« on: May 19, 2014, 12:12:00 PM »
Man I love Colbert, sorry to see the show go. Can't wait to watch this clip tonight.
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.
I'm using 7D, pairing with 16-35 II... as my regular walk around lens
wonder shall I go for the 16-35 IS? worth?
also I haven't got my wide for APS-C , which should I go for?
I) New, 10-18 STM
II) Old, 10-22 USM
I am formally nominating "IS or no IS on Wide Angles" to the CR Forum's We Are Never Going To Agree On This Hall of Fame.
These new lenses will be overpriced (the L being at least $2100, I guarantee it), and will still under-perform even though it will be a little better in the corner sharpness over its predecessors.
My 50mm f/1.8 has IQ equal to the 70-200II at f/8. So what? How about at f/5.6 or f/4? That's different totally.
You still lose some edges and most importantly, you can't see your composition while you compose. It doesn't work for me but if it works for you, good for you. I won't buy a fish eye anytime soon.
I meant at f/2.8. And I certainly can see my composition while I compose. It's in the viewfinder.
Great work! These four images and the accompanying explanation completely rationalize the statement "no one asked for the 16-35 f/4 IS".
Look at the number of people within this forum itself who have countered your statement. That is a testament to how many did ask for it.
Show me. I saw lots of people looking for a 14-24/2.8. I didn't see anyone looking for a 16-35 or a 10-18.
While the new "L" lens seems to be getting all the love here, it's worth taking a look at the MTF chart for the 10-18 STM.
Compare to the 16-35 "L" f2.8
Others understand this stuff a lot better than I do, but this seems pretty good for a lens that retails at $300.
It appears this lens may rival the 55-250 EF-S for best bargain lens in Canon's lineup.
What's to prevent other companies from patenting their lighting secrets? Pretty soon we'll have no way to legally light a subject!
Are there really two threads going on about this camera's AF pushing 20 pages now?
Why can't people just agree to disagree, and accept the fact the 6D is a great camera for what it is - an entry level FF body with great IQ but with simplified AF.
Sometimes one tool is better than another based on needs/wants.
To put things in perspective, my SLRs are playing backup to my EOS M at the moment
Actually there appears to be two threads going on. One is about the 5D3 (the hostile hijacking of the original thread), the other is about the 6D (the original thread). I've tried to agree to disagree, but that's not always possible.
Unfortunately there is not a satisfactory amount of practical information about specifically the 6D's autofocus, and how best to use it, in this thread. I've tried to share my impression of its capabilities (and limitations) based on 13 months' experience and 15,000 shutter cycles, on my 6D. I have used 8 lenses (9 if you count a TC combination) on it over this period of time. I feel there are a few others who briefly contributed to this thread, that I could learn more from. But they might have been soured by the thread's hijacking.
As for your DSLR playing backup to an EOS M, I'm not sure why that would be. Whatever works for you.
Just to be clear, the OP in this thread DID ask about the 5D3 vs. the 6D.
+1 ... but then, you see what you want to see. Not that it is surprising though.
Well that would make the title of the thread misleading...it should have been "6D vs 5D3 autofocus capabilities, let's bust a hole in one while heaping fanboy praise on the other one." That is what would not be surprising...And since you want to be clear, how about reading the context of what the OP was saying? He said he didn't want quirky autofocus behavior with fast lenses, and yet said he also didn't intend to make a living from his photography. That last part to me, was code for "I don't think I need to spend the extra 1000 Euros to get the better autofocus". For my part, I posted a difficult shot in very low light with a fast wide angle prime lens, that achieved the focus plane I wanted, via focus recompose on the 6D. A shot that the OP would never need to attempt, actually...The 6D has its quirks, and the AF sensor is its biggest compromise. Everybody knows that. To keep belaboring it, is silly. But the first post in this thread by the OP, did not scream out a need to buy a 5D3. Clarity is a wonderful thing.
Whatever Carl. TBH, I don't care what you think
Feeling is extremely mutual.
+1 or +3 or wherever we are on the standard Eneloops. They've treated me well. I’ve been slowly using older ones to put in remotes and clocks and whatnot around the house. They last forever in low power applications.
I couldn't find the link, but somewhere out in the internets some guy wrote up a pretty good page comparing major brands for flash use. I don't remember the details but I remember being surprised that the high capacity batteries didn't (Eneloop and PowerEx) didn't really pack all that many more shots in over the standard Eneloops. I wish I could find the page to confirm, but I remember thinking that the price hike on the high capacity version just wasn't worth the cost.
Probably this link ... http://www.slrlounge.com/the-best-aa-battery-for-flash-the-ultimate-practical-review-of-aa-batteries-for-photography
Hope this helps!
Given all that info, I seek a unified triggering system that would somewhat be camera independent, device independent and allow for remote power control. Especially if I go with Einsteins and 600 flashes,