March 01, 2015, 02:23:28 PM

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 - cliffwang

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 34
331
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Canon 5D Mark II or a Real Video Camera?
« on: September 04, 2012, 01:18:09 PM »

+1 ... Magic lantern has killer features esp. for video, don't forget about *hdr* video! The 5d3 improves on the aliasing problem, but other than that 5d2+ml should be a pro-level video solution if you are ok with mf and the handling of a camera w/o swivel screen that was basically designed for still shots.
Do you know any free software to merge HDR video?

332
Lenses / Re: Canon 50 F1.4 VS 50 F1.2L Lenses
« on: September 01, 2012, 01:55:33 AM »

If you are not comfortable with Canon 50mm F/1.4, go with Sigma 50mm F/1.4.  It's much better than Canon 50mm F/1.4.

Build quality, maybe, but the difference in IQ is negligible from what I've seen. Plus, I'm reading a lot that the Sigma AF is inconsistent. Not that the Canon's AF is stellar, though. There's some give and taken no matter what you do.
Do you really own both?  I have used both Canon 50mm F/1.4 and Sigma 50mm F/1.4.  For me Sigma is better than Canon.  I don't know how other Sigma 50mm lenses, but my AF is very consistent.  I have even used FoCal to adjust AF.  From the test numbers, I can tell the AF is very consistent as well.  You should try it out by yourself.

Edit:
I just remember one thing.  Sigma 50mm F/1.4 has reversion in year 2010.  In many forums people report that the new  version has improved its AF.

333
EOS Bodies / Re: Nikon user Swapping to Canon with a 5D3
« on: August 31, 2012, 06:29:56 PM »
5DIII instead of an 800E?  Thats nuts.  The Nikon sensor is a generation or two ahead of the Canon.

Why take a step back?

Probably Mr elbeasto thinks that lenses are more important than bodies.

Agree.
D800 was so attractive to me.  However, I gave up because of my Canon lenses.  If I sell my gears, I will loss 1000+ right a way.  Moreover, I don't know if Nikon has a lens close to my favorite Canon 70-200mm F/2.8 L MK2.
Lucky for me.  I just ordered 5D3 for 2800.  Cannot be happier.

334
Can I buy this 80K camcorder for 3K?  Canon can put it 120MP 35mm sensor on a camera, but the cost may be 100K+.  220MP is just not for normal people.

335
Lenses / Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« on: August 30, 2012, 05:07:08 PM »

IS is important but if it would make the price 30% higher but benefits from it (IS not price) would not sacrifice it frequently enough, then why include it? If you would be about to buy it - which version would you choose: 24-70 II for 2500$ or 24-70 IS for 3300$ assuming they had the same optics?
I think we are off topic now.  I mention VC(IS) feature because pakosouthpark asked me the comparison between old Canon 24-70mm and Tamron 24-70mm.  I guess most people here reply post without checking the old post.  Tamron 24-70mm VC is 1299, not 3300.
Guys, please check all posts before you reply.

336
Lenses / Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« on: August 30, 2012, 04:50:28 PM »

My 2cents:
Picture of a kid in action - playing sports, dancing  etc....has more meaning then still shooting.   
Agree.  I usually shoot with my Sigma 50mm F/1.4 when my son is dancing.  However, kids are not always in action and I have no chance to change lens.  That's why VC bring me benefits sometimes.  I still don't get why people think VC(IS) is not important.

337
Lenses / Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« on: August 30, 2012, 02:27:59 PM »
Almost all sports and wildlife photos look better if subjects are moving, at least "somehow" moving. No action in playfield or sleeping bird in most cases are not fascinating.

I forgot  sport and wildlife photos.  However, I think 24-70mm for sport and wildlife photos is too short.

338
Lenses / Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« on: August 30, 2012, 02:10:29 PM »
Except that IS (aka VC) does nothing to help with subject motion - it works by allowing you to handhold at a slower shutter speed than would otherwise be possible.  So, three stops of IS/VC at 70mm, on a FF body, means you can handhold down to 1/8 s.  If your living room is dimly-lit, a 1/8 s exposure with VC means your furniture will be nice and sharp...and your 2 year old son will be a blur.
I am not talking about subject motion.  I tried to avoid taking photos in low speed and when my son is moving.  You do take many photos in low speed shoot when your subject is not moving, don't you?  I really wonder if anyone taking photos only when your subject is moving?

339
Lenses / Re: Samyang 24mm f/1.4 Review
« on: August 30, 2012, 01:13:48 PM »
do they both have automatic focus?
No.  I bought the 35mm F/1.4 weeks ago.  The IQ is good; however, I hate the manual focus.  I am not so familiar with MF, so I always takes a lot of time to focus my objective.  Now, that lens is just seating on my shelf and eating dusts.  I will get an AF confirm chip to see that will help me or not.
By the way, anyone knows a cheap and good ultra wide prime (like 14mm)?  Manual focus is fine for me since I will use that one for landscape.

340
Lenses / Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« on: August 30, 2012, 01:05:36 PM »

what is that like comparing to the old canon 24-70?
IQ is slightly better my old Canon 24-70.  The best part is the VC.  My son is 2 year old.  I don't use flashlight when I take his pictures because the flashlight hurts kids' eyes under 5.  The illumination in my house are not good enough and always slow down my shooting speed.  The VC really brings a lot of benefits to me.  I think people like me taking a lot of photos at home may really like this lens.

341
Lenses / Re: Canon 50 F1.4 VS 50 F1.2L Lenses
« on: August 30, 2012, 01:37:48 AM »
No question, the 50 f/1.4 gives you the best IQ for the money in their entire lineup. But it's finnicky and can be fragile. Learn it's little quirks and treat it gingerly, and you should be ok.
If you are not comfortable with Canon 50mm F/1.4, go with Sigma 50mm F/1.4.  It's much better than Canon 50mm F/1.4.

342
Lenses / Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« on: August 29, 2012, 06:40:08 PM »
I am glad that I got Tamron 24-70mm VC.  No more waiting... :)

And how do you like it?
I like this lens a lot.  The IQ is sharper than my old Canon 24-70mm MK1.  I think people complain that it might have onion bokeh.  However, I haven't really seem that yet.  By the way I am not a PRO, so I don't really think I will be so picky for the onion bokeh in few photos in my life.  I really like the IQ and VC feature of this lens.
HOWEVER, if I was a PRO, I would just wait for Canon 24-70mm MK2.  For PROs you are making money from your clients, so you should use the best gear for your clients.

I was definitely temped by this lens. It receives great reviews and considered at least on par with the Canon 24-70 f2.8 Mk I in terms of IQ and has VC to boot! However, having the zoom ring turn the opposite direction was the deal breaker for me.
I think you won't feel any inconvenience for the opposite direction for zoom ring.  When you are turning the zoom ring, you will adjust the direction to the correct way.  At least there is no problem for me.

343
Lenses / Re: Canon 50 F1.4 VS 50 F1.2L Lenses
« on: August 29, 2012, 06:22:39 PM »
I have had both, but now have the pick of the bunch, a Sigma 50 f/1.4.

Read up on this lens. No it's not 10/10 perfect score perfect, but in my experience it's one of the few non-Canon aftermarket lenses than really stands out from the crowd. Same goes for the Sigma 85.

I'm generally not one for aftermarket non genuine hardware, but the Sigma 50 was too hard to ignore.

-PW
I haven't use 50mm F/1.2, so I cannot tell how is the 50mm F/1.2.  However, I had both Canon 50mm F/1.4 and Sigma 50mm F/1.4.  I end up to keep Sigma 50mm F/1.4.  The IQ and the bokeh of Sigma 50mm F/1.4 is better than Canon 50mm F/1.4.  The only problem is the focus issue.  I have to do +17 MA for this lens.  Sigma lenses are not good for camera without AFMA feature.

344
EOS Bodies / Re: 4K, 8K, UHDTV and the big megapixel EOS
« on: August 29, 2012, 02:08:06 PM »
Thank about that
Can we see the difference between 480p and 720p?
Can we see the difference between 720p and 1080p?

How about
Can we see the difference between 1080p and 2160p(4K)?
Can we see the difference between 2160p and 4320p(8K)?

My answer is yes especial between 408p, 720p, and 1080p.  If you have a 32 inch TV, 720p might be good enough for you.  If you have a 46 inch TV, you might want 1080p.  When you have a 60-80 inch TV, 4K and 8K is very important.  By the time high MP surely will bring the benefit.
However, that depends on how big TV you are going to have.

345
Lenses / Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« on: August 29, 2012, 01:57:14 PM »
I am glad that I got Tamron 24-70mm VC.  No more waiting... :)

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 34