September 21, 2014, 10:41:04 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 - Marsu42

Pages: 1 ... 123 124 [125] 126 127 ... 304
Lenses / Re: 16-35 f/2.8II vs 17-40 f/4
« on: April 21, 2013, 06:26:28 AM »
and used on a crop body it's not suffering the same drop off in resolution or vignetting at the corners as it does on a FF body at the wide end, wide open!

... only that correcting vignetting in post is really easy and with no problems unless the vignette was -3ev, but you cannot raise sharpness in post (yet :-)). As for the much discussed corner sharpness, well, I haven't got a ff body (again: yet :-p) but looking at my current shots it doesn't really matter.

Marsu, excellent point.  However, I did shoot the Tokina outdoors and into the sun today.  I saw no flare.  If there ever is some, surely it is minimal.

I didn't research it that much, but the sample shots I saw were mostly night-time like these, and you don't get this type of flare (circles around point lights) with the 17-40L (and afaik 16-35L):

The Tokina 16-28 is a far better buy than the Canon 16-35.  I just used one for the first time, today.  It's sharper, and costs just over half.

The Achilles' heel of the Tokina is flare control (or the lack of) - try shooting into the sun or point light sources at dusk/night and you'll get very "artistic" results - and with an uwa lens you're bound to have lights in the picture often.

The Canon's are much better, the 17-40 is said to be even best (probably due to the smaller lens diameter), I have never managed to get any flare at all. So for strictly indoor shots w/o effect or protection filter, the Tokina is excellent value, but imho that's about it.

EOS Bodies / Re: 21mp Sensor in the 7D Mark II? [CR1]
« on: April 19, 2013, 04:13:54 AM »
18 MP. 21 MP. 24 MP. Even 15 MP.  Frankly, I don't especially care

You just don't understand what matters to Canon :-p ... the 5d3 with 22mp is *better* than the 20mp 6d because it has 2mp more, and that gives Canon the freedom to put the 21mp 7d2 where they want it to be in (automated) tech comparisons: Between the pro 5d3 and the amateur 6d. Maybe the 70d will have 19mp?

It´s time that Canon reduces the price of the 5D Mark III around 2000 bucks and put a FF camera between the 5D Mark III and 1D X on the market that is worth the money you pay for it. I need a better IQ in the range ISO 50 to ISO 800.

Amen to that, esp. since you know the Canon gear. But of course it won't happen now that the 6d is out, or Canon gets really bold and prices the full frame 60d where it should belong - at say €1300.

Lenses / Re: 16-35 f/2.8II vs 17-40 f/4
« on: April 19, 2013, 04:02:21 AM »
This is great feedback on both of these lenses.  This is why I'm saving up for the 16-35.

As usual, "more expensive is better" applies here, though as far as I read it not for f8-f11 landscape shots. If you use uwa a lot, the 16-35 might be the better choice, but often it'll be used in a combo with a 24-70 lens - and then it gets more difficult: 16-35+cheap 24-70 or 17-40+expensive 24-70? That's why I've got the 17-40, and at f8 I'm happy so far, it's a good iq (even on crop) and sturdy internal zoom lens.

Yesterday I did a quick comparison (video mode/indoors) between a Canon 60D and a Nikon D7100.

Converning lv focusing and zooming: This is where Canon blows away Nikon simply due to having Magic Lantern with all it's features, the main reason I got a 60d and not a Nikon d7000. If you don't know ml and go for video you should really have a look at ml ( - it has more lv zooming options & even sharpens/constrasts the zoomed image for better manual focus).

As for awb, yes, I think it works good on Canon and I seldom see any magenta/green tint, can't tell about Nikon.

Are you just using it at the widest setting?  I hate the idea that a lens is "meant" for a certain purpose, but some certainly lean a direction.
Well just for perspective. My worry is that if I got close then my subjects will be distorted. I wonder if I should have went for more reach.

It's great you're posting here because you tend to get the most expensive gear (which is absolutely legit, btw) and then wonder what to do with it, makes me feel better with having cheap gear but learning how to use it :-)

I got a wide angle lens *because* I want shots to be distorted and getting a "close up" effect, otherwise I just do a step back - I  was shooting with a zoom starting at 45mm for the last years and seldom missed wider angles. Yes, uwa might be essential for some indoors people group shots but for architectural shots you can also do panorama stitching.

Please do see this, uwa is not for "taking it all in":

Lenses / Re: Speedy Manual Focusing?
« on: April 17, 2013, 01:25:29 PM »
I believe innately knowing this concept and how it applied to their cameras helped a lot especially when street shooting
As it happens, Magic Lantern calculates the hyperfocal distance for you :-) so this helped me a lot.

Lenses / Re: Speedy Manual Focusing?
« on: April 17, 2013, 12:26:14 PM »
How do focus screens work on newer body? Are they like the old split prism from the film-era? Any recommendation on which is the best for the 6D? Thanks a lot!

I'd also be interested in some experiences with these, there only seems to be one option left (no katzeyeoptics for ff, brightscreen seems to be out of business). As far as I understand it they screw up spot/partial metering, at least with fast lenses?

Lenses / Re: Speedy Manual Focusing?
« on: April 17, 2013, 10:20:51 AM »
If you are manual focusing a DSLR you have to use live view. The viewfinder is just not good enough.... it gets you close, but not spot on. You really need live view and then to zoom in on your target to properly check focus.

Or, much better, use Magic Lantern with focus peaking, esp. good with switching the display to b&w. You exactly see where the focus pane is w/o needing to zoom in (well, except if you're shooting f1.2 or macro with very thin dof). And with ml you also see what's under/overexposed (zebras) and even where the midrange tonal values are (false color).

Nowadays I mostly use live-view mf for macro shots, it's faster more precise than constantly af'ing and still missing, with the 60d's swivel screen it's a great tripod setup. I do miss the vf split screen from the ol' days though, it's a pity there's no option to switch this on/off quickly but it needs a vf screen replacement.

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]
« on: April 17, 2013, 04:09:10 AM »
Regarding differentiation. I am not sure Canon can keep the 70D at 9-points, all cross-type (as 650D/700D). (Well of course they CAN, they are Canon...)

Probably they'll add 2 more af points just like 5d2->6d for all you nay-sayers to be happy :-p ? Personally and having looked at Canon's product policy during the last years, I cannot imagine they'll just chuck in the good 7d af system into a xxd system yet - even if they love re-using af arrays.

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 5 Public Beta Available
« on: April 16, 2013, 12:52:22 PM »
It's slow going due to general buggy-ness

My experience when trying it is quite the opposite: LR5 feels like turbo-charged, as if the build a wait loop into LR4 to make people wish for an upgrade :-> ... this and some new features like the heal/clone brush are enough to upgrade, let's hope the RC phase doesn't take the better of a year's time.

EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]
« on: April 16, 2013, 12:40:26 PM »
I´d like to know why Canon is announcing the cams so late....

Canon has been burnt by the 1dx & 24-70ii delays, now they'll release it if it's really ready for production.

Shutter lifecycle is irrelevant. Almost nobody ever wears out a shutter on any DSLR, let alone a consumer model,

Not so: Shooting brackets (3+ shutter cycles per shot), focus stacking (10-20+ cycles) and using live view with quick af (one cycle very af action) I'm now on 125k cycles on my 60d after about two years.

Dual memory card slots are irrelevant to all but a very small minority of shooters, too...essentially, the only ones who care are those who need a redundant backup, and they're all shooting with two bodies anyway.

That doesn't make sense: Another body doesn't protect you from card failure, i.e. coming home and the data isn't readable but the camera thought it was written just fine. For many, no dual cards disqualifies a 70d or 6d as a backup body for a "pro" first camera 7d2/5d3 - probably what Canon intends.

If they want to pull some Rebel/Kiss/xxxD users upmarket they really need to up the AF.

Canon might decide last minute based on market research what existing af system to chuck in - 60d or 7d. But I'm not very hopeful, there are plenty of other tech specs above the rebels and the whole usability, Canon might think that'd be enough or they'd risk 6d upselling.

Lenses / Re: EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Availability
« on: April 16, 2013, 12:31:57 PM »
So over 8 lbs? Yikes. :o

Holy cow, not that I'd be in the market for a 10k lens, but I'm wondering what users Canon has in mind - at this weight, most photo-journalistic or quick action shots seem to be impossible?

But probably it's really a small pro sports (and maybe wildlife?) market, and those few people are fine to shell out that money for top notch iq & reach flexibility.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Upgrading...Canon 60D to...GH3
« on: April 16, 2013, 04:29:48 AM »
I think the most basic difference to me is that the 5D Mark II is better in low light and the GH2 has better image quality when properly lit, which is most of the time...

I seldom do video, but when switching away from 60d or 5d2 I'm wondering if people know and use Magic Lantern and all the video features it provides (hdr video, gradual expo, fps override, ...). But if it comes to raw sensor power in very low light the crop sensor doesn't cut it, that's a known fact.

Pages: 1 ... 123 124 [125] 126 127 ... 304