Messages

16

Technical Support / Re: Dubai Pro Photographic Equipment Suppliers

« on: February 21, 2013, 10:11:50 AM »

In Dubai you are pretty much lost, if you search for a professional photo store. To my knowledge only two stores would even sell you a 1D-X, one being in the Dubai Mall, the other being at Dubai Airport. I seriously doubt that you will get Bowens or other professional lighting equipment at these places.

This information might be somewhat outdated as I have not been in Dubai for some time. Prices for photographic equipment in the Middle East are ridiculously expensive. You would be better off to bring in the gear, purchasing it elsewhere.

17

Lenses / Re: New Member / Lens Recs

« on: February 12, 2013, 06:21:12 AM »

Go either for the 50mm f1.2 or for the 85mm f1.2. There is no need to start with the f1.4, if the 50mm L is within your budget. Your choice should depend on your preferred focal length. The 85mm L is a better lens for sure, but as an example I tend to shoot at 50mm far more often than on 85mm.

Adding the 24-105 zoom is a great choice. That it is f4 and not f2.8 is not a big issue with a 5D Mark III, especially since you have the fast prime for wide aperture shots.

18

Canon General / Re: Post-Processing Woes

« on: February 10, 2013, 12:14:42 PM »

The same happened to me. I had to correct exposure corrections I had done in Lightroom a couple of times.

It is quite normal that our eyes adapt to our environment. There is an additional factor, which slowly drives me mad, in case it is switched on: My post-processing laptop's default settings make it adapt screen brightness to match what it detects as available light. The same goes for my other laptops. I have now switched this off on all my computers.

What I consider good in post processing consequently may depend on weather conditions and available light. The only way out of this is to keep your work environment in a more stable condition regarding lighting and to switch off that automatic screen brightness.

19

EOS Bodies / Re: need an upgrade from 40d, can't decide: 5D 3, 70D (when available), 7D?

« on: February 10, 2013, 11:33:49 AM »

I suggest to rent  both 7D and 5D Mark III.

These models offer very similar ergonomics, so the striking difference will be what kind of photos you will get from each camera, not difference in camera size or add-on features like the 60D flip screen.

I suggest to perform macro shots for testing. This will show you the difference in reach versus increased image quality at 100% image size, which for me was quite a revelation.

If money is not a big issue I expect you will upgrade all the way to a 5D Mark III. Not that you cannot get really nice photos from a 7D, but the difference in image quality is striking, especially when pixel-peeping.

20

Lenses / Re: How much would you pay for Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L IS

« on: February 04, 2013, 06:42:16 AM »

I really do wonder about that argument regarding weight increase.

I believe we can all accept that a lens may be heavier with IS in it, that is kind of obvious. Nevertheless it appears to me that Canon has shied away from trying to minimize lens weight to make up for the weight increase due to IS being added. Tamron appears to have managed to achieve this, but then again their lens design is not the same.

What weighs most in a lens is glass, followed by lens barrel material. It will be difficult for Canon to reduce in these areas without seriously compromising lens quality unless they go for a complete overhaul of their lens design, which may lead to a model more similar in weight to the Tamron lens.

Probably only Canon's product designers will be able to supply the information as to which reasons compelled Canon to omit IS in this lens.

21

Canon General / Re: Canon Inc posted a 17.9 percent drop in quarterly operating profit

« on: January 31, 2013, 08:02:32 AM »

What is really interesting in the document is the value percentage of what they call digital cameras with interchangeable lenses (and related products) compared to compact cameras, because Canon seems to be quite adept at replacing income by compact camera sales with income by dslrs, EOS-M and related lenses, which are much more profitable compared to those compacts. A increase of 14% for the year in an area, which makes up 76-77% of the value total is pretty good.

So I believe we do not need to worry about operating income going down overall. If there are any cuts or price increases due to lower volumes they will likely befall a less profitable sector.

22

Canon General / Re: Canon Inc posted a 17.9 percent drop in quarterly operating profit

« on: January 31, 2013, 07:39:54 AM »

According to the linked document there is no relation of reduced profits to lens or dslr sales, which have gone up. What is going down is the compact camera market, which is as expected as people switch to smartphones. Canon has also sold less printers, but again this has nothing to do with lenses or dslrs.

23

Lenses / Re: Advice..what lens

« on: January 25, 2013, 06:39:49 AM »

I agree with Paul here. The 17-40mm should be your best choice.

For night shots f4 might not be ideal, but this lens will serve you quite well, if you shoot from a tripod or other supporting surface. For its price the 17-40mm is really a nice choice.

In case you would like to do hand-held night shots without having to venture into higher ISO ranges you might want to add a 24mm f1.4 prime later on, which should serve you fine for landscape shots as well.

24

Landscape / Re: Spiral Arm of the Milky Way above the Texas Desert

« on: January 22, 2013, 07:47:29 PM »

@Axilrod: Thank you for the useful tips. I would love to take shots like that. I especially like the first one.

My only serious problem is that I happen to be almost constantly in densely populated areas with massive light polution, so seeing the milky way like this just doesn't happen. Should I ever happen to get to a reasonably empty area at least now I know the settings to use.

25

Lenses / Re: Canon 85mm f/1.8 vs Other L and non-L Canon Primes

« on: January 14, 2013, 05:53:01 AM »

@Grummbeerbauer:
What you wrote regarding autofocus speed applies only in case you are not using the lens on an 1D-series body. Here the camera body supplies more power to the lens drive, making both 85mm f1.2 and 50mm f1.2 lenses significantly better to use. Then you can nail focus using f1.2 without getting the feeling that autofocus is slow. Those are still not lenses I would pick for shooting sports, but in other conditions autofocus speed is just fine.

Using those lenses on other bodies like for example a 7D causes some extra effort to focus correctly. I can't say anything regarding focussing on a 6D. It may be worthwhile testing the 85mm f1.2 with this body, but be sure to take your time with it, because I fear the autofocus system may not be adequate for this lens.

26

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 50 f/1.2L

« on: January 13, 2013, 06:30:40 PM »

According to the test data shown the f1.4 results go often into that red zone, while the f1.2 lens delivers nicely in that deep blue zone, which I believe is supposed to suggest reasonable resolution. Do you believe those charts to be showing the f1.4 to deliver far better resolution than the f1.2 lens? Do you also believe that the corners are consistently better than resolution at the center? I truly have difficulties matching what you describe with the results Zlatko posted.

Attached you can find a sample shot I took last December in Zurich. This is an f5.6 shot, so not even close to the apertures this lens is typically used for. Nevertheless I am not able to blame the lens for being soft in the corners or anything, so I think this lens has its uses beyond the more typical shallow depth of field shots.

27

Lenses / Re: January 8, 2013 Announcements?

« on: January 10, 2013, 08:55:09 AM »

This is quite interesting as our hopes and wishes for new lens development may be frustrated for quite a while by Canon's apparent efforts to adapt and optimize existing L lenses for use in video production. As we can see with the new cine lenses lens size standardization efforts lead to slightly reduced lens sizes with a corresponding loss in the ability to collect light overall.

To reduce development costs Canon may eventually decide to take care of video requiments with almost all new lens developments (specialty lenses excepted), which may lead us to an era of somewhat smaller apertures in an effort to standardize lens sizes. I am not sure I would like such a change.

28

EOS Bodies / Re: In Camera Naming

« on: January 09, 2013, 05:42:42 AM »

I don't know that you can name your cameras, but for example you can export your pictures into different folders or you can use one of the cameras much more often than the other so that you can differentiate based on different image numbers within the same folders.

29

Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM

« on: January 07, 2013, 07:16:31 PM »

These are some views of Swiss passes, the first being from Grimsel, the second from St. Gotthard.

30

Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM

« on: January 07, 2013, 07:09:58 PM »

These shots are from a trip to Venice. Here I have used the 14mm prime with a 7D.