Messages

2056

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D mk II still a viable option?

« on: May 26, 2012, 08:33:10 PM »

He would like to know if shelling out for a new 5d II is still a good option?

At the moment, the 5d2 is the much better option when shooting video because it runs magic lantern - a look at the hdr video samples on vimeo should convince anyone, it's the absolute killer firmware. And even for standard still shooting it's extremely handy (automatic hdr which selects how many shots are needed, focus stacking, focus trapping, ...). It'll take quite some time until it is ported on the 5d3, my guess is at least a year.

http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/Unified

2057

Lenses / Re: A Brief Hands On: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II

« on: May 26, 2012, 08:23:49 PM »

In-camera NR is irrelevant here - these are Lightroom conversions.

You can turn off or screw up nr in Lightroom, too. To answer the noise question we'd have to have the raw file - maybe the image was underexposed in the first place.

But in any case: Looking at the real world 5d3 shots from users in the forum tells me that the 5d3 might be a little better than the 36mp d800 at higher iso, but the improvement from the 5d2 is really not so large and people are strangely shocked to find iso noise in 5d3 shots at all...

2058

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D full frame

« on: May 26, 2012, 08:18:45 PM »

The 7D is also a sports camera - so I would guess an APS-H version would also be a sports camera.

It is a sports camera to *you*. But go in a shop and ask "What's the 7d good for?". They'll say it's an excellent camera for everything. And it is, well, if it would run magic lantern. And "everything" simply contains a lens offer below ff-20mm that isn't a fisheye. The many bird shooters with a 7d here in this forum produce a shifted view where the 7d is really positioned by Canon.

I don't say a 7d2 with aps-h wouldn't make sense or that I wouldn't want to use it, but I am saying that this is the reason why I am rather sure it won't happen, even if the ef-s compatibility problem wasn't there.

2059

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D full frame

« on: May 26, 2012, 07:31:09 PM »

Thanks for this evenings laugh

:-)) This is the great thing about the internet - just understand what you want, and you'll have plenty to laugh forever! Also, it saves you plenty of calories because there's no need to think anymore, and why would you  given the current style in this forum. Right on, commander!

If you read my post again, I didn't write the *1d4* was phased out because of not working with ultrawides, but *aps-h* will be because it won't appear in a 7d2 (see the thread title?) for this reason. Just because the 7d is very well received by people who want the built-in 1.6x tc, it's still positioned for general use and thus will either have to work with ef or ef-s ultrawides. And at the same time the 1dx replaces the 1d4 for completely other reasons that have nothing to do with this thread, so aps-h is gone. 1+1 = 2, see?

2060

Lenses / Re: 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II chromatic aberration

« on: May 26, 2012, 05:48:56 PM »

I guess 'minimize' is the key word because to me I feel like there is a good deal of chromatic fringing

Just use Lightroom 4.1RC2 with its new CA reduction and lens profiles, problem solved. CAs and vignetting aren't a problem if you do any postprocessing other than Microsoft paint, leaving only sharpness & focus (af on body & lens) to worry about.

2061

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon are you listening...?? NIKON D600

« on: May 26, 2012, 05:46:12 PM »

As the saying goes, "it takes two to suffer."

Currently with this thread, there are lots more suffering: Given the participation and the thread title, it's always on top of the main page and many more people will pick up the message :-p

2062

Lenses / Re: 100-400mm vs. 70-300L for basically the same exact price used? Which one?

« on: May 26, 2012, 05:41:18 PM »

THEN Canon bought out the 70-300mm L. Smaller/lighter/conventional zoom, over 400mm in 35mm terms on my 7D, - very very sharp, - 4 stops IS, NO CONTEST!

It's really funny to see how the 70-300L gains reputation. When I first researched what tele lens to get, I was not the only one to think this zoom is a rip-off: no Canon tc usable, only 4-5.6 (vs. primes or the 70-200L) and only up to 300 (vs. 100-400), while there are Canon and 3rd party alternatives that are way cheaper. But it just has the right ingredients for a walkaround tele zoom, I have to give it to Canon, they knew what they were doing here.

2063

Lenses / Re: Purple fringing: Canon EF 24 f/2.8 IS

« on: May 26, 2012, 04:05:03 PM »

Second shot: Purple fringing on the ceiling lights in the extremes of the frame.   It wouldn't be so bad in a $500 lens, but for $850...?   

It's not that much and outside a 16:9 video frame, and I guess would hardly show up on video anyway. Furthermore I don't think that's a production version of the lens and probably has been thrown around a lot when ferried from a to be, so let's wait and see.

2064

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon are you listening...?? NIKON D600

« on: May 26, 2012, 03:59:39 PM »

And no one really knows anything about the new 24-70, how do you know it's not worth it?

For the same reason, I was recently wondering why lots of people recommend the 24-70ii as a perfect lens if no one's seen it until today, and this started long ago once it was rumored. So to be fair, there might be rather a tendency here to think upcoming Canon gear will be stellar, while Nikon is out to produce vaporware ... just noticing.

Still, if rumors and only announced products would be treated equally from any manufacturer, I still think discussing upcoming Nikon bodies from a Canon perspective has its place here, because the competition will influence what Canon does and what we all will probably buy next.

2065

Lenses / Re: A Brief Hands On: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II

« on: May 26, 2012, 03:48:21 PM »

The good news? At least we’re sure they’ve made at least one.

:-)) ... but you're wrong: the lens' serial number is 0000000039 !

2066

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 4D full frame (6D)

« on: May 26, 2012, 03:39:44 PM »

60D becomes a 70D with full time AF on video and partial weather sealing.

The 60d already has "partial" sealing. Actually, every type of sealing is partial, it just depends on how you use it - the 1d series have the best and better than 5d3, ...

7D becomes 6D with 5D3's AF, lower noise ISO and an articulating screen.

If they want the 7d customer base to upgrade, they'll call it 7d2 for marketing reasons so that the 7d1 will be "old". And if they put in an articulating screen in a 7d body I'll laugh my ass off because that's one of the things 7d users always laugh at concerning the 60d/600d ("only the rebels have it - it can't be good or pro").

2067

Lenses / Re: 100-400mm vs. 70-300L for basically the same exact price used? Which one?

« on: May 26, 2012, 03:34:53 PM »

but the 100-400 is a push pull zoom i think, sucks dust into the camera

All non-internal zooms sucks in air when zoomed out, how else would it work? By creating lower pressure inside the lens - that would be news to me. If you don't want this, get an internal zoom like the 70-200, but the downside is that they are as long when zoomed in as zoomed out, so it's bad for transport and carrying around.

2068

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon are you listening...?? NIKON D600

« on: May 26, 2012, 03:32:10 PM »

Just to add to that. I bought yesterday my first L lens (24-105 f4, YAY!) and the man at the store (one of Athens' most popular) was very much puzzled on Canon's marketing policy. He even told me, that he most probably won't stock any of new Canon L lenses because they are pretty much more expensive than the older models or Nikon's counterparts. I admit though that Greece is not Canon's primary target so that won't matter much to Canon.

It's might be not Greece, but the kind of shop - many retailers have not the kind of customers who buy L lenses at $1500+ and thus are well-advised to stock aps-c, kits or 3rd party gear. But still - I'm interested to see how many shops in Berlin will have Canon's 24-70ii on display and in stock.

Off topic, and if for the reason alone this might actually be helpful: You know the 24-105L is the one L lens that is to be found rather cheap used because it's a kit lens and many people dump it for this reason? If you want to save some money, I guess you can still return it and look on ebay, craiglist or whatever else you've got down there.

2069

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D full frame

« on: May 26, 2012, 04:42:29 AM »

1D X
Future high MP full frame body
5D mk3
Future budget full frame model (5D2 taking that role for now)
7D mk2 - APS-C sensor, 5D3 style AF
70D - updated with 7D style AF

I agree if the this is what makes sense as far as I understand what would be competitive and what Canon users would buy. The only thing I'm not so sure about if there is a big enough market for a 7d2 that would cost as much as the "budget ff", but maybe since it's got the 1.6x tc and if it would be better equipped for outdoor use. Now let's see what Canon really does and when :-o

As an open question, who wants an APS-H body? I can imagine 1D series users may wish to continue having a future path for them on the same course, but do full frame or APS-C users also want APS-H?

The problem with aps-h is that you cannot use the good ef-s ultrawides nor can you use the potential of ef ones. That's why I think it'll be phased out. And even if the sensor is cheaper to produce than ff, I don't think this would make that large a difference nowadays in comparison to the rest of the body. If Canon want to release a new ff body well below $2000, they certainly can and don't need aps-h for that.

2070

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 4D full frame

« on: May 25, 2012, 05:13:15 PM »

I don't think we need to plug any more holes...just my 2 cents...

That's too simplistic, 7d aps-c and 5d2 ff have completely different characteristics not only because their af etc. is different but because the 1.6x crop factor makes the same lens behave so differently.

Not that that stopped Nikon from releasing a "D4" of course.  But then Canon always skipped around the number 4 (EOS 3, EOS 5, etc) where as Nikon had the F4 as well...

Now it would be interesting if Nikon pro photogs are more often hit by lightning or a crashing satellite when at work :-p