Messages

1051

Lenses / Re: Is Canon EF 24mm f/1.4 L II USM Lens too wide for FF?

« on: December 13, 2011, 12:56:55 PM »

I use the 24 L II on a 1d4 (1,3x crop) and it's the perfect lens for my uses, I use it for EVERYTHING. Absolutely perfect.

Now, I'm moving on to a 1d X when it gets here, so I tried the 35 L on a 5d to sort of match the focal of 31mm the 24 gives on the mk4, BUT that is quite a lot narrower, even though it's only 4mm, it surprised me. So I went on to try the 24 on the 5d, and seems better, so I would have liked a 30mm on FF, but I'm much rather keeping the 24 than getting the 35 to replace it. This is also something to do with the fact that I have a 50 for a little more reach which I like MUCH better on FF than 1,3 crop.

1052

United States / Re: Is 1D Mark IV boring or almost perfect?

« on: December 13, 2011, 09:41:13 AM »

I agree! I didn't think Canon would be able to create a camera worth replacing the mk4 for, but along comes this FullFrame Monster that does exactly that.

I don't have that kind of money for other things, and I buy all the cheapest stuff of everything else. I haven't bought new clothes since the 90's, but do I blink to spend 8000 dollars ( a bit more expensive here in Norway) on a new camera? Nope!

1053

EOS Bodies / Re: Should i go for the 1DX or the 5D Mk III?

« on: December 13, 2011, 08:31:50 AM »

Do you have the money for a 1d X and get by with 18mp, get it! It will be better in every way. If you don't know if you need a 1d and you choose between a 1d and 5d based on resolution, yeah, that answer it for me, you don't need a 1d.

I use both 5d2 and 1d4 and for things that need to be perfect I use the 1d, if I'm doing portraits and less stress situations, I use the 5d because of the FF sensor (although the lack of useful af-points makes it much less able to shoot like I want to, wide open at 1,2 and 1,4), the only thing the 1d4 lacks. So I'm first in line for the 1d X. Giving me the perfect camera, but the FF sensor is just a very welcome bonus. It's the AF-system that is highest on my list when choosing a camera.

And be prepared, once you go 1d, you'll never buy another camera than a 1d.....

1054

Lenses / Re: Will it be a EF 14-24 2,8 L is from Canon

« on: December 12, 2011, 06:28:10 PM »

I'm not sure 14-24 zoom makes too good of sense for Canon.  For Nikon, the 14-24 is effectively the replacement for the 14mm prime, and has been said to be of superior image quality to the wide 14mm Nikon Prime.  The Canon 14mm prime on the other hand is said to superior to all the aforementioned lenses, including the 16-35 L II, (all third hand information from scouring various reviews, mostly Ken Rockwell).  Also the zoom range from 14-24 seem a bit awkward.

http://minus.com/mwi8ith2f

Seriously, have you looked through 14 and 24 on a FF camera? the difference is HUGE!! I miss the extra 3mm from my 14 L II when I got the TS 17, but the IQ and endless possibilities with the TS makes me forget lightning AF, small and light, f2,8, weathersealing and all other things that are better with the 14. Because the 17 is the best UWA Canon has ever made, and Nikon (and everyone else) have nothing to challenge it with...

And if you want 2,8 to isloate an item with UWA, yo neeeed to check out what the TS 17 can do at f4.

1055

United States / Re: Is 1D Mark IV boring or almost perfect?

« on: December 12, 2011, 02:28:59 PM »

YEah, I second that, out of reach for a lot of people. Cost issue I guess.

I use the mk4 and I'm not a pro, but use it for all it's worth and it lacks some Af-tracking abilities in lower light, but other than that there's nothing wrong with it, and I know it by heart so less need to start threads. 

1056

United Kingdom & Ireland / Re: S100

« on: December 12, 2011, 07:19:33 AM »

How much are you selling them at the store you work at ? Do you have a website ? Im guessing your UK based.

Actually Norway 

1057

United States / Re: $100,000 - How would you spend it?

« on: December 11, 2011, 03:54:34 PM »

I would spend it on two 1d X (I have the lenses I want), a hassy H4d with 28 equiv and 50 quiv. 2 x Profoto ACut D4 plus modifiers. An assistant to carry it all and the absolute rest to go to the sickest places on earth to shoot things I only dream of now...

1058

Canon General / Re: An EF 70-200 f/4L IS II in Mid January? [CR1]

« on: December 11, 2011, 12:26:48 PM »

... they've done it a few times before, and it IS for a reason, like the earthquake. Supply and demand, no secrets there.

That's one of the reasons to increase prices, too - natural disaster; supply and demand.  The same thing is happening with prices of hard drives due to flood in Thailand.

It's much better for Canon to say the world economy forces us to up the prices worldwide, than do a halfass attempt to squeeze more money out of customers by slight upgrades, then no one would by them either, and production costs, it just wouldn't make them any money....

It won't be "halfass" - you'll get new coating that will reduce light scatter and increase scratch resistance; or in the case of 35L you may get weather sealing, too.
So, what price increase scenario is more likely to be accepted by the public?
1. World economy forces us to up the prices worldwide
or
2. We are "improving" the current close-to-perfect lens with new coating and/or weather sealing and that's why the price of new lens is higher now.

p.s. You have to look at this from Canon's, as a business, point of view rather than from customer's point of view: how to increase profit with minimal expenses.

First off the 4 L IS isn|t THAT old, and scratch resistance is a big upgrade? I think not, buy a filter, which you needed for it to be fully weathersealed anyway, done.

Second, I mentioned the 35 as much more probable candidate to be upgraded because it lacks behind in every way, comparing, of course, to the 24 1,4 II. So for Canon to upgrade the 35 to match the 24, and yes, also with the weathersealing, less ca, better color contrast and corner performance and the new AF and it would be a solid upgrade, but that's very far from upgrading the 70-200 with new coating.

Canon spend quite a lot of time and money to find out what the customers want, we see that again and again, so looking at it from a customers perspective is also what they do.

Small adjustments , upgrades if you will, is done with camerabodies at entrylevel, and some of the cheapest lenses, but not to L-grade lenses. There isn't a single mkIII lens, which means the ones that are upgraded have been around for along time and needs a SOLID workover.

1059

Canon General / Re: An EF 70-200 f/4L IS II in Mid January? [CR1]

« on: December 11, 2011, 10:36:50 AM »

Canon is in need to increase prices on their lenses in order to stay competitive and profitable.  They cannot just bump up the price $500 on current lenses.  So, they add a little "upgrade", call it MK II, and increase the price.  That way people don't go wild saying that Canon went insane and increased the price of current lenses for no reason.

This might be meant ironic from your side, but if it's not I disagree that they won't increase prices, they've done it a few times before, and it IS for a reason, like the earthquake. For that reason alone I made crazy money on my 300 f2,8 IS, because I bought at low market price and sold it when it was bumped. Supply and demand, no secrets there. It's much better for Canon to say the world economy forces us to up the prices worldwide, than do a halfass attempt to squeeze more money out of customers by slight upgrades, then no one would by them either, and production costs, it just wouldn't make them any money....

Plenty of other lenses waaaay before the 4 L IS in the line for upgrade. 135, 35, 400 5,6, 300 4 IS, 100-400 for example...

1060

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D + 10-22mm or 5D III + 16-35mm L II?

« on: December 11, 2011, 03:55:09 AM »

Why didn't you get the 5d2 for your 16-35? For landscape you really cant't beat the 5d2, 1d X would be the only better option, and as I understand, a tad over budget.

Having actually done this test (7D v 5D2, 24" landscape prints) I can tell you that nobody can tell the difference or tell which print comes from which at low to mid ISO. Out of camera there are some small differences between the two at low ISO, but those differences do not survive post work or printing. I've even challenged people with 100% unlabeled crops, after post processing, only to have them completely fail to say which came from where.

Both make excellent 24" landscape prints, and very good 30" prints, and that's about the limit for critically reviewed landscape prints (i.e. close viewing; judging on fine detail). I highly doubt the 1Dx will change this for landscapes since the limiting factor here is the resolution of fine detail like distant foliage.

I'm basically in the same boat as jrista. The 5D2 is a great camera, but for my uses offers me nothing over the 7D. Until Canon breaks 30 MP in FF I can't see any reason for spending the money.

But the OP was talking about waiting for the 5d3, and got a 7d whilst waiting when he could have gotten the 5d2 was my point. Trying to prove and fool people to think a 5d picture is taken with a 7d or vice versa is just stupid. You can put ANY of the fast L-primes on the 5d2 and shoot wide open, do the same with the 7d and you1ll see what I mean. To say the 5d2 and 7d is comparable at all is just wrong, plain and simple. I use both FF and 1,3 crop and that beautiful smooth bokeh and transitions of the FF is a big difference to the 1,3. But hey, if you shoot at 50mm f11 iso 100 for landscape the difference is way less than with a 85 1,2 shot wide open or for example my favorite wide TS-17, I would get FF just to have a 17-equiv TS lens. You see, different needs, different products. No need to compare them, if you don't see the point of FF, that's your choice. Compare 60d, 600d and 7d at all same settings, then you have a test.

I have the mk4 and the IQ is fantastic and it delievers when no other camera does, but when I go out and shoot less fast moving subjects, I use the 5d+50L or 24L, it's just crazy good.

1061

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D + 10-22mm or 5D III + 16-35mm L II?

« on: December 10, 2011, 07:00:27 PM »

Why didn't you get the 5d2 for your 16-35? For landscape you really cant't beat the 5d2, 1d X would be the only better option, and as I understand, a tad over budget.

I would get rid of the 7d and get  5d2 and smack the 16-35 on it...

1062

Canon General / Re: 2012 Prediction - Canon drop from #1 to ...

« on: December 10, 2011, 06:55:37 PM »

Sensor size being the biggest difference between hybrids and slrs? A NEX-5 has the same siza sensor as the 7d, what you should mention is speed of operation, buttons on the outside instead of hidden in menus, but most important of all , the AF-system.

Get the greatest sensor EVER, the sickest, sharpest lens EVER, have no AF, and your pictures of anything moving is useless, AF, rather important....

1063

Lenses / Re: EF 35 f/1.4L II & EF 24-70 f/2.8L II on January 3, 2012? [CR2]

« on: December 10, 2011, 01:53:11 PM »

"What could they possibly upgrade"

LOOOL

Go out with a 24 1,4 mk I and II and the 70-200 2,8 IS mk I and II and you don't need to wonder about things like that. Jeez....

Or these, TS 24 I and II, 14 I and II. Why would Canon release an identical lens and slap a mkII on it?! 

1064

Lighting / Re: PHOTTIX ODIN TTL Flash trigger for Canon

« on: December 10, 2011, 01:28:16 PM »

[/quote]

I've only watched 21 minutes of the review and the only negative they raised is that certain third party flash units worked intermittently with it.  They did not mention which brands worked intermittently, but I am hazarding a guess it was with Metz and Sigma units that they had problems.
[/quote]

I think it works with Nissin, and yeah, Sigma at least might have some issues, but hey, you can't blame Phottix for that. PW can't even get theirs to work with Canon Speedlites...

1065

Lighting / Re: PocketWizard FlexTT5 and 580exII RF Issues?

« on: December 10, 2011, 12:30:57 PM »

Pleeeaaassse don't!!!

I will shorten your life with ten years trying to get them to work.

Buy the Phottix Odin at a third of the cost, more functions and best of all, they just work.