July 30, 2014, 03:51:38 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.


Topics - ScottyP

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
31
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Going FF very soon; what to do about lenses?
« on: December 16, 2012, 02:23:43 AM »
Hi,

I am going full frame.  Soon.  Nearly dove in on Cyber Monday.  Now just stalking prices.
I may get 5D3, or I may go 6D.  Either way, I obviously need a new "walking around lens".  I will be keeping the T3i body but I will be selling the wonderful 17-55 f/2.8 zoom lens.  I already have a 70-200 f/2.8 mk2.  I also have the nifty firty 1.8.

I have never shot FF before.  I am wondering if for the "normal lens" I should either:

1.)  Get the 24-105 f/4 at the nice discount for package/kit deal, or
2.)  Just get a prime (85mm?) (50mm?) and live with it, or
3.)  Wait for 24-70 f/4?

I know I need a walk-around lens. I worry that only a prime or primes would be too hard to work? 

I am also aware that you get a serious discount if you buy the lens with the camera, so the 24-105 looks great.

I could MAYBE do the 6D plus 24-70 f/2.8 mk2, though it would be a real stretch.

There is no way I could do more than the 24-105 if I bought the 5D3.

Should I go 6d instead?  I know the advice is usually to go lenses first and then bodies.

ALSO, what about a cheap 50mm or 85mm?  Supposedly Sigma is getting good at these for the price?

Sorry for so many questions.

I shoot:
Portraits of my elementary school kids, and
Some non-serious kid soccer, and
Candids of the family, and
misc., and
who knows?

Thanks!


32
Is this the solution?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Yongnuo-YN-622C-Wireless-TTL-Flash-Trigger-Canon-2-Receivers-/251173637846?_trksid=p2047675.m1850&_trkparms=aid%3D222002%26algo%3DSIC.FIT%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D11%26meid%3D4199993506709166129%26pid%3D100011%26prg%3D1005%26rk%3D5%26sd%3D120988902989%26
This trigger/transciever has its own AF beam, which is the same beefy robust pattern shown on the Yongnuo 565ex.  At just $47.00 is this the solution to the 5D3's bad AF beam performance?  Either buy 2 or 3 of these at $47 bucks each, or just buy one to use as a stand-alone AF beam for the 5D3??

BTW I did NOT come up with this; I took it from another of the threads on this subject.  I am about to buy either a 5D3 or a 6D, and I would like to know what others think about this beefy AF beam as a possible solution/aid to AF on 5D3??




33
EOS Bodies / 6D or 5D3 (or wait for 7d2?)
« on: December 08, 2012, 01:27:51 AM »
Too many variables now.  6D or 5D3 or 7D2?

I have a T3i and the 17-55 Efs lens.  I also have the 70-200 f/2.8 mark 2 which is great.  I am 90% sure I want to get a FF body for the high ISO ability alone.

Part of me still wants to wait for the 7D2.

But I would not want to buy a super-crop like 7D2 UNLESS it had at least 1 stop improvement in ISO over old crops, preferably 1.3 or 1.6 stops?  What are the chances on that?

My PRIMARY goal is improving acceptable IQ at high ISO.  I shoot portraits and candids of my girls.  Maybe a little soccer.  FF is great for that, right?  How big a deal should 7D2 be in my thinking? 

I have the $$ ready to buy now, but I don't need to buy now.

Please no one post how if I don't make cash on pictures I should not spend money on equipment! :)


Thanks.


34
EOS Bodies / Possible positive 6D surprise? Should I wait?
« on: November 24, 2012, 02:26:27 AM »
Various websites are saying the 6D sensor will actually have an advantage in low noise at high ISO vs. the sensor on 5D3. 
I have an itchy trigger finger with all the $2500 give-aways on the 5D3.  If the 6D were really going to stay at or around $2100.00, it would seem like a slam dunk for buying 5D3, UNLESS the new sensor really is better in low light...  I realize the AF seems to have been deliberatively crippled (and overly-so!), but for shooting portraits and candids and casual soccer of my kids, I really don't need the pro athlete or bird-in-flight AF.

Plus, heck, the replacement for the 7D (7D2?) could have a wildly better sensor?

What do CR folks think of this?

I should say you can see my equipment below my name.  I shoot portraits and candids of my 7-year old and 6-y-o and my infant.  They do/will play some peewee soccer, but nothing challenging for another 6-8 years max!  I've never met a bird who would pay fair value for an excelent portrait at 1000 yards, so I don't need too incredible an AF capability.   :)

35

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/11/07/chipworks-nikon-d600-sensor-made-by-sony.aspx/

This from Chipworks, via Nikon Rumors. 

Kind of interesting to look at NR.  I want to go back and see how many posts tell gripers to "Go switch to Canon" or "It's not about the gear; it is about the talent of the photographer", etc...  8)

But apparently D600, D800, D7000, and basically all newly announced Nikons have Sony sensors, except for D4 and D3200.

36
Hi,

We were given a pair of $400.00 Pittsburgh Steelers football tickets from a vendor, and we saw a heck of a game recently.  I read the rules of the stadium, and it says no video gear, and no "professional lenses", listing 6 inches as the maximum.  My EF 70-200 f/2.8L Mk.2 is about 8 inches long if you ignore the end cap and lens cap.  The pros on the sidelines all had massive lenses on monopods of course, over half of which were BIG WHITES!  (Woo, hoooo!)  (At Pirates games, it is usually about 100% big whites.)

I chickened out and didn't bring my camera for this reason.  The parking is like 1/2 mile from the stadium and the security check line is always a mile long, and I didn't want to risk a long walk back to the car.  (Nor did I want to leave a nice lens in the car.)  But with the seats we get, I am SURE that with the 1/4x TC, I could have gotten some really good shots.  A guy right in front of us got a Nikon lens in, (NOT large and white) by playing dumb and saying "I don't know how lenses work" when asked if it was a telephoto.  I thought I might say it is an insect and flower lens, and I am pressing into game service because it is my only weather-resistant lens".  If I don't draw a camera guy at the security booth, maybe I'd be OK?

Does anyone have experience getting long-ish white lenses into NFL stadiums, or Heinz field in particular?  I do believe I may be lucky enough to get more of these tickets.  ;D

37
The thread in here on "Canon on top again" got a little flamey, but the OP's premise was that there is such a rumor.  (That Canon will be the top-ranked pro sensor when the Dx0 Mark rating comes out).  That was largely ignored in the responses, though. 

Anyway, I never saw that rumor.  Was that a CR rumor?

38
EOS Bodies / So does 6D have AFMA or not? Haven't seen that spec anywhere.
« on: September 17, 2012, 05:02:18 PM »
Of course I frequently ask the wife where things are in the fridge, when it is right in front of my face.  Have I misssed it, or have they not yet said whether it has AF micro adjustment?

40
Was feeling a little nutty today, and bought 100 shares of Nikon (NINOF) at $28 a share.  Had rolled old 401(k)'s into Fidelity, and was squirrelling away the proceeds into a lot of new investments.  The order has not cleared yet, but I assume it will do so Monday. 

Was considering buying some Canon, but at present the stock didn't look promising enough even for a lark.  Also, Canon does copiers, etc., so it seemed like less of a "pure photo play", which is what I thought was interesting in the first place.

Maybe if this grows, after some years, Nikon can buy me a nice Canon to play with in my retirement.

Feel free to check in from time to time and flame me royally if I lose my a*s on it!  Will teach me to stick to mutual funds where qualified professionals make the investments.

41
EOS Bodies / Should/can Canon keep making its own sensors?
« on: July 16, 2012, 03:22:39 PM »
I see Nikon using Sony sensors, and Sony itself is using its new sensors in its new well-received bodies, and I read people discussing how the Canon sensors seem to be falling behind. 

I wonder if Canon will reach a kind of "Apple Moment", like when Apple quit spending its R&D money trying to beat Intel on a component (CPU's) and started just using Intel chips like everyone else.  They freed up the resources and focus to start beating the competition by doing what they did best, which was making superior products, innovating and making customers happier with them than with the competition.  And now Apple went from almost disappearing to being bigger than ExxonMobil?

Canon makes better lenses than Nikon, and could focus on staying ahead on that.  They could/should take a page from the perfectionist Steve Jobs, and focus on addressing all the 1000 little niggling customer gripes and wishes about cameras, and making Canons just work better and smoother than Nikon (or Sony).  Outclass the competition by thinking of everything, and including it; and by not withholding simple little crap in hardware and firmware that they could instead make standard in all their cameras for very little cost.  Little stuff like firmware improvements (auto ISO), or simple features like AFMA, or including more external controls, or simpler cleaner menus.     

I think I am right on the little user-experience enhancements as a powerful & underutilized competitive opportunity.  I may be foolishly throwing the baby out with the bathwater here on the sensor question; I don't know.  I do wonder if the current "sensor gap" will or can continue.  If things are no better, or worse, in a year or two maybe that is something they should think about?

42
1.)  Assuming that a manufacturer wanted to make them work, and was not hoping instead to sell 2x as many lenses (or to make a smaller body), is there any reason a mirrorless camera body couldn't use everyone's nice, expensive, existing "L" glass?  I mean, is there any basic mechanical/operational difference necessary for a mirrorless lens vs. a traditional lens? 

2.)  If there is no difference, do you think Canon will nevertheless choose to make new mirrorless bodies incompatible with EF lenses?


43
Maybe it is just me, but it seems like the spammers are plaguing CR a little more lately than before. 

You notice them when they make the Homepage as a forum headline.  I guess that is because so many people are reporting the spam, that the spam post is, for a while, one of the most talked about posts on the site?

And what spammer in their right mind would think they can drum up business for their unrelated garbage on a photo site?  Especially when it just ticks everyone off?

44
Canon General / Canon stock (CAJ) repeatedly hitting 52-week lows
« on: May 25, 2012, 12:10:49 AM »
I was going to buy a few thousand bucks worth of Canon stock in my retirement portfolio, just to make it interesting to follow Canon's status.  Maybe "let them buy me a new Canon" or whatever.  Unfortunately, Canon stock (CAJ) is continually triggering news alerts in my browser for having hit a "new 52-week low".  I know that cameras are only a part of their business, but they seem to be in a bit of trouble.  Plus, their PE ratio is still high compared to others in their industry, even after the recent drops.
 
Anyone have insight as to how much of this losing is due to the camera end of Canon vs. copiers, printers, etc.?  I do know that Nikon has been losing money for years, and of course Sony has too, though they are so big that cameras are only a tiny part of Sony.

45
Animal Kingdom / Mr Cardinal feeds Mrs Cardinal in my yard
« on: May 18, 2012, 01:16:07 AM »
Comments and suggestions welcome; love photography and trying to always improve.

FINALLY got Mr and Mrs Cardinal together.  Learned to use MANUAL focus, which was good because it was early morning low light...Had to use fast shutter because they fidget a lot, and that plus shade and morning light required a f/2.8 aperature. 

Any and all critiques welcome!  I was just so excited to catch the two together after a MONTH of trying!

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4