October 22, 2014, 01:31:01 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 ... 161 162 [163] 164 165 ... 321
Lenses / Re: Tokina AT-X 16-28mm F2.8 vs. Canon EF 17-40mm F4
« on: February 01, 2013, 01:27:45 PM »
Does anyone have any experience or recommendations with purchasing either one of these lenses?

Well, w/o any information about what you plan to shoot this is a little fuzzy - but I'm a happy new 17-40L owner, it is sturdy/sealed, inexpensive (for a L lens), has a wide zoom range vs. changing lenses and has good performance if stopping down.

I wouldn't buy the Tokina because it doesn't take simple protection/polarizer/nd screw-in filters, the 77mm 17-40L can even be fitted with 82mm filters with a stop-up adapter since the Canon lens caps I own are designed to take 1 step larger filters (67->77 & 77->82).

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms 70D; Future of Semi-Pro DSLR is FF
« on: February 01, 2013, 01:12:43 PM »
It's probably a reach to consider staff at DPReview "industry writers" or media or journalists at all. Owned by Amazon, they are simply part of the marketing system designed to make people want their products.

Good to know, maybe this is the reason they seem to be delaying their full 6d review indefinitely (just the af performance test is missing)? They probably have a hard time deciding between sugar-coating it or looking for a new job :->

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Help to make my decision.
« on: February 01, 2013, 12:14:38 PM »
Not difficult to understand.

:-) I guess the difficult part is that the "entry-level" gimmick-loaded 6d has better performance than the venerable pro 5d2 that has been used winning "photographer of the year" awards ... but you're correct, it's simply the way tech evolution works.

Imho the only important reason to buy a new 5d2 over a 6d is that the older model has higher sharpness @low iso, next to the pro-style usability with the joystick which might mixing 6d & 5d3 a hassle.

Lenses / Re: VC on the 24-70 f/2.8 VC
« on: February 01, 2013, 12:08:56 PM »
I didn't feel that my first one was within spec with the VC (I would get the jumping and inconsistent VC performance).

Since I'm most probably going to buy the Tamron, too: could you please write how you tested the lens for "proper" vc performance and came to the conclusion to replace it?

That'd be really most helpful for us budget Tamron customers :-) ... the good thing about Tamron for sure is that they do free lens-body calibrations and have the 6y warranty.

Lenses / Re: VC on the 24-70 f/2.8 VC
« on: February 01, 2013, 08:38:54 AM »
Has anyone else been able to do a similar comparison?

I don't have the 24-70vc (yet), though I guess I'm guilty of having read about every review and post about it trying to decide between this lens and the new and much more expensive Canon counterpart.

From everything I read the vc is said to be equal to Canon, though from my personal hands-on experience I think the swing-in time of the vc seems to be longer than on my IS lenses (esp. 70-300L) - did you allow for the vc to settle before taking your shots?

Maybe you could post two sample shots (crops) to let us see us your experience, they were taken at the same aperture & focal length = same magnification? It isn't an afma/af problem?

Lenses / Re: Please explain the need for f2.8 zooms
« on: February 01, 2013, 08:29:50 AM »
One thing that has not been directly mentioned is that a good photographer will envision the amount of DOF he/she wants in a shot and then adjust the aperture to match based on the focal length of the lens, the distance to the subject and the distance from the subject to the background.  As the distance variables change, so must your aperture to keep the same DOF

Thanks, I didn't think about this point, keeping a consistent dof across the lens zoom capabilty certainly is a plus for a professional appeal.

Also a big thank you to all posters explaining the pro and cons to me w/o any "just get the best" attitude, to summarize my current understanding f2.8 zooms are for

* keeping a constant dof
* pro-looking bokeh
* faster shutter speed for fast motion with zoom
* reserve in available light situations, though as far as noise goes 5d2+f2.8 = 6d+f4
* sharpness because f2.8 lens stopped down > f4 lens wide open
* more reliable af  - though I wonder if this is valid for the 5d2/6d af? Anyone?

All these points make me tend to get a Tamron 24-70 lens for the 6d after all since my lenses don't pay for themselves by pro shooting, I will shoot somewhat stopped down often and 100% crop sharpness is nice to have, but not critical to me... and the plain matter of the fact is that I could get 2 (two) 6d+24-70vc for 1 (one) 5d3+24-70ii :-o

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms 70D; Future of Semi-Pro DSLR is FF
« on: February 01, 2013, 08:18:47 AM »
That's really interesting - and if only because it says I was correct all the way along predicting the semipro-crop segment being sandwiched between pressure from below (better Rebels and competition) and above (more future potential in ff than in the nearly maxed out aps-c) ;->

And also interesting to see one of the guys responsible for Canon's strategy - I can imagine him supporting what dpreview.com calls the "conservative, slightly unimaginative design that's become the company's hallmark"

Last not least with the upcoming new ff models he imho more or less confirms that even Canon figures that the expensive 5d3 and the feature-reduced "5d mk2 mk2" = 6d is not for everyone...

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Help to make my decision.
« on: January 31, 2013, 03:44:54 PM »
I wasn't aware there was an increase in DR in the 6D? Not beyond marginal, at least?
Nothing to get excited about, but still: http://www.sensorgen.info/

For the OP's needs the 5d2 sounds perfect and I think the 'raft' of extra features in the 6D (in this instance) are not exactly essential. Nice to have but are they really useful? I would suggest the extra ISO capacity is the only enticement...
Personally I like the silent shutter and the decrease in banding with is said to often hinder raising shadows on the 5d2 even in low iso. Also better metering/awb an some more fps are not to be disregarded, but of course ymmv concerning your shooting habits.

Most fw improvements of the 6d can be had on the 5d2 is using Magic Lantern though, except for the improved afma.

EOS Bodies / Re: Expected reception of the 7DII / 70D
« on: January 31, 2013, 03:22:58 PM »
Sounds about right.
LOL - but it's rather a good joke than reality, because my observation is that people who know a product is crap even before it's released tend to continue to think so even after it's available. But he got the 6 month catharsis right, sooner or later indeed the "useful tool" opinion dominates.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Help to make my decision.
« on: January 31, 2013, 02:40:10 PM »
I realize that some people have found that the 6D is not for them, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean that it's not for everyone, or that it's a bad camera.

The catch with the 6d is that I have to press the big red "delete knowledge" button to stop thinking about what Canon cut in comparison to the 5d3 for no reason at all than marketing, and what the competition can deliver for a €2000 price tag - after all, that's a lot of money for a camera body that is soon to be outdated by upcoming sensors and just has a 100k shutter rating.

But ignoring the said facts I'll most probably also buy a 6d if the price drops a bit more after the early adopters wave.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Help to make my decision.
« on: January 31, 2013, 11:02:39 AM »
So why waste those extra 500$?
Well, some things come to mind... (from http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=1130)

  • higher iso capability
  • less banding
  • higher dynamic range
  • center-point af up to -3lv
  • silent shutter
  • faster fps
  • longer battery life
  • shorter release time
  • better metering & auto-wb
  • hi-res lcd
  • small & light but good grip
  • top wheel lock
  • gps built-in
  • wifi built-in
  • newer firmware:
    • full support for rt flashes,
    • in-camera multishot/hdr
    • in-camera ca correction
    • 7x bracketing
    • dual afma for zooms
    • servo af customization
    • flexible min/max auto-iso
    • min shutter speed setting
    • orientation-linked af point

Lenses / Re: Please explain the need for f2.8 zooms
« on: January 30, 2013, 09:21:07 PM »
The standard lens requirement for shooting events/weddings seem to be a combination of 24-70/28 and 70-200/2.8, I read both are nailed to a pro's camera 90% of the time (though I have problems doing the maths :-))
I disagree with your basic presmise that  24-70 and 70-200 are "nailed" to wedding photographer's SLR's...and are "must-have" lenses. This is simply not accurate.

Well, I actually I do agree with you and have to admit that this premise was an ironic part, 90% + 90% = 180% :-)

Another is an old timer who can pick his L-lenses from his oversized bag, but what sticks out in my mind is not his lens collection...

That's what a photog also said to me, but on the other hand the "I can shoot a wedding with my iPhone" photog type is a bit suspicious to me, too - I really can't tell what's reality and what's showing off in either "top gear" or "low gear" way.

I thought that 2.8 was important for using the high precision cross type auto focus sensors.... Better and more accurate focus at 2.8, then the pics append at the aperture of choice... Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that this was how the autofocus operates....

Afaik: Yes and no. The 5d3/1dx-type af is more precise with the newest lenses (*not* necessarily the ones with the widest apertures, see lens groups in the manual), i.e. it can use all focus points, the doublecross sensor points don't degrade & the enhanced motor precision can be used (see lensrentals test on the 6d af which cannot). So that's +1 for the newest Canon f2.8 zooms.

On the other hand the camera *has* to focus more precisely when using a f2.8+ lens, and that can cost speed as a tradeoff for precision - so focusing with a "dumb" f4 lens might be faster since a little focus miss doesn't show.

And the 6d/5d2 is another matter, it has *no* cross-type af point @f2.8, but falls back to the less precise cross when the f2.8 line fails to focus - so -1 for f2.8 lenses since this af system is "anti-tuned" for it, there's a reason the Canon sample shots are made with the 17-40/4 and the kit lenses are 24-105/4 and the new 24-70/4.

Turning this around, what are the disadvantages of f/2.8 zooms ?

Um, price, bulk (scare-factor, pack-size) and weight come to mind :-p that's why I have a 70-300L and not a 70-200/2.8.

Lenses / Re: Please explain the need for f2.8 zooms
« on: January 30, 2013, 08:14:29 PM »
x-sync is irrelevent when dragging the shutter since you are shooting at 1/10th second or so

Wow, I really have to try that - but 1/10s does result in shots with a large motion trail that are rather "artistic", doesn't it? Or you could even pull a sample shot out of your stack :-) ?

I thought more of a 1/60s as the lower limit (and conveniently settable in the camera fw), and the upper x-sync limit with 2nd curtain was meant if for fast motion 1/500s+ would be more appropriate, but a lower shutter speed captures more ambient/background light at acceptable iso.

Lenses / Re: Please explain the need for f2.8 zooms
« on: January 30, 2013, 07:44:55 PM »
as for the tamron well I've had bad tamron encounters in the past so i'm really gun shy about this lens and have a somewhat prejudiced opinion which isnt helped when people report front elements falling out
I understand that and nearly forgot about the tamron until another CR wedding photog tested it and uses it as his wedding lens: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11251.0

The thing to know about the 6D, is it's not really considered a 'professional' camera as such.
... said photog now uses a 6d and praises it over his 5d2, sure a 5d3 is better (at €1000 more...) but the way I see it either the 5d2 and 6d are "professional" or neither is - except for the fact that the "budget" €2000 6d is only valid for cps silver in Europe, thanks, Canon.

Personally I think the 24-105L and say a sigma 35 f1.4 would be a more reliable combo
the 24-105L with some flash is a superb lens tough and very versitile and when f4 aint enough then swap over to the 35. If f4 isnt enough it doent take too much more light loss to make f2.8 not enough.
That's basically what I figured, too - but I don't have enough experience yet to be sure of that reasoning considering the very strong "everyone needs f2.8 zooms" opinions.

a neat trick with event photography is use a slower shutter speed to balance the ambient while keeping a decent iso
Thanks a lot for this and the other hints, it's just a pity the Canon cameras have such a slow x-sync (6d: 1/180s...), but I really have to test 2nd curtain sync more to get a feel how much it can make a bit of motion blur "snappier" and at what export resolution.

Lenses / Re: Please explain the need for f2.8 zooms
« on: January 30, 2013, 07:02:39 PM »
When you say 1 stop better, are you just talking about sensor noise performance or AF sensor performance?

My question is purely about sensor performance and why f2.8 will stay that important forever.

There is also another thing that you may not think of, is that lenses wide open generally don't perform their best.

... unless you're scraping together the money for a Canon 24-70L2

basically having a wide aperture available is like a condom
its better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it :P

Ok, thanks for the answer from a real world pro, so you're on the side that even f2.8 isn't really "fast" enough and it just happens so that the fastest zooms available are f2.8. So if I understand you correctly you'd rather go with a Tamron f2.8 + a faster prime like the Sigma 35mm than a Canon 24-70/f2.8 for the price of both combined?

Pages: 1 ... 161 162 [163] 164 165 ... 321