April 20, 2014, 07:51:31 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 - Chuck Alaimo

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 56
331
EOS Bodies / Re: A Big Megapixel Discussion
« on: June 11, 2013, 12:26:41 PM »
I am torn between 1D series and 5D series for the body.  I love the feel of the 1D but the cost could be close to $10,000.  With a 5D type body, hopefully the cost would be close to $3,500 (though more likely to be around $5,000).

Perhaps they will come up with both - unlikely but possible.


I'd actually say it's very likely because there is demand for both.  The question is really how will the specs differentiate.  What features will go into the 1d style and what will be stripped from that for the 5d style.


332
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D Autofocus not impressive
« on: June 11, 2013, 12:23:38 PM »
I think mostly you get what you pay for, I'de be a little miffed if Canon sold the 6D for 2k and it performed exactly as a 5DMK III (3.4k) or a 1Dx. (7.5k)

Likewise, people are a little miffed that the 6D has less cross points than a Rebel ($750).

Apples and oranges...  FF vs Crop.  if the 6d was a 1.6 crop for 2k then yeah, let the miffing begin.  But, the 6d is a FF camera with outstanding high ISO performance.  A rebel can't touch that.

When it comes to stuff like this, there are always compromises.  Ifg you want the bells and whistles, then you grab a 5d3 or a 1dx.  But if that's out of your reach, then your choice is used 5d2, 6d, or a high end crop body.  the high end crop may get you a more robust AF, but there is a trade off in overall IQ and ISO performance.   What area are you willing to compromise in? 

333
I just fail to see why this new 50mm will be a problem.  We will then have:

$125 or so --> 50 F/1.8: nifty fifty
$350 or so --> 50 F/1.4 (sort of) USM: a great lens for the dollar (like the 85 F/1.8:)
$800 or so --> new 50 F/? IS USM
$1300? (I have forgotten) --> the 50L F/1.2:  the high art / portraiture lens, the je ne sais quoi lens, the bokeh magic lens, etc.

That third option is perfectly placed.  Many people who feel the L is overpriced or underfeatured will jump at the new offering.  I certainly will.

- A

The problem is --- many feel that the 1.4 is the one that needs to be updated...as a 1.4!!!!  The market for primes seems to have a clear line in the sand ---the camp that wants a slower lens with IS and a camp that wants a fast lens and doesn't care for IS.  The next divide is price - the only way to please both camps is to make a 1.4 with IS but I seriously doubt such a thing would be made available under 1K - or IQ will be garbage from 1.4-2.8. 

I just want an optically improved 1.4...or, lets get it on with a 50mmL 1.2v2!

I think some of us (and this is not an indictment) are getting hung up in F/1.4 vs. F/2.  It's just one stop.  The other improvements -- general overall sharpness, internal focusing, IS, much much faster focusing, better build -- would have me buy this lens at F/2 or F/1.4. 

I know I am in the minority here, but I'd gladly give up one stop for all those improvements.

As for 50Lv2, agree.  It doesn't even stack up to the current F/1.4 in the corners.  For 3-4x the price, it should everything the cheaper one does and more.

- A

I think the camps are pretty evenly divided (because there are a lot of video folks that want the IS).  But for those of us hunting for amazing bokeh, f2 is not f1.4! 

In my shoes, I want bokeh.  If the new 50 is f2 with IS and costs $900, well that just gives me the extra nudge to upgrade my 24-70 to the v2 because that lens is from what I have heard nothing short of amazing!!!!   With that lens now out, the only reason to go for a prime in that range is  --- bokeh.  2.8 vs 2.0 doesn't let in enough light to make that a wedding lens.  1.4 vs 2.8 though, now that is a difference maker.  I can handheld my 50mm down to 1/40th of a second no problem - so with IS I could go down to 1/10th ---but, that won't be of much use at a wedding reception because people are moving. 

So yeah, in a nutshell, if it's f2 with IS, that just gives me another reason to save the pennies for the 24-70.  But if its f1.4 no IS but improved IQ, corners, AF...then I'd snag one! 

Either way, I do think that each variation is different enough to warrant both.  But again I really feel that we're talking about apples and oranges here.  f2 with IS will appeal to some --- 1.4 no IS will appeal to other...but like I said - if all they release is f2 with IS, I will just go with the 24-70 because the IQ will most likely be better and there is a lot more versatility to the zoom (and no compromise in IQ).  And mounted on a 5d3, I have no problems just boosting the ISO to keep my SS at a reasonable level!

334
I just fail to see why this new 50mm will be a problem.  We will then have:

$125 or so --> 50 F/1.8: nifty fifty
$350 or so --> 50 F/1.4 (sort of) USM: a great lens for the dollar (like the 85 F/1.8:)
$800 or so --> new 50 F/? IS USM
$1300? (I have forgotten) --> the 50L F/1.2:  the high art / portraiture lens, the je ne sais quoi lens, the bokeh magic lens, etc.

That third option is perfectly placed.  Many people who feel the L is overpriced or underfeatured will jump at the new offering.  I certainly will.

- A

The problem is --- many feel that the 1.4 is the one that needs to be updated...as a 1.4!!!!  The market for primes seems to have a clear line in the sand ---the camp that wants a slower lens with IS and a camp that wants a fast lens and doesn't care for IS.  The next divide is price - the only way to please both camps is to make a 1.4 with IS but I seriously doubt such a thing would be made available under 1K - or IQ will be garbage from 1.4-2.8. 

I just want an optically improved 1.4...or, lets get it on with a 50mmL 1.2v2!

335
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D Autofocus not impressive
« on: June 10, 2013, 01:56:51 PM »


I wish the 6D were available for $ 1,100 WITHOUT the GPS and the WiFi. Not everyone wants these features built into the camera.

Me too.  I wonder if it would ever be economically viable for Canon to turn out a model like this?

It's called a used 5d2.

Canon isn’t going to strip things off and offer a budget version unless their market tells them they are losing shares on a market.  They did just that on the 6D to keep the same price point held by the 5d2 when they launched the 5d3 on a higher tier.  Judging by the amount of people shooting 5d3s, I’d say they’re not worried about having their price points set too high on the 6D.
True, but a used 5D2 is not much cheaper and it has worse high iso performance. But although I would like a stripped 6D I agree with you that it will not be in the interest of Canon to do so. With this reasoning someone would like to ask for an even more stripped 6D -one for stills only - which would be fine by me too. But this is simply NOT going to happen either.

Up to now I am used to the fact that there is no absolute superset in cameras. May be a camera is better that other in 90% or even 99% but it is never 100%. There is always something. We just choose the best we need and can afford.

That is so a never ending slippery slope...ohhh i don't need feature X and Y...make that for me for less $$$...  So they strip that...what next...why don't they just make a $1300 one with no outer focus points (just the center point)  ...or why not make one for $1500 with no gps, but keep the wifi...these things aren't custom made, they are mass produced.  Like the comment said, find a used 5d2, ---but don't expect it to be much cheaper - expect to pay about $1500 used...if your looking for an $1100 camera you need to go a lot older or your looking at crop sensor bodies.  FF and new at $1100 just isn't happening

336
An updated 1.4 with a better focusing motor, bit better sealing and no IS would be great. A second model with a STM and IS for video/people who want IS would be great. IS has its place and yes it can be shut off, but I feel the market is large enough for two versions, say a 50 f/2 STM IS and 50 1.4 (updated).

Agreed...

337
Lenses / Re: Is the 16-35 L II worth its price?
« on: June 07, 2013, 02:21:42 PM »
Thanks a lot for all the kind answers... I think I'll try to go for a good used 16-35L II, if I can find one! Right now I'd prefer not to spend over 1000$ (or €, in my case).

But maybe I will give a look to the Tokina 16-28 too... I didn't know anything about this lens, and the reviews seem very favourable.

Used prices will probably be closer to the $1200-1300 range...I picked up mine used from adorama...and...what is it doing...it is mounted on my mk3 right now!

338
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Creative Cloud - Adobe Owns you!
« on: June 07, 2013, 01:49:32 PM »
My 2cents...

I hated this idea at first for many of the reasons brought up here.  But, I am kind of coming around in thinking about it.  I may have to go and thoroughly read the terms of service.  But - I am currently on CS5, I have not felt the push to upgrade to CS6 because the bulk of what I do is in Lightroom (I use PS for the fine tuning side of things that lightroom just can't do).  So for a user like me, PS is just a fine editing plugin for lightroom - and yeah that's definitely not worth forking over the dough to upgrade unless there is some substantial new tool I feel I need to have.

So, for someone like me, this new CC may actually not be a bad thing.  Unless there's something I am missing, I can now have the latest capabilites without having such a large up front price.  As a wedding/portrait shooter in an area that has very defined seasons - meaning my need for PS would be from May-November - at $20 a month that would mean I'd be paying about $140  (maybe more if I need it in the winter).  I have to check the fine print to see if there are penalties for letting your subscription lapse, or, some kind of silly startup fee.  This may be a loophole that they find a way to fill by implementing penalties, but, it may be awesome for the occasional user because they can now have access to $600 software for $20 (as long as they don't mind just using it for a month. 

I do hope they don't go cloud with lightroom.  We shall see what happens I guess.  If enough people boycott CC, then it won't take adobe too long to change their tune...

It looks like the month-to-month plan is $30 per application, so more like $210 for May to November. You could buy the annual plan and cancel, but there are cancellation charges after the first 30 days.

Also, if you don't have an older version of Photoshop already on your computer, you won't be able to access or edit your files during those down months.

As far as I understand - that's just for the PSD files...anything saved locally in TIFF or Jpeg is still accessible? 

339
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Creative Cloud - Adobe Owns you!
« on: June 07, 2013, 12:44:39 PM »
My 2cents...

I hated this idea at first for many of the reasons brought up here.  But, I am kind of coming around in thinking about it.  I may have to go and thoroughly read the terms of service.  But - I am currently on CS5, I have not felt the push to upgrade to CS6 because the bulk of what I do is in Lightroom (I use PS for the fine tuning side of things that lightroom just can't do).  So for a user like me, PS is just a fine editing plugin for lightroom - and yeah that's definitely not worth forking over the dough to upgrade unless there is some substantial new tool I feel I need to have.

So, for someone like me, this new CC may actually not be a bad thing.  Unless there's something I am missing, I can now have the latest capabilites without having such a large up front price.  As a wedding/portrait shooter in an area that has very defined seasons - meaning my need for PS would be from May-November - at $20 a month that would mean I'd be paying about $140  (maybe more if I need it in the winter).  I have to check the fine print to see if there are penalties for letting your subscription lapse, or, some kind of silly startup fee.  This may be a loophole that they find a way to fill by implementing penalties, but, it may be awesome for the occasional user because they can now have access to $600 software for $20 (as long as they don't mind just using it for a month. 

I do hope they don't go cloud with lightroom.  We shall see what happens I guess.  If enough people boycott CC, then it won't take adobe too long to change their tune...


340
hmm i see!

well the lenses i have are
- 24-105L
- 70-200 f/4 IS L
- 100mm f/2.8 macro L

Also an ef-s 10-22 and a samyang 8mm fisheye for my 600D which i'll use for a second camera which performs quite well in 1600-3200 iso and these lenses doesn't need fast speeds. f/5.6 and 1/60 are ok even for a large print 30x40cm

i'll buy an ef 50mm f/1.4 along the the FF camera. (i love the creamy 1.2 but it goes way beyond my tight budget :(


The way i'm thinking of it.
my FF will play with the 50 1.4 and the 24-105 for start
and the 600D with 10-22, fisheye, and the 100L which is ideal for head portraits as it becomes like 160mm

Your 10-22 won't work on a FF body (you may know that already though).  I'm not sure if the 8mm is FF capable, but that would be almost tooo wide for wedding work

Also, I was on a 7d before upgrading to the mk3 (I also had the 10-22).  I tried my best to use both side by side at weddings.  But, I found that the 7d became a very heavy lens holder...It did great at outdoor ceremonies, but  the difference in IQ above ISO 1600, that is a game changer and yeah, led to my 7d just sitting in the bag all day, then not even in the bag at all, then sold to a friend who was going to africa and wanted more than a P&S.    So, be ready for your 600D to become a dust collector!

Also, after you snag your mk3, you could sell the 600d with 10-22 and then the 8 mm and snag yourself a 6d as backup body.

Lastly, I see your hot to trot for the 50 1.4, but, take a good look at the 85mm 1.8...same price basically but IMO a much more useful lens!

either way, be ready for the 600d to become a paper weight!


i see your point.
if i'd sell the 600D + 10-22 i'd go for the 16-35 2.8, i was thinking to keep the 600D with the 10-22 for the wide angle shots and also as a backup camera and put some money on primes.

the EF 85mm 1.8 is an excellent lens no doubt, better in everything than 50mm 1.4 (sharpness, bokeh)
However, the 50mm range is more "all around" than the 85mm and the churches here are a bit tight.

I had thought the same thing ---re: " i was thinking to keep the 600D with the 10-22 for the wide angle shots and also as a backup camera and put some money on primes."...But your 24-70 will actually cover the wide end on a FF body!  It was startling to me, my 24-70 was a whole new lens on FF vs crop.  And the quality at 24mm on FF vs the 10-22mm,...yeah, I quickly decided that its just better to take a few more steps back and use the 24-70 on the mk3 than to use the 10-22mm on the 7d.  That really ended up being the final nail in my 7d's coffin.  That and the reach factor with crop vs cropping the FF image...cropped FF was superior.

LOL --- the primes I have now, I bought them thinking - OK, lets see if maybe using the 7d with the 50mm and 85mm would get me to use it more.  What ended up happening?  I used the primes on the mk3.  Seriously, I was fighting to find a way to make the 7d relevant, but in all cases the mk3 outshined it by so much that I just stopped using the 7d.  So yeah, be ready for that (and the 7d is a bteer body than your 600d!!!!).

341
Canon General / Re: Noooooooo....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
« on: June 01, 2013, 12:48:49 PM »
newspapers have big problems.  I understand keeping the reporters & getting rid of the photographers.

It's funny, here in buffalo our newspaper is doing just fine, but that's because they are using their presses to print a ton of stuff for other businesses.  Sounds to me more like an old business that's not changing with the times...

342
I once had my car break down on a busy freeway and since I had to wait for the repair service to come pick it up, ......It Didn't take long for the police to show up to question me what I was doing there either, so I guess the police just looks for unusual behaviour.

I think the police stopping by when your car breaks down is a good thing.  :)

Having worked for a Highway Patrol department in one state I'll tell you it's more than a "good thing."

Interstate highways (freeways in general) exist to move vehicles. Anytime a vehicle or pedestrian or dog, ladder, mattress, etc. is stopped anywhere on the highway, it is unsafe. At the very least, it's a distraction to drivers. At worst, it's an obstacle. With the prevalence of cell phones the last 20 years, every such instance floods a dispatch center with calls so everything is known. Officers are dispatched. Depending on where/what it is, they don't give it a high priority, but they'll eventually investigate. It's also gender specific. If a woman is reported to be sitting in a car on the side of a road, that's a higher priority than a man -- from days of yore when chivalry ruled, I suppose. Nevertheless, it's a reality.

These days I'm guessing if you stop on the shoulder AND get out and start taking pictures, officers will get there faster!

Last summer the first day I took my bike out, I didn't notice I was already on reserve. So drive few miles, the engine stalls as I ran out of gas. I rolled to stop and parked the bike, called AAA to bring me enough gas to get to a gas station. The neighborhood was fancier than average, not B. Gates style but still better than many around here.

It was nice day, so I laid down on the lawn next to the road while waiting for AAA. I was highly tempted to have a beer as I was carrying couple in the saddle bags, but eventually didn't. Give 15 minutes, a police car pulls over. I get up and go say hi to the officer, and explained the situation, and he drives off.

I was thinking to myself that maybe someone had reported a biker stopping at their nice neighborhood. That was quite remote spot for police just randomly go around. Don't know.

Not really sure how this went from street photography to rights and wrongs of the police...but ---

my 2 cents...

To protect and serve...more times than not the police take the protect roll to the extreme and forget about the serve roll.  I have had a mix of experiences with police, but for the most part i have been thankful for their presence.  From running out of gas and having them pick me up and give me a ride to call AAA (yeah, that was before the age of cell phones).  I just think we're conditioned to see those flashing lights and assume cuffs are next, where that's not always the case.  To protect and serve...yeah, that sometimes means hop in and I'll get you to the gas station. 

343
hmm i see!

well the lenses i have are
- 24-105L
- 70-200 f/4 IS L
- 100mm f/2.8 macro L

Also an ef-s 10-22 and a samyang 8mm fisheye for my 600D which i'll use for a second camera which performs quite well in 1600-3200 iso and these lenses doesn't need fast speeds. f/5.6 and 1/60 are ok even for a large print 30x40cm

i'll buy an ef 50mm f/1.4 along the the FF camera. (i love the creamy 1.2 but it goes way beyond my tight budget :(


The way i'm thinking of it.
my FF will play with the 50 1.4 and the 24-105 for start
and the 600D with 10-22, fisheye, and the 100L which is ideal for head portraits as it becomes like 160mm

Your 10-22 won't work on a FF body (you may know that already though).  I'm not sure if the 8mm is FF capable, but that would be almost tooo wide for wedding work

Also, I was on a 7d before upgrading to the mk3 (I also had the 10-22).  I tried my best to use both side by side at weddings.  But, I found that the 7d became a very heavy lens holder...It did great at outdoor ceremonies, but  the difference in IQ above ISO 1600, that is a game changer and yeah, led to my 7d just sitting in the bag all day, then not even in the bag at all, then sold to a friend who was going to africa and wanted more than a P&S.    So, be ready for your 600D to become a dust collector!

Also, after you snag your mk3, you could sell the 600d with 10-22 and then the 8 mm and snag yourself a 6d as backup body.

Lastly, I see your hot to trot for the 50 1.4, but, take a good look at the 85mm 1.8...same price basically but IMO a much more useful lens!

either way, be ready for the 600d to become a paper weight! 

344
hmm so you're saying that the 5D3 AF system worth the extra cash, and focus is everything, where i agree on that.

I haven't been experienced with 1D series AF systems, and a when i played a bit with 5D3 it confused me a lot. I found it so complicated that i said "do i really need that" ???, where the simpler AF settings of the 6D with the -3ev sensitivity in the center point is tempting, making me ask myself and you of course.

However you're saying 5D3 AF system is more reliable and tested from the one of 6D.

another +1 about the 5D3 is the second slot card used as a backup for weddings something 6D lacks off :(
i don't know if the wireless function of the 6d permits backup


2 cents

I own a 5d3 and have rented a 6d (I may end up buying one as backup in the next few weeks), and I shoot mostly weddings and portraits.  Unless $$$ is really tight, I'd opt for the 5d3 now then fill in your glass needs later (hard to say though because I do not know what glass you have). 

The 6d is a fine camera, but I would be leary of depending on it too heavily as a primary body because it just didn't feel as sturdy as the mk3 (mind you, I'm not saying the 6d felt like junk, just that the mk3 does for sure have better build). 

The 6d AF system isn't all that bad...just limited as the light gets lower (depending on the ceremony sight it would be center point only, where the mk3 will use all points flawlessly).

either way, I'd go mk3 over 6d.

The tracking capability of the 5d3 on moving subjects like walking down the isle, first dance, dressing room, etc...  Too many situations where AF is crucial.  Also good point about durability...  At a event I was hired to do a photobooth/candid photographer for Union Pacific, my second assistant tripped over a cord and knocked my 5d3 which fell 3-4 feet onto concrete...  It has a paint scuff on the bottom corner, but other than that, it is in perfect condition... even my 24-105 suffered little to no damage...  Cant say enough about the durability.

That's why I say snag the 5d3!  If you already have one and are in need of a backup, then the 6d is a fine choice (of course, if funds allow it, a second 5d3 would be better).  But if your making the move to a FF primary body for weddings, 5d3 wins that battle hands down. 

345
I rented a 6d and am 90% sure I will have one of my own in the next week or 2 to be a backup body for my 5d3.    the one thing that kind of disappointed me with the wifi, and kind of potentially ruins one of my plans with it is --  for weddings I had had the idea to set it up in an area I can only access before the ceremony (like behind the altar).  The problem is after like 5-10 minutes of not being in use the camera and phone lose connection and there is no way to reestablish the connection without direct access to the camera.  It can still be done, set up, then just make sure to snap a shot every minute to keep the connection active.

Another valid point.  Have you tried changing the Auto Power Off setting?  You have a lot choices there, including never shutting off.  I haven't tried that, but I suspect it should keep the camera live and thus the connection on during that time. 

BTW, that is a very clever idea and use for the Wi-Fi connection, particularly considering you can you change DOF and lighting on the fly.

I forget the name of the device, but there's a thing floating around that connects via USB and supports a variety of remote control functions. Sounds pretty analogous to the 6D + WiFi + Canon Remote app for anyone who doesn't have a 6D or can't use their phone (non-Android, non-iPhone user here).

I think turning off the auto-power off might do the trick for you. Probably kind of distracting to try and work both that and shooting from the normal angles. How do you manage that? Or is it simply knowing which parts of the ceremony are better captured from the alternate camera and using it then?

I tried turning the the auto power off off...camera did as it was supposed to, it stayed on, but the connection still timed out, and you need access to the camera to reestablish connection.   I only had the 6d for a few days so my tests were less than scientific...lol.

As to " Probably kind of distracting to try and work both that and shooting from the normal angles. How do you manage that?"  Specifically I was thinking about Catholic weddings, where the ceremonies are long and the B&G are up by the altar kneeling for a half an hour, I can only take so many shots of their backs!  So my idea was with the 6d, get there early, talk to the priest and ask him if setting up the remote camera was allowed...on that kind of wedding there are plenty of moments where you just have to chill out and wait because again, how many shots do the B&G really want of their backs?  The remote came would be able to get their faces.  So I don't think it would be too distracting for me, at least on those kid of weddings.

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 56