April 25, 2014, 03:00:36 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 - Viggo

Pages: 1 ... 59 60 [61] 62 63 ... 115
901
Guess my reply was censored, well that pretty much sums it up...

902
EOS Bodies / Re: 1DX question
« on: September 23, 2012, 03:14:19 AM »
I guess that's customfunction (C1) and it's settings are stored from P-mode. I have removed everything else but Av, M, C1 and C2. One set for video and one for bracketing.

903
The metering difference I don't get why people are using as an argument when it comes to iso evaluation. First off, which metering is more accurate? Absolutely no contest ... and in the X you can offset your 0 ev, mine is at +5/8. I've shot 20k shots on the 5d3 and 11k on the 1d X and the difference is huge in metering precision and noiseperformance. I always need to to adjust the metering back and forth on the 5d to get what I want which really slows down shooting, is very annoying and makes me miss moments. The 1d is consistent no matter what light it's crazy, i hardly ever touch the ev scale.  I guess all the 5d owners don't know or don't want to know and needs to defend their purchase. I too defend the 1d X over the 5d, and i have used them both to the limits. And it just isn't right the difference is minor and not worth the price. It might not be worth it to some people, but the 1d is twice the camera.

904
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 1DX VS 5D MKIII Cameras
« on: September 22, 2012, 05:07:11 AM »
Yeah, totally agree, the 5d3 is very good, but I felt it lacking in af speed , so many pictures that weren't focused that I should have been. When I got the 1d I felt straight away the mindblowing power of it, and I'm not using the term loosely... i bet i could throw it to someone's head and it will deliver eyeball-sharp worldclass action shots. No, really!!

If you're worried about weight, use a black rapid strap and hang it just below your belt. It doesn't even feel like you're carrying a camera. And btw, this doesn't work to do with the 5d as it jumps around much more.

905
Lenses / Re: List of rumored lenses
« on: September 22, 2012, 04:55:43 AM »
Not a word anymore about the 35 L II?

I think Sigma has that covered  ;)
Hey! It is a Canon site  :)

Yeah, I actually thought the new Siggy looked cool, they've taken a big step, by the looks of it at least. I couldn't really locate if it was weathersealed or not.

What you guys think, does it top the current 35 L? Af and wideopen performance are my biggest points.
The point for me is not whether it is a little better or worse than its Canon equivalent. It is a matter of future compatibility. I have a Tokina ATX28-70 f/2.8 and a Sigma 14mm that are nice paper weights.
They cannot be upgraded for the digital Canons. The Sigma works only fully open which is next to useless and the Tokina had ceased working since the advent of Canon 50E  !!! (It works though with my EOS1n camera!).
Both companies responded that they cannot upgrade their lenses. Now, my version 1 Canon EF50mm 1.8 still works!
There is a single exception to

I thought that was the idea with new firmware docking... but I can't say it is a compatibility problem that 30 year old lenses from thirdparty doesn't work with digital. It's not that long ago Canon's own flashes bought can't be used with digital.

906
Lenses / Re: List of rumored lenses
« on: September 21, 2012, 02:14:36 PM »
Not a word anymore about the 35 L II?

I think Sigma has that covered  ;)
Hey! It is a Canon site  :)

Yeah, I actually thought the new Siggy looked cool, they've taken a big step, by the looks of it at least. I couldn't really locate if it was weathersealed or not.

What you guys think, does it top the current 35 L? Af and wideopen performance are my biggest points.

907
When people like this exist you can charge whatever for whatever...

First Look: iPhone 5 Small | Large

908
Lenses / Re: List of rumored lenses
« on: September 21, 2012, 05:28:34 AM »
Not a word anymore about the 35 L II?


909
Lenses / Re: Quality control issues with the 24-70 L II?
« on: September 21, 2012, 03:58:53 AM »
You'll see MUCH bigger variation out in the field when you're using phase-AF, and even then you'll probably hardly ever notice it in a real shooting situation.

Besides, apertures can vary alot, and there is VERY few lenses that follow the "soft open, better one stop, very good two stop down and diffraction softens at f22"- curve. For example the 50 L is sharper at 1,8 than at 2,2.

And the 24-70 mk2 is no different and it still is the best zoom ever, but it's when a test charts shows you a slight difference it's a bad copy and it sucks and Canon should burn in hell.

I like my lenses to be optimized as well, and I have had several copies of every lens (never saw a difference) and I adjust them with AFMA, now lately, with the best method, FoCal. They are adjusted as good as they can be on the best AF-body ever made, and that's good enough for me.

Perfect phase-AF is a myth.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/07/autofocus-reality-part-1-center-point-single-shot-accuracy

910
20k on a single job?? Did you have ten batteries then? Wow! I can't really see why it would be wrong, it seems dead on to me.

911
EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« on: September 20, 2012, 09:30:48 AM »

Define capable, and in your definition please address their evaluation of the performance of the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, which they score lower than the MkI version of that lens.   :o

Noooo? Are you kidding? Really, lower for the mk2? LOOOOL . That adds to the credibillity.... ::)

912
Canon General / Re: How many of us are making money out of photography ?
« on: September 20, 2012, 09:26:10 AM »
I have no idea how many thousands I have sold and bought in Canon-gear, but I'm very sure I haven't made any of it back. Done a couple of concert shoots for some magazines and two weddings for a friend and my brother (and never ever again) and that's about it. For me it's about the hobby aspect, as soons as deadlines and clients come into it it takes away the fun for me. I need to have a hobby to relaz with. And mostly it's for my kids, they can pretty much go through every day of their lives and have pictures by the hour ;D

I have always worked in stores where I sell photo-gear so I think gear is just as much fun (when they work!!) as pictures and memories, well, almost.

913
No need to use software for the 1d x, it tells you in the menu. Mine is between 10 and 11k.

914
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: A positive feedback for 6D
« on: September 20, 2012, 03:56:18 AM »
Considering the 5d2 locks in lowlight scenes the 1d X doesn't makes it plausible that 6d can deliver what it says. I'm still amazed how the managed to make the 5d3 and 1d X worse in that regard. And if the 6d does even better than the 5d2 then Canon yet again made their flagship look stupid for being outdone by lowsegment body...

915
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: /D: Embarrassing question
« on: September 20, 2012, 02:15:09 AM »
Is your lens set to AF?

Does the lens AF on another body?


Pages: 1 ... 59 60 [61] 62 63 ... 115