses. Not a recognised measure of sharpness, but I like it nonetheless.

Lenses / Re: Lens recommendations for fashion photography (catwalk)
« on: February 14, 2012, 09:48:17 AM »
I think it all sounds very dubious. It might be fun, and you might even get some decent photos for your portfolio (the idea of payment seems completely nonexistent to me), which might be handy if this is the industry you're trying to break into.

All in all, you don't sound sure and I think the travel & accommodation money could be better spent.

Lenses / Re: Kit Lens to New 24-70
« on: February 12, 2012, 04:49:56 PM »
Also bear in mind that the 24-70 isn't really a comparable focal length to your 18-55.  I would recommend the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS over the 24-70 for a crop body; the image quality of the 17-55 matches or surpasses the 24-70 at all focal lengths and it has image stabilization for a cheaper price.  I am speaking both from reviews and the fact that I own both of these lenses - the 17-55 is THE standard lens for a crop camera.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 4K DSLR Pics
« on: February 12, 2012, 12:01:45 PM »
Interesting! Why doesn't it have a name? Is it a prototype?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Image effects with EOS 7D possible ?
« on: February 11, 2012, 07:43:18 PM »
If I were trying to create the effect you're going for, without flash, I would keep my camera on a tripod and take a burst sequence of shots, then combine them in photoshop. If you don't have photoshop or an equivalent PP software package, I guess this is a no go.

In my opinion this would look better than your proposed (and technically very difficult) single cyclist 'trail'.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Does FF make your photos pop?
« on: February 11, 2012, 07:31:18 PM »
FF isn't a magic bullet - you can get yourself a 5DII, shoot with a shallow DoF like f/1.6, but if you've got distracting elements in the frame ... you'll still get a flat image with no 'pop'.
This reminds me of my favourite cork photographer. Man, could he take a photo of a cork.

Do you want it? Can you afford it without changing your lifestyle?

If the answer to both of those questions is 'yes', you decision is justified. Don't sully the happiness of acquiring a new lens with feeling of guilt or remorse. If your situation changes, sell it.

You could get hit by a bus tomorrow.  :)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Does FF make your photos pop?
« on: February 11, 2012, 11:57:48 AM »
I think you're being a bit harsh on yourself and also viewing the full-frame pictures with rose-tinted glasses. Your photo of the girl 'pops' (I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this) more than the picture of the giraffe because she is sidelit, nicely separating her from the background.  On the other hand, your photo of the clock tower could probably 'pop' a little more if you used a polarizing filter to remove a bit of that haze.  The FF HDR landscape... well that just looks awful to my eye.

The FF sensor will provide a shallower DoF, so when using wide apertures it is easier to isolate a subject and nicely blur a background. They also have better colour depth, but can you even tell on your monitor? My monitor can't differentiate!

That being said, I am swapping to FF for its advantages to me (lower noise, shallower DoF, namely), but I don't expect it to make my crappy shots look any less crappy.

Lenses / Re: Handheld shooting: FF vs. Crop
« on: February 10, 2012, 10:32:20 AM »
I haven't had experience using a full-frame camera, but I would assume that, due to the shallower depth of field at a given focal length and aperture on a FF sensor, any small movements that you make after focusing are more likely to introduce out-of-focus blur to your shots. This is my best guess, though.

On the other hand, for the same lens... actually let's have an example. A 50mm prime lens, using the 1/focal length rule of thumb for avoiding camera shake blur, would require 1/50sec on a full-frame sensor, but 1/80sec for a crop body.

Lenses / Refurbished 24-70 via Canon UK @ eBay
« on: February 08, 2012, 09:15:37 AM »
In the wake of the 24-70 II announcement, at least a few of us are thinking of buying the original 24-70mm.  I just thought I'd give a heads-up to those of you in the UK that there is a newly listed Canon refurbished lens on eBay for £900

Link here:

Personally I ended up buying a second hand copy for £835. The next lowest price for a new copy seems to be £930 from Amazon, but those are grey imports.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L Version 1 vs Version 2
« on: February 07, 2012, 02:48:31 PM »
No I.S is a little surprising. With any luck there will be a glut on used mkI on sale soon.

Don't count on that.  Price differential is greater than for the 70-200 II, and when that came out, used prices on the MkI went *UP* by several hundred dollars. Only now - 2 years later - are used MkI prices down in the range they were before the MkII.

Bottom line, if you want a 24-70 MkI - used or new - buy it NOW!

Buy it now indeed... I never saw myself doing this, but I am going to buy a second hand mark I as soon as possible. I am truly terrified of the £2300 price tag that UK retailers are slapping on the mark II pre-order. Even if they come down to meet the officially announced German prices, that's still £1900.  The mark I can do everything the mark II can do, just a bit heavier and a bit softer (according to MTF)...

I never thought I'd wait all of this time just to buy a used mark I.  :o

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Announced
« on: February 07, 2012, 01:38:57 PM »
I hate the build quality of that lens

Really? I don't own this lens, but I've never heard bad things about its build quality...

Lenses / Re: Pricing of the New Lenses
« on: February 07, 2012, 09:54:19 AM »
If anyone would like a laugh:

£2299.00 = $3,638.09

Of course, this is a pre-order and prices are subject to change... blah blah. The sad thing is, I doubt they'll change much.

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13