January 27, 2015, 03:48:04 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 - sanj

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 120
Canon General / Re: Africa calling
« on: January 02, 2015, 03:46:14 AM »
I guess I am going alone then!

My uncle wanted a camera for family shots and for product Images...
He asked me what to buy and I recommended this very camera, the Sony a6000 with the 16-70.
I had in my hands now for a day and I have to say I don't like the handling, I hate the JPEG engine and I'm not as impressed by the AF and the VF as several reviews stated I should be...
Sure, RAW IQ is nice, but other than that... It is a good choice for him as a relative noob, but wouldn't be an option for me...

I bought the a6000 to give mirrorless a try and to see what the fuss is about.  I also wanted something smaller and lighter than my Canon DSLRs. 

The electronic viewfinder works fine for me.  I spent several years using a PowerShot S5 IS, so the EVF didn't take much getting used to.  I wasn't blown away by the autofocus.  It was fast, but didn't feel faster or more accurate than a 5D3 or 70D.  The AF isn't perfect; it hunted annoyingly in a few instances. 

As for the basic kit lenses, the tiny 16-50mm powerzoom is just OK and I do not like the 55-210mm telephoto zoom.  The 55-210 is small and light, but it is not sharp and the f/6.3 aperture is just too slow even in cloudy conditions.  The Canon EF-S 55-250 IS STM with a Metabones adapter produces great images on the a6000, but without autofocus.  That brings me to one of my favorite things about the a6000 - focus peaking.  It makes manual focusing so easy.  I see many posts about the quality of high ISO images from Sony sensors, but I'm not seeing it.  I don't shoot over ISO 1600, and even at that moderate ISO I don't like the noise.  I don't know if the Sony is noisier than the Canon crop bodies I have used, or if I just prefer the look of the noise from the Canons.  I do pixel peep.

The user interface of the a6000 is decent, and the face-finding autofocus works well.  I do like the portraits I have taken with the a6000, but I can get similar or better results from a Canon.  The body is put together well, but feels fragile to me.  I feel like a Canon DSLR will stand up better against bumps and the environment.  For me, the buttons are too close together and don't feel as good as Canon's.  I usually shoot in Aperture priority, and on the Sony my thumb keeps hitting the top scroll wheel, changing the aperture.  There isn't much of a thumb rest on the back, though the grip in front is OK.

The a6000 is great for walking around town because it is small and light, and it can produce some good photos with the right lenses.  I wish there were good E-mount zooms that didn't cost an arm and a leg so I don't have to carry several primes.  I could pop on one of my Canon zoom lenses with the adapter, but there goes the compactness.

My feelings are mixed about the a6000.  It's good enough, but given the hype, I think it should be better.  For me, it just isn't as good as a 70D or 60D.  I want to like it, but I feel like I have to work harder to get a good photo from the a6000 than I do with a Canon product.  The only time I choose the a6000 is when I want to travel light or want to challenge myself.

If Canon comes out with an awesome replacement for the EOS M, I'll probably ditch the a6000.

Well said.

We are unfriendly? We?

You have two posts, and in one you call us 'criticizing nerds' and in other peasant.

Think about it.

Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: December 31, 2014, 07:10:04 AM »
I was expecting this lens to beat the 400mm f/5.6 at 400mm but Bryan says IQ is similar.

That's because they're both very close to "perfect" (diffraction-limited).


Although, it sure looks like the zoom is quite a but better on crop (I know - 7DII versus 60D):


Hmmmmmm...seems the 400mm f/5.6 is sharper...
    On full frame, the 400mm f5.6L seem a bit sharper, but on crop, the 100-400 II look sharper. Too bad TDP don't have the test shot of the Tamron 150-600mm for crop camera...

    Have a nice day.

I did not know that lenses change sharpness qualities FF vs crop. Hmmmm.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Is Leica really worth it?
« on: December 31, 2014, 02:48:19 AM »
Above all first ask yourself if you can live without AF and if you shoot mostly low ISO. Because Leica is manual focus only and not so great at high ISO.

Rest follows later.

Canon General / Africa calling
« on: December 30, 2014, 03:40:39 AM »
I got a package deal for Safari and my friend and I were going but she can’t now because of work and I am extending this offer to anyone who loves Africa/photography and perhaps can’t do this on his own.
Safari starts Feb 15th (possible to change that by few days I think).
Area: Masai Mara.
Lodges: Cottars Camp, Elephant Pepper camp, Elsa’s Kopje and Lewa Safari camp.
Please Google these camps and see how great they are. Also check their prices to realize how great my deal is!
Total: 5,700 USD per person for 2 people.
This INCLUDES: All internal airfares/transfers, Safari (I almost always manage to get a private vehicle), all meals, conservation fees, tips.
EXCLUDES: Airfare to Nairobi and back from your city.
I will be carrying my 1dc, Sigma sports 150-600, Canon 16-35 f4 IS.
Please inbox me if you have any questions.
Mods: If you think this post is inappropriate, please delete.

I have two.

Third Party Manufacturers / Sigma 150-600 sports testing
« on: December 29, 2014, 02:00:51 AM »
I get my Sigma 150-600 sports lens after two days. I will like to test it and put up a report.
Is there anything specific you would like to be tested? I will test it on the 1dx. Is that fair (as many will not use it on 1dx) or I should test it on 5d3? The camera would not change the IQ as such only the AF speed I am assuming.

Lenses / Re: Upgrade or not the 24-70 f/2.8, a thousand dollar question.
« on: December 28, 2014, 10:29:32 AM »
Telling you no. Get it.

My unwanted comment: So sad you going with pre conceived shots! It is a tremendous city and if you let yourself go you may just get unique great photos. My two cents.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 1DX maintenance?
« on: December 28, 2014, 08:54:10 AM »
In what way are your pictures suffering when you say "Keeper rate is down"? Curious.

Lenses / Re: Safari lens advice: 200-400 or 500 f4 and 70-200 or 200 f2
« on: December 28, 2014, 08:03:04 AM »
I know 'Pila' very very well.
I think 200f2 is the last lens you should consider.
500 is an absolute must. 200-400 would be better than 70-200. If left to me I would take the 70-200 (on 7d2) and 500 on 1dx.
Pila is a very small reserve but animals are faaaar from the roads.

hahaha I keep changing my mind, now Im back to thinking the 500 and have a 1.4 and 2x extender lol.

Love to know if you have any tips for Pilansberg? Ill be there in late January so im thinking it might be quite dry and waterholes might be popular?

Thanks :)

Yep the waterholes have hides from where you can do bird photography. You may want to use the services of Jaco Rautenbach <travelinafrica@gmail.com> You may drive with him day one and then from day two be on your own. But not necessary as Pila is very very small and very easy to navigate. But if this is your first Safari you may miss out on spotting animals and this guy is a good guide.

Lenses / Re: Safari lens advice: 200-400 or 500 f4 and 70-200 or 200 f2
« on: December 28, 2014, 12:36:28 AM »
I know 'Pila' very very well.
I think 200f2 is the last lens you should consider.
500 is an absolute must. 200-400 would be better than 70-200. If left to me I would take the 70-200 (on 7d2) and 500 on 1dx.
Pila is a very small reserve but animals are faaaar from the roads.

Thx for the post. Always nice to hear for senior execs have to say.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms Development of High Megapixel Camera
« on: December 26, 2014, 11:25:07 AM »
Almost all Canon's current lenses would do just fine on a 50MP full frame sensor, and the better ones would excel.
If you are used to images from a 24MP sensor and accept that level of quality, I agree.
However, if you expect to take advantage of the 50MP sensor and see closer to 40PMP images you are dead wrong.

Pls help me learn: Many Canon/Nikon lenses are supposed to be on par. How does Nikon get away with 36mp cameras with it's lenses? Thx. (Genuine question)

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 120