Messages

2596

Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

« on: March 18, 2012, 11:10:26 AM »

Some shots with my 17-55. It can't get sharper than that

... exif is missing - I take it these were shot at f2.8 and are 100% crop pictures? At what zoom range? Personally, I doubt the helpfulness of posting pictures for lens reviews because you can good and bad shots out of most lenses - but at least the basic information should be there.

2597

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Have Canon 60d and want advice on next upgrade for my needs

« on: March 18, 2012, 10:36:28 AM »

Yes, dof at f/1.4 is outlandishly thin close to minimum focus distance (whether using APS-C or FF), but becomes more manageable as subject distance increases and the extra stops really come in handy for indoor shots. f/2.8 often isn't fast enough.

... until sensor noise decreases with each now eos generation, and in a couple of years even shots @f2.8 will have 1/8000s and no noise in the dark :-p

... but for now, I partially agree with you: Until it broke its plastic casing, I carried my 50/1.8 in my pocket for public meetings and demonstrations, and it got ok pictures at extremely low light and fast movement e.g. of people running from the cops.

2598

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Have Canon 60d and want advice on next upgrade for my needs

« on: March 18, 2012, 09:28:08 AM »

I recently loaned the lens to a friend who is neither very experienced nor an expert, and he had a lot of fun with the lens. I have no idea how good the pictures were as I didn't see them, but it was definitely fun.

Imho the actual *shooting* with a 1.4 lens is fun, but not viewing the results :-) ... the problem with the 60d (and most other bodies, I guess) is that the standard viewfinder screen is optimized for smaller apertures and with f2.8 or larger (see your manual...). The dof in the viewfinder appears *larger* than it is in reality. Thus, a scene looks ok while shooting and maybe on the small body lcd screen, too.

But when back @home and looking it full size on a larger screen, 1.4 and closer distance imho is for artistic effect and not your general purpose shots. Same goes for 2.8 macro and very close distance - the dof is just too thin.

2599

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Have Canon 60d and want advice on next upgrade for my needs

« on: March 18, 2012, 08:44:27 AM »

If f/1.4 is too shallow DOF, then there's no use spending over 4x as much money on the f/1.2, either.

Since you were quoting me - I certainly didn't recommend the f1.2, but basically the same thing you wrote: stay with a larger dof lens like f2.8+, because personally even that has a very thin dof. I got the 70-300L, and even at 5.6 shooting a bird that is not exactly right angle to the lens only part of the head or feathers is in focus...

2600

Lenses / ef 35L on crop - experiences?

« on: March 18, 2012, 08:40:39 AM »

I need a wider angle lens for my 18mp crop body, and am thinking about either one of the ef-s zooms or a fixed prime. Actually, I like primes since I bought a 100mm macro and *might* get a ff body sooner or later.

Since I want to buy a ultra wide, too, there actually is no need for 15/17mm, and neither for 70mm because my 70-300L starts to cover that. And the difference between 35-70 is bridgeable if I move towards the object or crop the hopefully sharp pictures of the 35L.
 
* Does anyone use the 35L on a crop body and can share some real world experiences (sharpness, af speed, dust/sand resistance due to missing weather sealing)? Do you think it's overkill to use this prime on a crop body, because it uses only part of its potential?

* There is talk of a replacement for this lens - I guess it would be clever to wait for it and then get a used copy of the older one? Or do you think because the 35L-II will be double the current price, the 35L-I won't go down?

2601

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Have Canon 60d and want advice on next upgrade for my needs

« on: March 18, 2012, 08:10:22 AM »

For pics of kids around the house, no need to get a 5dmkiii.  Like killing an ant with a nuclear warhead.  First try getting some fast primes.

:-)) .. the good thing about primes is that you learn how to frame a picture instead of standing right where you are and zoom your lens.

plus the 50mm 1.4 is cheap and makes up for some of the body cost.

... which is exactly what just about everybody is advising you *not* to do - but it's your money. And you'll need your money because you've got two (overlapping!) ef-s lenses which won't fit on full frame.

I tried the 50/1.4 and imho it is cheap for a reason, esp. in comparison to a good copy of the Sigma 1.4 on crop : crappy usm (micro, not ring type), old design and imho bad bokeh, not very sharp under f2. And most important: at f1.4 the depth of field is so thin you won't have much fun with the lens if you are not experienced an don't know exactly what you're doing.

So if as a result, you are shooting with f2.8+ anyway you keep your 17-55 lens, look at your pictures and how often you really used the open aperture. A 50mm on a crop body is nice for portraits, but imho too long for everyday shots - the crop equivalent would be a 35mm.

you'd probably be better keeping your original kit and using the money for some training courses...

I agree - do shoot a couple of ten thousand pictures first, postprocess them, learn from them, show them around at photography meetings and think again.

If you have money burning a hole in your pocket, then fine, get the 5dmkiii - at least you will look like a pro.

No, you won't. You will look like a clueless amateur with too much money to people who know your gear and its cost, and they will smile deprecatively once you turn your back on them.

EDIT: @KKCFamilyman: watch this :->

Pro DSLR + Cheapo Lens vs "Cheapo" DSLR + Pro Lens	Small | Large

2602

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Finally I pulled the plug and bought a 5DMKII

« on: March 18, 2012, 07:56:14 AM »

Amazing camera

Amazing in comparison to what? Your mobile phone :-) ... I'd like to advise that when people are stating that they are happy with their gear (and nearly everybody is) it's important to know what their experiences are - because every somewhat current Canon body is a good camera, provided that you're not using the very cheapest lens out there and mis-using the camera in conditions it's not made for (1d for light travel, crop camera @high iso).

2603

Lenses / Re: Advice on ef-s 17-55mm f2.8 IS

« on: March 18, 2012, 03:35:26 AM »

Got mine in 2008, and never had an issue with IS.  I'm also not aware that its IS motor is "weak," so that is news to me.  And I don't agree that the 15-85's build quality is significantly better

For the record: I didn't say the 15-85 build or iq is better than the 17-55, actually iq-wise it's clearly but slightly the other way around - apart from flare. But I'd get the 15-85 because its value (price/iq releation) imho is better and I don't need 2.8 on this zoom range.

Concerning the alleged weak IS motor on the 17-55: I read this at a couple of places because I was thinking about buying it, here's one example and you can of course use Google yourself: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=484061

"The 17-55 has a weak IS motor and dies after hard use. You have to use it ONLY when needed, and it should last forever. Overuse it and it'll break. I was the first on POTN to report this back in 2006. Many identical cases have popped up since then. I have found a rather consistent way to tell if it's on the way out. Half-press the shutter so IS is activated, and slowly zoom from 17 to 55. If it's starting the dying process, you'll likely see a jump in the viewfinder between 28 and 35mm. If it isn't, then you're good. It's been mostly pros who've subjected the lens to rigorous use that have failed 17-55 IS motors, so the casual shooter may not need to worry. In any case, I suggest any 17-55 user ONLY turn on IS when you actually need it. So in other words, shooting under 1/50 with NO flash and no tripod."

2604

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What's the real world difference of the 60d/7d/5d(3)/1d af systems?

« on: March 17, 2012, 04:30:42 AM »

You'll find that choosing between 45 or more points makes your compositions waaay better also.

@all: Thanks for your input so far... but @ viggo: I don't understand why I'd need 45 af points for, except for tracking moving objects. But for static objects, I'm fine selecting one of the 60d's outer af points and then recomposing a litte - worked fine so far for me, even with fast lenses (50/1.8 and 100/2.. Usually, I'm mapping the af point not to the shutter, so I only af once and shoot many.

2605

Lenses / Re: Advice on ef-s 17-55mm f2.8 IS

« on: March 17, 2012, 03:40:55 AM »

I never understood why the 17-55 has such a bad reputation.  The 10-22, 17-55 and 15-85 have similar construction quality but it seems like the 17-55 gets panned the most...

The 17-55 is said to have a "weak" IS motor which breaks just outside Canon warranty - I don't know if this issue is fixed with the newer 15-85 which I'd prefer. The 17-55 is more prone to lens flare, too - and this is an issue with wide angle lenses when shooting outside. And concerning construction quality: Since the 17-55 is the most expensive, it is most obvious that Canon marketing kept the plastic quality to prevent ef-s lenses entering "L-territory".

2606

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 7D vs Canon 60D - Can't decide which to upgrade to.

« on: March 17, 2012, 03:11:27 AM »

I'm looking to upgrade my Canon T1i after 2 years. I'm not sure which one I should upgrade to though. I'm not thinking about going full frame either, it doesn't really suit me.  (My main focus is portraits, landscapes, group events, and occasional basketball games)

* "amazing low light performance" on the 7d :-))) Whoever told you that? The 7d has got the same sensor as the 550d/600d/60d, and it's main drawback is that above iso 800, noise reduction will blur you picture at crop sizes noticeably. And af is determined by the lens' light capability, too, so for fast phase detect af in low light you should have a 2.8 or better open aperture.

* weather sealing: The 60d is weather resistant, too, much more than the cheaper rebels. But that won't do you any good: your *system* isn't sealed if you use non-sealed lenses, and all of yours aren't! And you could think back of how often you were tempted to shoot in the rain anyway.

* I try to be not in the habit of recommending my own gear (60d), but I cannot resist: It's drawbacks over the 7d are less weather sealing (see above) and much worse af (do you track moving objects often? for "occasional basketball games" it'll do, too) and 8fps instead of 6fps (if you're not into pro event photography, do you think that'll make a difference)? And the 7D doesn't run magic lantern, which is a must for video and has great value for still shots, too.

* My recommendation: 1. get better lenses. 2. get more better lenses. 3. get the 60d if you must upgrade now and need more megapixels to be able to crop more... did I say better lenses do make the difference? Now I wouldn't recommend anyone to go over the top and buy a 24-70ii for a 1000d, but your current lenses are crappy, the 15-85 is worlds better, not to speak of a good macro (like the 100L as a combined portrait lens), fast quality primes or L tele lenses.

2607

EOS Bodies - For Stills / What's the real world difference of the 60d/7d/5d(3)/1d af systems?

« on: March 17, 2012, 02:53:15 AM »

I've got a 60d and might upgrade to another body sooner or later. Having used the af system of the 60d - which is the same of the 40d/50d afaik - for over a year I am wondering what's the much praised af systems of the 7d or 5d(3)/1d are actually good for. Imho the 60d hasn't got a working af, but rather a "focus helper", but it works ok for static objects with a little recomposing. For moving objects, it does track them, but choose "servo af" is all you can customize.

Obviously, more expensive af systems have better low light capability, higher precision and higher speed. But apart from that...

* What features of the "pro" af systems really do make the difference for you? Can I tell the af to constantly backfocus so I have the eyes of a portrait in focus instead of the nose? Do these af systems remember which (part of a) moving object is tracked even if obscured from time to time?

2608

EOS Bodies / Re: So when does everyone think things are going to get back to normal around here?

« on: March 17, 2012, 02:36:20 AM »

everyone pouring over image files to examine them at sub-atomic levels to see if the molecular structure of the D800 is cleaner.

That's the rational opinion that made Canon make their 5d3 with 22mp. Basically, you're saying that the gear has to be in line with the photographer's needs, and too many mp for lower fps or higher noise or dr (though the d800 seems to be unaffected) don't result in good pictures - cropping power is not everything.

However, I really don't see why the resulting mp count and dr/noise tradeoff would be 22 instead of e.g. 28. Canon (marketing) could have lowered the mp to 16, too, and made iso 6400 look like iso 100. But they didn't.

I guess what people are saying/writing based on rational thinking is one thing, what they actually wish for or would buy is another thing alltogether. This is what Canon marketing overlooked when they granted the wish for a "fixed" 5d2 and came up with the current 5d3 specs.

The other way around, I am pretty sure many Nikon gear owners who argued "12 or 16mp are enough" for the last years now are absolutely crazy about "their" brand 36mp body, and so would be Canon users that now praise the 5d3 if Canon would be able to release at least a 28mp 5dx.

2609

EOS Bodies / Re: So when does everyone think things are going to get back to normal around here?

« on: March 16, 2012, 06:27:13 PM »

A few observations:

• Canon went for lower MP, thinking the chatter from users leaned towards lower MP - but improved quality
• Nikon has demonstrated that higher MP doesn't necessarily mean a sacrifice in quality
• Canon took a gamble that Nikon could not produce a mind-blowing high MP body.  They took that gamble and, in the short term at least - lost
• Nikon is likely under-pricing their d800 as a loss-leader to get Canon people talking, and possibly jumping ship.  And so far... it's genius marketing, because - well - it's working.  We're all talking about it, aren't we?

+1 for your observations - but what is your definition of "under-pricing"?

Does it mean Nikon does not take as much money as they can possibly get away with like Canon? If so, I wouldn't call it under-pricing, but clever-pricing, because if the price tag is still somehow reachable for Joe Sixpack, people will still invest in dslr gear and not simply abandon it for mirror-less systems that are rumored to be able to take pictures, too...

2610

Lenses / Re: Good/Better/Best Macro for T3i

« on: March 16, 2012, 02:19:04 AM »

the 100mm NON IS and the new 100mm WITH IS are practically the same in picture quality, soit all comes down to whether or not you want to spend an extra $300 for ISO and build ($70-140 rebate is being offered on the 100mm IS)

Another advantage of the non-L 100mm macro is you can get a cheap used one because they have been around so long that there are many in circulation plus better-off people sell them for getting the L version or a 70-200/2.8 (I got mine from a guy who argued that the zoom covers most of this close-distance needs). The L macro almost sells at its original price, so no use getting this from ebay.

0
I would also recommend you get an extension tube set

I never thought of that -  Which one *do* you recommend then?