July 28, 2014, 04:19:37 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 - Marsu42

Pages: 1 ... 124 125 [126] 127 128 ... 291
1876
Lenses / Re: Is your midrange gear insured?
« on: February 14, 2013, 02:56:10 PM »
They all have similar values. I am at Poepping's.

Thanks!

I would hardly consider the 100L, 70-300L, 17-40L etc as "mid-range"

Well, I concur there are a couple of top range items included (100L, 600rt) but since for every other lens & camera there are cheaper and more expensive offers I consider €5000-8000 still midrange - a 1dx body alone costs that much, not to think of €10k tele primes. But correct me if I'm wrong, I'd happily change my perspective on my gear.

1877
Lenses / Re: Is your midrange gear insured?
« on: February 14, 2013, 02:30:15 PM »
That 2.5% of the gear value I pay per year is worth it the second you drop it or someone threatens you.

You seem to be German - did you do a survey for the cheapest insurance company, is 2.5%/year the best offer, what company is it? The next step for me would be to search for a company, and I really don't know where to start (again, in Germany).

1878
Lenses / Is your midrange gear insured?
« on: February 14, 2013, 02:12:16 PM »
I didn't quite know where to put this question, so it ended up in "lenses" since these are the most expensive items in the bag.

The motive for me thinking about insuring my gear is that I though someone has nicked my 70-300L out of my bag today - but back at home I gladly saw that I didn't take it with me in the first place as I usually do. So: My current gear (camera+lenses+flashes+filters+...) I'm carrying around is worth about €5000, and I'm going to add a 6d+24-70tc totaling about €8000. I bought this gear piece by piece, but somehow it's grown to (for my standard) considerable value, though it's far from the pro 1dx/5d3+f2.8-kits other people have.

Starting as of today I somehow feel that not insuring the stuff but carrying around the greater part of it most of the time is not exactly clever, on the other hand my budget is stretched as it is so I'm wondering if other people insure their "midrange" dslr gear against theft & damage or they consider the real world risk too low to pay for the insurance?

1879
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: DPReview: Canon EOS 6D Reviewed
« on: February 14, 2013, 11:58:31 AM »
And finally it will be considered as what it is: a decent camera.

All current dlsrs are "decent", imho it's only about "value", i.e. performance vs. price - and since the price curve is unpredictable (see 5d3 price drop) imho it isn't as easy as the previous posts above or the (humorous!) lens rentals article suggest.

Esp. with the rather "basic" feature set of the 6d the price is a main component, while the 5d3 with better specs and esp. the af system will keep being "really" decent for a long time to come but the 6d will be more quickly regarded as "only" decent since it's mostly the previous 5d2 generation tech. That won't hinder me from buying a 6d, but I'm aware of the 5d3/6d difference.

1880
I guess thatr the Tamron wins hands down for video use over the canon mk2 due to the VC?

Only if you use handheld static video, but for most professional applications a body stabilization gear is used which prevents the typical IS/VC "skip" when moving around.

1881
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: DPReview: Canon EOS 6D Reviewed
« on: February 13, 2013, 07:43:30 PM »
In FoCal's test, the rather big surprise is how inaccurate and variable contrast-detect AF is on both the 5DII and the 7D.
I didn't know that and expected my 60d af to be always spot on - is this your personal experience or do you have sources on that? Afaik even lensrentals uses contrast af as the comparison for perfect af accuracy?
The 'inaccuracy' refers to low-contrast scenes -- obviously.

Since I only heard about this now and didn't have time to read up on the tests it was news to me - but fortunately there are very clever people here to point out the obvious :-> ... I was just wondering if I can use contrast af for shooting test charts after getting a new lens, or if I have to take multiple exposures to allow for some af error - but as I understand now high-contrast b/w charts should achieve good focus.

1882
Form-fitting 580 modifiers (e.g. StoFen) do not fit on the 600 head.  However, modifiers for the older 550EX will fit, albeit snugly.
Stofen has released a new diffuser specifically designed for the 600EX.
Yep, and I have one.  It's still a pretty snug fit, tighter than the ones for my 430EX II's.

I've got it too and it's true, the fit is snug but I really like it because I'm 100% sure it won't fall off in any situation.

1883
I got a quoted price of 840EUR for it, which seems decent, other opinions?

I won't get the cheapest offer but I'll buy my 24-70vc either from a bricks and mortar store or at lest Amazon where I can exchange it w/o delay or hassle because Tamron's qc is weak and buyer's have to be ready to get a decentered, less sharp, or broken vc lens.

Unfortunately I have one major issue with my new lens. Since I bought it, I have significant problem with quickly discharging battery.

As you wrote Tamron service is very good, they do free lens-body adjustments (like for Rebels or 60d w/o afma) and replace the old lenses that don't work with the latest Canon bodies - the latter is always a possibility, Canon likes to screw 3rd party manufacturers from time to time.

1884
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: DPReview: Canon EOS 6D Reviewed
« on: February 13, 2013, 11:21:48 AM »
In FoCal's test, the rather big surprise is how inaccurate and variable contrast-detect AF is on both the 5DII and the 7D.

I didn't know that and expected my 60d af to be always spot on - is this your personal experience or do you have sources on that? Afaik even lensrentals uses contrast af as the comparison for perfect af accuracy?

, the battery drain with wifi and GPS turned on is quite significant

... as far as I've read wifi is the main culprit, while gps surprisingly seems to draw little power when the interval is set to 60sec.

Why do the mention - "Relatively unsophisticated Auto ISO"?

Because there's Magic Lantern with sophisticated auto iso :-)

nothing but a re-packaged 5D II, crippled all around.

Imho the 6d is still overpriced and certainly not a feather in Canon's cap, but you are either ignorant or trolling: The list of advantages of the 6d over the older 5d2 is significant, though we know Canon felt like downgrading some core specs (x-sync, shutter speed, shutter rating): http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=12582.msg226467#msg226467

Overall even weaker than the nothing-to-write-home-about Nikon D600.

... but you might feel different about writing home about the 6d after trying to use the d600 af in low light.The main part in the dpreview review that was missing from the preview is this:

Quote
Focus acquisition on the EOS 6D displays all the hallmarks of mature phase detection AF performance. The camera is quick to lock focus and under most conditions does so with a high degree of accuracy. In reviewing hundreds of images shot with the 6D, the vast majority of shots that did lack critical sharpness were due to either subject or camera movement.

1885
Lenses / Re: How to reduce the nd filter warm color cast?
« on: February 13, 2013, 04:39:34 AM »
You can fix it with the white balance.
Or you can do it in photoshop with a method that can remove every colour cast ( doesn't always work well because it is based on the average of the image).

Thanks a lot for the advice! I ordered the Heliopan filter today and am very eager to see the results, and I admit I hope that wb will fix it most of the time because with Photoshop I end up with a 100mb tif instead of a 20mb dng :-o

1886
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D Likely Price Trend
« on: February 13, 2013, 04:33:40 AM »
The kit price dropped another $50 this morning at B&H. $2,399

That'll probably be due to the 24-70/4 production setting in and the "new" - not necessarily "better" - kit arriving ... at least in Germany I didn't see any price drops during the last month. And since 6d availability is still limited (I asked in a shop a week ago) I don't see the price changing a lot anytime soon :-\

1887
Canon is said to be a lil sharper.. But not worth $1000 more.. Plus..

The Canon is more "worth it" if corner sharpness is paramount or often really shooting @f2.8 - but if the general style is to shoot @f4+ for increased dof and only for available light emergencies wide open then the Tamron with vc and 6 year warranty has a strong case - if you can get a good copy.

Yes, there is one report of a lens element coming loose and if I'd be a full time pro on heavy duty shooting the build quality might favor the Canon, but currently that won't hinder me from getting the Tamron.

1888
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: How bad is moire?
« on: February 12, 2013, 02:28:17 PM »
I know this probably sounds like a minor quibble, but I can't stand that I have to hold down a button with my thumb while turning a dial to change my f/stop on the T3i. To me it is worth the extra cash just to get the better form of the 60D body.

Same here, I'd never want to use a camera body w/o back wheel since I often change exposure compensation and currently try to shoot full m more often - both a pita on a Rebel-style camera.

1889
Lenses / Re: Please help me.
« on: February 11, 2013, 05:17:44 PM »
17-40L is a good call ...has a broad usable focal range on a crop body.

Yes and no: it's ok on crop, light & good flare control - though the 17-40L is better on ff plus it's not sharp esp. at open aperture in comparison to the ef-s lenses. I'd only get the 17-40L for crop if upgrading/dual-using to/with ff is planned, or if weather sealing is important - in the latter category the 17-40L shines as an internal zoom.

If your budget allows, consider the 16-35II f/2.8 instead of 17-40 f/4, you will then have two fast lenses. But the f4 lens is no slouch and both are great walk arounds for crops.

Here I have to disagree - since there is the Tokina 11-16 for crop imho the 16-35L is complete overkill - constructing an uwa zoom for ff is much harder esp. if the corners have to be sharp, that's why the 16-35L is so expensive. On crop the mirror is smaller, the ef-s lens is nearer to the sensor and a good performing f2.8 uwa is cheaper to produce. Next to that, the 16-35L is heavy, and you're not even using part of the glass.

Disclaimer: I'd gladly switch my 17-40L for a 16-35L for free, but only because I'll get a 6d sooner or later.

1890
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Anti-Aliasing Filter
« on: February 11, 2013, 05:04:09 PM »
I'm not saying the 5D3 isn't better than a 6D and it seems practical to pixel bind with the native resolution of the 5D3 but I am seeing very similar if not the same results with the 6D and this third party AA filter that I see with native 5D3 video footage.

Terrific - just one detail though: "VAF-6D Moire / Aliasing Filter - Your Price: $365.00" ... and thinking of the current 5d3-6d price difference, the tons of things that make the 5d3 a more capable camera ... well, you know :-o ...

Pages: 1 ... 124 125 [126] 127 128 ... 291