Messages

76

EOS Bodies / Re: Describe the 6D in one word...

« on: September 17, 2012, 03:12:11 AM »

Embarrassing!

What do you mean with embarrassing; the whining that's going on here in the forum, or something else?

Most interesting is, that people are complaining about the camera, befor they were able to hold it in their hands, and were not able to take pictures with it. I'm sure, it is a nice camera, and will make great pictures in the hands of a skilled photographer, like any other dslr that comes out at the moment.

There are three points I do not like about the 6D though. I miss the "vari angle display" of the 60D, the autofocus systems seems downgraded from the 7D, and the built in flash is missing (as bad as the pictures with built in flash look, sometimes it is the only possibility to take a shoot).

77

EOS Bodies / Re: When it could be presented the new Canon 70D?

« on: September 16, 2012, 03:48:55 PM »

I have the same problem. I'm also looking forward to the 70D, but I'm not considering the 60D. Why? The sensor is pretty old (3 years), the autofocus system its not that much better than the one in the 650D. I think the 70D will have some nice improvements over the 60D, which was kind downgraded from the 50D in its position in the lineup.

It looks like the 7D will be succeeded by the 6D (Fullframe), so the 70D could indeed move up a little bit again.

I considered the switch to FF after I head the specs and the price of the 6D. The camera itself is affordable, but when I sum up the money I would have to invest in lenses, then it is too much money for me. The new 24-70 f2.8 is 2300$, the old one still 1400$; the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 on the other hand is 1000$, the also very nice EF-S 15-85 is down to 650$. So even if though the body is affordable, the money for the lenses is just too much.

So it seems, that I have to live with my trusty old 350D for a few month more. But one thing I know for sure is, that a new camera won't improve my compositions, so I can live with what I have.

78

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Take a look at this image, can someone with great PP skill make it work?

« on: September 05, 2012, 03:00:56 PM »

Here is my try of a PP for this pic.

Not great, but it is okay. The color on the eagles is not perfect yet, but the tree looks nice.

79

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Should I stay with Canon or moving to Nikon

« on: September 05, 2012, 04:06:34 AM »

However, many of my friends encourage me to switch to Nikon with the following reason below:-

Forget about the difference in the specs. As a newbie everything will make nice pictures; and even if you become a pro, it does not matter. Some pros are shooting Nikon, some Canon, both can live with what they have.

There is only one reason I can think of, that would make sense for you to switch. If all or most of your friends have Nikons, than it would make sense to switch to Nikon, because you could share some eqiupment, say a special lens for some work you like to do, or a second body you could borrow to shoot an event, or you can buy used eqiupment from them.

So stop worry about tech specs, todays cameras are amazing compared to what we had 10 years ago, and the difference between brands is neglectable.

80

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Flat lens discovered in Harvard

« on: September 04, 2012, 08:25:38 AM »

It will take some time until we see a lens with this technology. As I understand it (from another article, about the same lens) the system so far works only for a certain wavelength, and the light transmission is only about 1%. But who knows, maybe they turn it into something useable.

81

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Upgrade from 10d to 60d or 7d

« on: August 28, 2012, 05:13:35 AM »

I was thinking I need upgrade to get higher iso on newer body.
I was going to get a refurbed, but is the extra 300+ worth it for 7d?

I would wait until Photokina, there is high probability that the 60D gets a successor; and rumors suggest that it will move up a little bit again, closer to the 7D.

82

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: World's most expensive lens

« on: August 28, 2012, 05:09:58 AM »

Hubble would have to be near the top of the list, too.  At $2.5b to construct, then all of the maintenane and the big upgrade a couple of years ago, I think it has cost almost $7b.  But it does get some spectacular shots.

The lens itself is much cheaper; the expensive part of the Hubble was its delivery (no free shipping here), and some repair work under warranty....

83

Lenses / Re: If you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they...???

« on: August 14, 2012, 10:02:34 AM »

Not soo easy. My first thought was 10-22 EF-S, 35mm f2, and 70-200 f4 IS.

I'm not sure about the 10-22 though, I might replace that with a 15-85 EF-S. This would mean that the prime lens would no longer need to be in the middle of 22mm and 70mm where the hole was in the first lineup. And here comes the problem, there is no prime that really suits me. I would like to see a 30mm f1.4 or f1.8, that is sharp wide open, with a small minimum focusing distance (this leaves the Sigma 30mm out). The Canon 28 f1.8 comes a little short on image quality (I'm hoping for a new version of that lens, seeing what Canon was able to do with the 40mm f2..

84

Lenses / Re: Sigma 30mm f/1.4 or Canon 35mm f/2?

« on: August 14, 2012, 02:14:46 AM »

Anyway, I've pretty much narrowed it down to the two lenses in the subject. Any opinions? Whichever one I choose, I'll be using it in situations that would require shooting wide open.

I was in the same position as you are now. My list also included the Sigma 28mm f1.8, a rather big, but also very cheap option. The Canon 28mm f1.8 fell out because its softness wide open, and it's price. Somehow price and IQ did not correspond. The Sigma 30mm f1.4 was also an option. The main frawback for my shooting style, would have been the rather large minimum focusing distance (I often can't focus my Canon 50mm f1.4, because I'm to close).
So I went with the Canon 35mm f2. It is also not perfect, but you can't complain too much at this price point. I use it very often, and it is my walk-arround lens when I only like to carry a small package.

85

EOS Bodies / Re: Should/can Canon keep making its own sensors?

« on: July 18, 2012, 02:26:52 AM »

The benchmark is now D800/E. 5D3's DR is blown out and away by D800/E in IQ department. Even NEXes blow Canon sensors away. Interesting seeing the denial.

What leads you to the claim, that a NEX blows away Canon (and which Canon sensor do you mean? do you compare the NEX to a coolpix?
And the 5D3 is not blown out by the D800. This is only the case if you take the strange overall score from DxO, which lacks any logic, like, why does the D800 score so much better in the ISO department, when measurments are so close together and while the Canon goes to higher ISO than the Nikon?
Don't get me wrong, the dynamic range of the Nikon is amazing at low ISO, also color sensitivity is good, both better than Canon. But at high ISO the picture changes, and Nikon only has better colorsensitivity up there, while it lacks behind in dynamic range. And this is only taken from synthetic measurments by DxO, I think in the reall world the difference will even be smaller (sure, you can always find a certain type of shoot, that shows the weakness of one camera compared to another one.

86

EOS Bodies / Re: Should/can Canon keep making its own sensors?

« on: July 18, 2012, 02:03:44 AM »

The fact remains the same.. Canon sensor can't take it!!

Back to reality, try pushing a couple of stops in a wedding in a dark church and check the shadows at ANY iso!

Oh and check the RAW image,, not that stupid-filtered jpegs

I really doubt that the D800 will do better at high ISO (and the shots will most likely be at high ISO, since it is dark). I've never tested it on my own, maybe somebody with both cameras available could do the test. But  from what I can read out of the DxOMark measurements, the advantage of a higher dynamic range (which enables you to push the shadows) the D800 has, is neglectable at ISO 1600 and definitly gone at 6400.

87

EOS Bodies / Re: Should/can Canon keep making its own sensors?

« on: July 17, 2012, 10:23:38 AM »

Take an underexposed shot with the same settings, ISO 100 with a 5d mark3 and a d800 (which is the megapixel monster and should suffer a lot from noise and banding issues)

apply +4 or 5 stops in lightroom.
see what happens.

And now do the same at ISO 6400 or even higher maybe at 51'000, oh sorry, the D800 doesn't go up there...

It always depends on what you like to do with the camera, and how do set it. To me adding many stops in PP is not important, I do it very seldom. On the other hand, I do a lot of shoots with available light, which means I need high ISO.
So even though the D800 has the better overal sensor, the 5D mkIII would still be the better choice for me, because of the better IQ at high ISO.

88

EOS Bodies / Re: Should/can Canon keep making its own sensors?

« on: July 17, 2012, 08:18:00 AM »

I also like to ask the question, what is wrong with the sensors from canon? It is true, that Sony's (and Nikon's) are better at the moment, but does it really matter? Up until a year ago, the EOS 5D II was the non plus ultra for outdoorphotographers. It was praised for its high IQ, now the mkIII is even better, so what should be wrong about it.
Sure, a better sensor always gives you more possibilities, but is it the limiting factor; and what is the limiting factor of the sensor? Sony (Nikon) sensors have the higher dynamic range at low ISO and the better color sensitivity, while Canon still performs better at high ISO. If you just take the DxOMark score as a measurement, then Sony (Nikon) is far better than Canon; but these marks say about the quality of a camera about as much as a 0-100 time for a car.

To be honest, I expected a bigger step in IQ from the 5d markII to the 5d markIII, but it was still an improvement from an already very high level.

So should Canon keep making its own sensors? definitly yes.

89

EOS Bodies / Re: Is it too early for the first "The Canon 1DX sucks" posting?

« on: June 27, 2012, 08:28:36 AM »

The new Nokia phone gets a better score from DxO

This says more about DxO Mark than the quality of a sensor (and even less the quality of a whole camera)...

90

EOS Bodies / Re: We need a "Canon Whiners" Section!

« on: April 25, 2012, 06:05:59 AM »

http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=5517
So much to the myth, that Nikon users are happier with their gear.

And the grass is always greener on the other side.

Fact is, that Nikon has the better Camera, on paper that is at least. 36MP for less money, and a much higher rating at DXO Mark.

The actuall question is, will you take better pictures with the D800 than you do with the 5DIII. Probably not; and also not the other way round. There are differences between the two cameras, some of them are easely measurable, others not.

To me this is like boys comparing cars. The BMW M3 has so much HP and this 0-60 time, but the Audi RS4 is stronger and even faster, and it has 4-wheel drive. All true, but put them on a race track, and there you will see the real difference in the performance of the cars.
And the biggest difference will be, when you switch the driver, because both of them are amazing cars, who offer more than you actually need in most situations. The same goes for the D800 and the 5DIII.

What influences the quality of your pictures the most, are your skills, and I think there are not so many people who are so skilled, that they can blame their camera for bad shots. We can reproduce known issues, and we can see noise at high ISO, but what we have to learn are the limitations of our tools, which defines the way we are using it.
To go back to the car comparison, we will never be able to go over a certain speed in a certain curve, it's simple physics, you will only be able to reach the maximum speed given the car and the circumstances. If you are too fast and fly of, than it was your mistake, and not the one of the car.

So how big is the difference between the D800 and the 5DIII, and how bad is the 5DIII? I would say both cameras represent the crown of digital FF photography at the moment; what you think is better mainly depends on what is more important to you, or what like better. It is like with the M3 and the RS4, none of them is realy better than the other, they are just a little different.