July 23, 2014, 06:35:12 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 - Skirball

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 21
32
I'm using 7D, pairing with 16-35 II... as my regular walk around lens  :D
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

Thanks...  8)

Guess I have to ask why?  I feel like there are so many better options for a standard zoom lens on a APS-C.  Why not the 17-55?  Or something like a 24-70 or 24-105 if you want an EF lens.

If you're willing to spend that kind of cash on a lens then I wouldn't be lured in by the low price of the 10-18, unless it proves to be markedly sharper, which seems unlikely.  So unless you want STM for video I'd stick with the tried and true 10-22.

33
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.

I don't know if there's ever been a single thing of substance that the people of CR have agreed on.  Hell, we could discuss why the sky is blue and it'd digress into arguments of Pantone colors, monitor calibration and why anybody would ever shoot jpg.

34
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.

I think that pretty much sums up the majority of rumor discussions on this site.

35
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.

As someone who has had the misfortune of going through the last 11 pages in a single sitting, I can confirm that there are many people in the previous pages that said that they are looking for a new 16-35.  And as someone who has been looking for one myself and thus has been searching through old threads, the CR community in general has been looking for a new one for some time.

I don't care about IS, and I don't care about f/4 vs f/2.8, for my uses.  I just want a Canon EF UWA with reasonably sharp corners at f/4.  If this proves to be a step up from the 16-35 and 17-40, at this price point, I will be a very happy man.

36
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.


Why compare it to the 16-35?  It should be compared to the 10-22.  I'm sure there are some that want IS, and others that are bargain hunters that will go for the cheaper lens, but unless this thing is markedly sharper than the 10-22 I'd expect it to remain a big seller.

37
What's to prevent other companies from patenting their lighting secrets? Pretty soon we'll have no way to legally light a subject!

I think that's the only interesting part about this.  Defensive patents are filed and granted all the time.  There's plenty more silliness coming out of the USPTO if you have a look.  But theoretically there could be an infinite amount of patents on every permutation of lighting setup.

38
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  :o

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.

Come on boys, hug it out.  Hug it out...

39
+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!


Nope, but still a good read, thanks.  The one I read was very methodical.  Using different test methods (flash settings) and recording the number of pops in addition to recycle time.  He even updated a few times with Eneloop performance after 6 and 12 months, IIRC.  Anyway, it's no matter, just thought it was a good read.

40
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New User looking for advice..
« on: April 30, 2014, 10:46:55 AM »
Maybe if we give him even more advice he'll come back!

41
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New User looking for advice..
« on: April 29, 2014, 08:07:51 PM »
Guess I'll be the oddball and tell you to just get a Rebel (unless you're going to get a cheap 60D).  If you insist on spending money put it towards lenses.  Any modern SLR will produce quality images in a tabletop setting, car races have less to do with fancy AF systems and more with panning technique, and car shows are going to benefit from large aperture glass more than the modest performance bump of the 70D - unless you go 6D, but a 6D with a single lens doesn't do you much good.

42
Lighting / Re: Small monolights vs speedlites
« on: April 29, 2014, 06:44:45 PM »
Sorry, I can’t comment on those Godox lights either, and that really seems to be what you need.  I’d agree that at that price, if they provide as much power as they say and function as intended, it’d be a good route to go.  If you’re purely staying within your studio then monos will save you some hassle.  And the extra power and modeling lights are just icing on the cake.  That said, I’m happy with my speedlights and I don’t find juggling strobes and batteries to be all that bad.  If I was shooting 5+ days a week in a studio I’m sure I’d have a different opinion though.

If you’re still debating between the two (mono and speedlights),  I will point out that you can get into the game for much cheaper than the 600exRT setup that Dylan posted.  If you don’t need eTTL you can get third party manual flashes for cheaper than those Godox lights.  Well for lights and triggers, you’ll still need a pile of decent batteries.  The flashes aren’t going to be near as strong, but I very rarely bump up against the limits of my speedlights indoors.  And when you take them outside of the studio you don’t have to worry about powercords and whatnot.  A strobe on a stand with a modifies is also light and easy to pull in for supplemental lighting.

43
+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.

44
Lighting / Re: small flash for catch light 5m to 20m
« on: April 29, 2014, 03:38:39 PM »
Catchlights are important.  This photo wouldn't be near as striking without them.





45
Lighting / Re: Lighting and triggering setup
« on: April 23, 2014, 12:25:18 PM »
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,

If that's all you want why not just get some PW and be done with it.  You can keep using the flashes you're using now and add continuous lighting.  Going the 600 route certainly won't be unifying anything, other than your other 600s.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 21