March 06, 2015, 11:37:38 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 - AmbientLight

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 33
Lenses / Re: Which lens to go with
« on: April 06, 2014, 07:02:48 AM »
For years I have been shooting the 70-200 f2.8 IS Mark I and haven't decided to upgrade to the Mark II, because the old lens is still very good and also very reliable.

For shooting events or people you will obviously notice its f2.8 (as previously mentioned by gshocked), but you will also notice its nice bokeh, which should be better wide open compared even to the newer and sharper Mark II version. This alone is the reason I haven't felt the need to upgrade.

The image quality difference between Mark I and Mark II versions is more noticeable using extenders, so you shouldn't use something like a x2 extender on the 70-200mm f2.8 IS or you lose significant image quality. In the Mark II lens this appears to be less of an issue. Then again if using extenders is not an option you want to explore, feel free to ignore that part.

Image quality differences between the f4 and f2.8 versions should be negligible. I have used both and always preferred the f2.8 version. I tend to shoot wide open all the time with such lenses, so the bokeh and f2.8 make for far more than a small difference.

According to the findings at there is also a marked difference in robustness between the older f4 and f2.8 versions and the newer lens generation.

Just one week ago I accidentally dropped my 70-200mm on a stone terrace. It fell for about 1m and then it bounced from one end to the other. At first I was in a complete panic. Physically I found some dust on the lens hood, but wiping it off, it looked fine. I then ran the lens through autofocus tests for hours on end without finding anything amiss. I am still completely amazed how that came out, because I ended up with the lens showing neither physical damage on the outside nor any damage I could find through my tests on the inside, but I wouldn't bet a pizza on a Mark II surviving such a drop intact based on the findings published by

EOS Bodies / Re: New DSLR and PowerShots in May [CR2]
« on: April 02, 2014, 11:05:08 AM »
I really hope that Canon doesn't release another rebel series dslr.. I still see t3i being sold and don't even see the t4i much and even less of the t5i.  the price differences are so minimal now too.  Just stop.  lol  Who wouldn't be happy to see a new rebel like every 1.5-2 yrs?  Maybe it's just me?  anyways, rumors rumors~~ 

Let's just hope it will be a 7D Mark II so that at least this waiting game is finally over and we will have a nice new camera to talk about and not just the frustrated concerns regarding what we have come to expect to be released.

EOS Bodies / Re: New DSLR and PowerShots in May [CR2]
« on: April 02, 2014, 10:58:35 AM »
Anyone have any speculation on what the new lens' could be?

Personally I am hoping for the rumored 50mm f/1.8 IS but there have also been some rumors lately of a replacement to the 100mm-400mm

The problem is: It could be anything. Here are some of my suggestions:
  • It might be a more lightweight mark II 800mm lens, taunting all those happy 600mm mark II owners to upgrade
  • It might be a new 35mm to put some distance between Canon's offering and Sigma's offering
  • It might be a new TS-E lens for product photography (wasn't something like this announced already?)
  • It might be a new 20mm wide-angle (for whatever reason I like that focal length, but this one is merely wishful thinking on my part)
  • It might be another movie-oriented lens

The last one is what I really expect (and don't need or want at all).

PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Technical Report
« on: April 01, 2014, 04:07:27 PM »
Really though, you're comparing apples to oranges.  You can't expect the same performance from these two types of cameras.  You just have to choose the right one for the job.  If there is a fixed lens point and shoot out there that compares to the 6D, it probably has the price tag to match. 

I am painfully aware that I am comparing apples to oranges.

I am looking for a small camera to always carry around, which is not my 1D-X or 5D Mark III, but which still delivers image quality I can enjoy. I have been pondering purchasing the EOS-M, but the EOS-M Mark II rumors have effectively kept me from investing into that system. I am also not very keen on using interchangeable lenses on this type of small camera and this is where the G1-X Mark II becomes really attractive for me, because it covers a focal-length range I consider sufficient.

Canon General / Re: No one sees it like you....
« on: April 01, 2014, 03:56:33 PM »
Sometimes we waste too much time over analyzing everything rather than just appreciating things for what they are...

That depends, if you are an artist type then sure, just look at things as they are and interpret them as you will. If you are an engineer type then it is far more fun working out how things are done. If you are a dillusional type then arguing black is white in the face of far more experienced doubters seems fun. If you are a pro photographer knowing what can, and can't, be shot easily, or created in post with better results, is a professional necessity.

It isn't that I believe my opinion is important, it is that I believe the truth is, particularly when the truth is being denied.

Bravo! I can only applaud your ethics in this, because finding out how something has been done is important for many of us on this forum. It is only sensible to point out how things can get done effectively to achieve the wanted results.

Lenses / Re: Which lense now?
« on: March 31, 2014, 07:27:45 AM »
How about a 17-40mm L zoom lens?

This one is relatively inexpensive, provides a decent zoom range for filming and you might combine it with a 70-200 f4, giving you 17-40mm, 50mm and 70-200mm focal ranges. That's not too bad in terms of overall focal length range and avoids multiple lenses covering the same focal lengths.

PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Technical Report
« on: March 31, 2014, 06:59:57 AM »
As somebody who enjoys the G1X already, I can honestly say that this Mark II looks like it will be even better all around.  Just looking at the lens specs and minimum focusing distances on that table makes me want to check my bank account.  But since I already have the first, I'll have to wait a bit until the early adopter premium drops out. 

How does your G1X compare in image quality to your 6D plus comparable lenses? I am looking forward to purchase the G1X Mark II once it comes out and am curious to learn about your experiences with the previous model.

Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: March 30, 2014, 03:33:21 PM »
my second image from Oman shows the dhow wharfs in the city of Sur.

Here's one I took earlier ;) Sorry, not a landscape...

What always amazes me is how those dhows (provided they are operational) appear to sit on the water due to their small draft. Again this is a shot from Sur, but taken with older equipment.

Canon General / Re: No one sees it like you....
« on: March 30, 2014, 03:41:43 AM »
100% it is CGI.

But this isn't.
I've heard of people doing that.... I've even heard that you can do that with the reflection from the eye of a chipmunk....

It isn't new.

Though when you look at the angle of reflection and there is no camera there you can be pretty sure that at the least it has been retouched, the video has many shots where there should be a camera reflection and there is nothing.

At least Don's chipmunk shot is for real.

But on the other hand I can't be the only one with two EOS bodies and eight EF/EF-S lenses.
You're not!  Which is why people on this forum are not representative of the typical EOS users.
DARN! I have 2 bodies and 9 lenses.... I have to sell one off to be "normal"....
I have 2 bodies and 14 lenses... I'm ok being abnormal.   ;)
The point I'm labouring to make is that if the average EOS owner owns only 1.4 Canon lenses, then the opportunity for Canon is surely to sell them more.  This may require better promotion and/or more aggressive pricing.

I think the vast majority of dSLR owners simply don't see the need/utility.  Honestly, I think a Speedlite with bounce capability would do more to improve the 'typical' entry level dSLR user's shots than another lens, but, "I don't need to buy a flash, my camera already has one!"

The root cause for the problem you address I suspect is no more than people trying to avoid having to learn additional techniques to get better results instead of just purchasing some piece of technology, that wondrously provides improved results once the user simply clicks a single button. Using a Speedlite with bounce flash is far beyond what many consumers may want to do with their cameras. I have too often seen people just point and shoot without any kind of preparation. This is exactly why internal flash is so much wanted in entry-level DSLRs.

Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: March 30, 2014, 03:20:06 AM »
my second image from Oman shows the dhow wharfs in the city of Sur.

Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: March 30, 2014, 03:18:51 AM »
here are some from Oman, the first one showing the old commercial district of Muscat.

Rather than disseminating useless marketing fluff, Canon should give us the raw data, so we can see whether their claim is substantiated or not.
They could publish a costed BOM for each of their cameras too, that would be nice.

The average repair cost is at least partially providing information regarding costs for parts replacement. This is of course not the same as a BOM, but should imply that vendors like Nikon or Leica do provide rather expensive parts. Once you apply factors like production costs depending on production volume the difference to Canon becomes smaller, as both Nikon and Leica don't produce the same quantities Canon does. Of course quantities produced at Nikon are still far more than at Leica.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Plans For NAB 2014 Next Month [CR1]
« on: March 20, 2014, 09:17:57 AM »
If one of those camera bodies is a Cinema EOS product, the other one might at best be a 7D Mark II? I must admit that I am highly pessimistic about this mysterious second camera being the long-rumored high-MP 1D-style camera. Perhaps it is going to be the year of the new camera body I won't invest in. :-\

Someone should make WiFi batteries for it....

I have not yet ever needed more than the two batteries I have, but it has been very close on one or two occasions. The ability to recharge them using some form of magic like WiFi would be amazing!  8)

Not exactly what I meant. I meant that instead of using the Canon Wifi adapter or wifi memory cards, one can insert a battery with built in wifi instead. That way we don't have to add the bulk of the transmitter.

Ah ok. Sorry, I misunderstood. Your idea is a very good one, I have no idea whether it is technically possible, or not, but it sounds good.

I would still like Canon to find a way for me to charge my batteries when I am on a pitch or wherever. Maybe a solar charger or something else. I know I could leave the charger and battery plugged into an outlet in the media centre or such like, but quite a few things go walkabout when you do that! It is only really for all day events, but still. I guess I could just buy a third battery.

I fear that the idea of using any low output form of providing electricity won't be enough for charging those batteries as used in the 1D-X. You did notice that the charger provided by Canon is not the same as with a 7D or 5D Mark III. Technically I don't believe it is feasible to load those batteries in a reasonable time-frame outside of using a regular power plug. A small solar charger or something like that won't do. A large array of solar panels certainly will do, but then you again will operate within normal conditions, so I don't expect anything you can carry about will do except for that extra battery.

Personally I have never had reason to use more than two batteries with my 1D-X, but perhaps I just don't shoot enough frames and especially videos per day.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 33