July 23, 2014, 04:07:20 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 - birdman

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9
16
Lenses / Re: Why is the 24-70 MK1 price so high.
« on: July 08, 2012, 01:49:48 PM »
Surprising how high that lens has always been. Had two copies at two different times. Overrated. Great contrast and delicious colors, but sharpness not near level of say, 70-200/4 IS

17
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk III vs D800/E, is the 5D3 better at anything?
« on: July 08, 2012, 02:29:13 AM »
My other point...people are all up in arms about Dynamic range...excuse me but aren't contrasty images much more pleasing to the eye in general?  By definition you can't really have a contrasty image and high dynamic range.  You get clipping but that is okay.  The images have punch.  HDR is either fake looking or flat for the most part because there is not enough contrast.  Just my 2 cents...worth about 1 cent probably...lol.
HDR vs LDR is like 36 MP vs 22 MP. If you capture your image with HDR (or 36MP) you can always clip (downscale) to the lower quality. But you can never go the other way.

So if you prefer lower DR, you can shoot with a Sony/Nikon sensor, and clip the whites and/or add noise until the image looks like a Canon sensor (might have to experiment a little until you get the banding artifacts right).


Oh, I am a Canon shooter, probably will be until my 7D is old or broken, and I reserve my rights to critizise "my" brand whenever they are lagging behind. Right now, they are in terms of image quality. That might not matter to you or most buyers, but the fact is interesting nonetheless.

-h

Amen, brother. The only "qualm" I have with your analysis is that you may not know exactly how each camera differs (5d3 vs. d800) until you truly have each camera and shoot the same scene side by side. I (was) a 5d2 user until a few days ago. Sold it, and maybe I made a poor decision--because its just a hobby for me, anyway.
 
AF speed or AF points not critical for my style. But good, wide glass is...and this is where Nikon may have more of what I need. The 5d3 can be bought for $3150-3200 on Ebay all day long, I see. You may even find it for $3,000. It seems the D800 certainly spells out what I want in a newer DSLR. It's got less to do with 36Mp and more to do with higher IQ at lower ISOs. At least, that's what people say....

And finally, I do think Canon will be able to replicate the DR capabilities of the Sony sensor. Once they commit to solving this, what's left? Better wide glass? It came down to me not needing telephotos lenses as much as wide and medium FL. Canon has the better telephoto choices, and more of them. But every rose has it's thorn.

18
EOS Bodies / Re: Any actual photographers out there?
« on: July 08, 2012, 02:03:08 AM »
I would have to say, NO, I am obviously not a Professional Photographer - - one whom earns revenue off their photography. That is why I like landscape shooting so much....because I don't need any criticisms or critique. I know what looks good, and like any art - - photography is very SUBJECTIVE.

If most of the people on here were getting paid enough to justify spending less time in forums, then how could we ever answer asinine/trollish/ignorant/controversial/rude/garbage questions such as the one you posed?

I'm trying to spend less time reading forums & more time focusing on other aspects of my life....like my health, family, and primary career. But this site is fun and conversation is light (or it needs to be). That's the great aspect of being a human being: We're given mental abilities to focus on different objects or subjects. You ought to try it, OP.  It's nice.  :o

19
i think the OP wanted to see images indicating example of what all the drama is about relaing to DxO numbers

since this thread has hit 7 pages and no images have come forth it kind of proves what a non event the whole issue is :D

I am OP (and posted one landscape shot)

You hit the nail on the head. I don't own any ND filters, just the 5d2, 17-40L, and some UVs and cir polarizers. I need to invest in some ND grad filters and practice, practice, practice.

I agree there are too many chiefs and not enough indians on these forums. No offense to Native Americans. I wanted to see examples of shots that could benefit from better DR, or that demonstrated what DR could do. I guess my strategy got thrown out the window. Or did it get vomited into 8 pages? You be the judge...

20
Lenses / Re: What the 40mm Pancake looks like on a 5D3
« on: June 23, 2012, 10:26:56 PM »
Damn the 1d4 is a beautiful, sexy machine. I would get it before a 5d3. Thats just me, though

21
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: 40 Shorty Test Shots
« on: June 23, 2012, 10:23:09 PM »
What's neat is that the voigtlander 40mm has a great reputation but is MF only. This trumps it based on shots I've seen and AF. They have a winner here. If it was a f/2.0 perhaps the bokeh, sharpness, and contrast would have been different--- and the price would've gone up considerably.

I have the delicious 35L so not too interested in this one. But obviously for the price, a good lens addition to Canon

22
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 14-24 f/2.8L [CR2]
« on: June 23, 2012, 10:17:15 PM »
What's crazy to me is that no one mentions the tokina 16-28. It was on sale recently for $699!!!!! Crazy cheap and has gotten very favorable reviews. I don't know if this dream 14-24 canon lens will out-resolve the Tok 16-28, if the Canon lens is even a reality.

14mm is WIDE!! So wide, for me, that you literally see little detail in the distant horizon. Nearly Too wide, for me. 17-20mm is my preferred FL, which my 17-40L quits distorting at around 19-20mm anyway. I've never needed WIDER, but many times needed sharper. If the Canon cannot accept filters, then it gets a thumbs down for me. On a bright sunny day, this lens becomes a lot less practical. At dusk and dawn (magic hours) I believe you can get by without filters.

If it does accept filters, then that opens up another thick, juicy layer of opportunities. If I had enough disposable income it would go to a good tilt/shift. One thing I haven't considered: at some point in time I would LOVE a 1d4. So the math gives me 14*1.3= 18mm & 24*1.3=31mm.   Hmmm, pretty useful for me.

23
EOS Bodies / Re: How would you upgrade?
« on: June 22, 2012, 07:22:33 PM »
I think we all roll these endless choices around in our head. I had the 40d, 7d briefly, and HAVE the 5d2 right now. I'm not thinking of upgrading to the 5d3 because I don't need fast autofocus for my landscape shots. And my next move might be out of the house (of Canon).

Actually thought about picking up used 40d a while back only for telephoto work & because I know it extremely well.  Sometimes regret selling my 40d because it served me well and I would love the extra reach now and again. I would advise against selling a camera that has been paid for many years, because you simply gain very little extra coin when you get rid of it. Its already hit its bottom in resale value. For me, the 40d and 5d2 would be fine. If you DID get the 5d3, I can promise you (at $3,500 especially) that the 40d wouldn't see much use. What a decision many of us have to make. I have a 5d2 that is freaking immaculate (less than 8,000 actuations in 2 years!!). It's probably gonna be for sell soon. I posted a topic earlier about selling it. Anyway, there are a bunch of them out there for sale. i just happen to have one, too.

24
I know Fred Miranda has forum to buy/sell. What about POTN? I don't want to pay sleazebay or Amabonk all of their crazy commissions. i may have to... :-[

Damn, i hate to get rid of this joker-- mint+++ with less than 8k clicks I believe. The value is bottoming out daily and I want to put a plug in it. When/If another entry level FF is announced the price will tumble so bad that I may be lucky to get $1,400 for it. And I paid $2,500 + tax new less than 2 years ago.


25
wow, from the D600 to the fox babes. If a Nikon manager is watching this, he must me laughing his pants off.

Make that Fox(y) babes, sir. Thanks  ;D

26
Rumors are starting about Pentax also using Sony's 24MP FF sensor in a camera for March 2013.

http://photorumors.com/2012/06/15/more-pentax-full-frame-dslr-rumors/

The K3 is rumored to have 1080p/60 and 6fps - if this is true, Sony is pushing Canon in a corner by using this 24mp sensors in their own, Nikon and Pentax bodies. Maybe we'll see a Sony sensor in Canon bodies, too?

Did Pentax not say that FF is dead, and they're focussing on APS-C and 645D only?

Of course they said that when they didn't have a ff body. But given the current pixel density on aps-c, ff is the way ahead in for more expensive sensors.


Pentax is dead, or rather undead. They are zombies that get older and uglier every day. All jokes aside, no I doubt Canon will be keen enough to use Sony tech for their own bodies. First, it would mean their multi billion dollar R & D was not up to snuff. Second, it would mean layoffs of some sort. Third, it would hurt employee morale. Fourth, investors would look to Sony stock. Fifth, well you get my point. Should Canon do this? Yes, for one or two bodies probably. Will they? Hell to the no. Never.

27
Lenses / Re: Could a 35mm f/1.2 L be in testing? (pic)
« on: June 21, 2012, 11:13:05 AM »
Typo, typo, typo.

I think so, too - at ~50mm it's easiest to design fast lenses, but if the focal length gets smaller it'll be quite a hassle to release a f1.2 35mm that's sharp wide open as a L lens should be. Much more likely they'll just add weather sealing to a 35/1.4L, reduce the vignetting and double the price.

If they'd made a 35mm L II at F1.2 that isnt garbage but usable. Expect A Wicked price tag, and a Very Hefty lens.

I'd buy that for a dollar.  ;D

My thoughts exactly. All of their newer fast glass is going upwards in price dramatically. They caught wind of Nikon's pricing and decided to match Nikon on price with bodies AND glass. Nikon was always more expensive for their glass. Or was it their bodies? I don't know, but they are beating Canon like Drago was beating Rocky in the early rounds. "C'mon Rock (Canon), get up you son-of-a-b!tch because Mickey loves you"

28
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: 40 Shorty Test Shots
« on: June 21, 2012, 11:08:55 AM »
Looks like some beautiful BOKEH to me  ::)

I like it. I wish it was faster, and with the 50/1.8 mk 1 available for cheaper used....you have a much, much faster lens with probably similar build quality. But the 40mm has some advantages -- especially with STM. Interesting...

29
Here is the future, guys. All teenagers, soccer moms, and adventurous grandparents are gonna take over the industry of photography with their mirrorless cameras. And the old professionals and prosumers, well they will be left behind with their 22MP and 36MP full-frame antiquated DSLRs. How 2012 is that? Or as Bruno would say, "Borat was so 2006."

30
Quote
Precisely. If Canon loses market share because of the D600 and D800, it will force Canon to up their game

well, if you consider how dominant canon was just 10 years ago, and how that dominance has waned over the last decade, then you can see that it has already happened. They went from being virtually unchallenged, to being just one more player, alas a major one, but certainly fallen from their prior mile high advantage.

Look at Microsoft. Once unchallenged and now it is being outmaneuvered by once smaller meaningless rivals. With size and a market to protect, companies often fall behind. They are too big and slow to react. Canon, and to a lesser extent Nikon suffer from their reliance on mirrors and outdated mounts that make it impossible to design small thin cameras consumers want. They have models to protect where as the rest have nothing to lose. The rest of the crowd, lead by sony has no such concerns are are busy with their mirrorless entries which will one day make DSRLS join film cameras in a musseum.

We've seen this transition before. Kodak failed to adapt and died off.

Whats with all this mirrorless garbage, people? I hope you "people" don't want a camera body without a viewfinder, like the mirrorless 4/3 garbage cameras out now have, right? You want to take a picture by looking at the back of your small monitor? Thats going to dominate? Really? And we thought the Unabomber was a nut with all of his anti=tech mumbo jumbo!! SLRs are not going anywhere for a while, buddy. What are sports shooters going to use.? A small box with a bright screen and a huge telephoto lens that makes it look like a whale eating a tadpole. People these days.....

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9