September 20, 2014, 02:18:31 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 - ScottyP

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 37
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 22, 2014, 06:59:39 PM »
What is "built in flash with radio trigger function"?  Is it just saying the on board flash can act as a master?  That is not "radio trigger".  Is it? 

It would be pretty cool if it had a built-in radio trigger for RT flashes, wouldn't it?

Lighting / Re: Mitros+ Owners: are you satisfied?
« on: August 20, 2014, 06:03:00 PM »
I have 3 Mitros + flashes and I have not noticed any issues at all.  I wasn't aware there was any kerfuffle out there, actually. 
I have never had a receiver not get a signal.  Also, although I don't necessarily push the thing to the ragged edge, I don't have a problem with overheating either.

As for the price of the Phottix being somewhere near the once-in-a-blue-moon sale price one might catch on a 600, that is not so if you are purchasing a set of 3 of them. 

It is even less applicable to folks who, like the OP, already have a whole set of Phottix triggers and receivers, plus multiple flashes to go with them.  Such a person would go from needing just one additional $399 flash unit to needing to ditch everything and buy 3 600's and a Canon transmitter.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: What does Sigma do next?
« on: August 16, 2014, 09:39:54 PM »
They would kill it with sharp long glass (400/500/600) that is 1/2 the price of the OEM models. 

Doing it with primes seems to be safer for them than zooms, and it seems to be where they have won their loudest praise (35mm and 50mm Art), compared to respectable but not stand-out billing for their zooms.

The tilt-shift comment above makes a lot of sense.  Get all the points for sharpness, and none of the griping about the autofocus, there being none.  I am not sure how many tilt-shift units get sold every year compared to lenses of more general appeal, such as telephotos, but at some point Sigma ought to get around to doing a TS.

Also, what about a "Sport" teleconverter?  No autofocus required!  Just good sharp glass, and sharpness seems to be their strong suit.  Maybe throw in $2 bucks worth of gaskets, though, so you could say it is weather sealed when you put it in between your 5d3 and your sealed "L" lens.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L For Sale
« on: August 16, 2014, 08:24:33 PM »
I wish it came in "M" mount.  The mirrorless cameras are just so much less bulky.

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 15, 2014, 09:23:38 AM »
Multi-layer with DPAF.

IF that is true, and
IF it really works, and
IF it represents the kind of major IQ improvement required to justify Canon's taking the major trouble of doing it....

And to take that further, into wild speculation territory...

That could be a setback for Sony trying to break into the serious/pro photography market.  And if it is a hiccup for Sony, it would be pneumonia for Nikon, who depends on Sony sensors, and who seems to be struggling financially lately.  If Sony goes some other direction in sensor development and quits innovating on 35mm stills sensors, it could be the beginning of the end for Nikon, who seems to have let its sensor development atrophy a bit while outsourcing that job to Sony.

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 15, 2014, 09:09:11 AM »
 We’re also told, that just like the EOS 5D Mark III launch. This camera should be available pretty soon after the announcement.

Could that mean in time for Christmas?  How quick did the 5d3 hit shelves after formal announcement?

EOS Bodies / Re: No weekend rumors ever??
« on: August 10, 2014, 07:45:32 PM »
While it can be a bit of a drag to find no new rumors waiting when you check the site, I think it is better to have fewer, more reliable rumors than lots and lots of unreliable ones delivered 24-7.  Pretty soon they'd exhaust even the sketchiest of sources and the thinnest of rumors and we'd all be scrolling through a lot of stories about space aliens and Bigfoot out there beta testing new high MP sensors, etc...

Which has greater noise? An APS-C sensor or a full frame sensor cropped to APS-C size? Bare in mind our hypothetical situation is you're still reach limited, so the bigger sensor in itself conveys no advantage, and the only arguable difference is pixel size. For roughly comparable sensor generations I'd argue they're practically the same. Outside of lab tests, it probably isn't significant.

At ISO6400, I'd happily use either of my 600D or a 5D mk2 (as secondary body to 7D), but when reach limited the 600D would be my preference of the two. To me noise isn't the limiting factor in this scenario.

Below are a pair of images shown at 100%.   One is from an 18 MP APS-C camera at ISO 3200.  The other is from an 18 MP FF camera at ISO 6400, a full stop higher than the APS-C image.   

I'm having trouble telling which is which, the noise levels are so similar.   ::) ::)

I'm not convinced.  I'd need to see the squirrels on the moon to be sure.

Lenses / Re: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8
« on: August 07, 2014, 07:15:41 PM »
The background is only 2-3 feet behind the subject?  Can you get much blur that close to the background?

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Doing Market Research on Medium Format?
« on: August 06, 2014, 02:49:22 PM »
I think we can all see what is next.  This return to medium format is sure, in turn, to ingnite the race back into Large Format. 

No one can deny the public has been itching to drape a new synthetic version (kevlar?) of the traditional light blanket over their heads, hunch over the tripod, clutching the updated carbon fiber handle of a state of the art  flash powder trough. 

Party like it's 1899.  This could obviously become huge with the steampunk crowd too. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 180mm f/3.5 DO Macro
« on: July 28, 2014, 09:59:02 PM »
Seems like they would want to shrink a bigger telephoto lens before a macro but maybe.  I also wonder if the price would be beyond what most folks would pay for a macro?

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50 1.4 Art NOT bokehlicious?
« on: July 27, 2014, 04:58:26 PM »

DigitalRev reviews have no purpose beyond entertainment.

What amazes me most are the number of posts on the forum lately scrutinizing the Sigma 50 1.4 beyond belief. Apart from the Otus, it's the best FF 50mm ever made from an optics standpoint. Let's stop discussing preferences about bokeh, rendering, etc. as if they are objective fact.

Yep.  According to nearly every review, too.  Everyone take a step back and breathe then answer honestly.

If Canon had released this lens with a red ring on it:  People would be singing the praises of its sharpness and color, contrast, and maybe some would swear that they can detect a certain undefinable something; something which can't be put into words, something which stirs the soul, etc...  And the price would be double or more.

If Zeiss had released this lens:  There would be no autofocus at all, and people would scoff at those lesser shooters that depend on such a pedestrian crutch as autofocus.  People would marvel at its sharpness and color rendering.  The images would send viewers into spasms of joy due to their sublime, yet undefinable other-worldly quality.  And the price would be four times what it is now.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50 1.4 Art NOT bokehlicious?
« on: July 27, 2014, 03:16:40 PM »
Also, why compare a 58mm lens to a 50mm lens?  The longer one will have more OOF blur taking the same shot at the same distance.

Lenses / Re: Canon 24-70 f/4L IS disappointing?
« on: July 25, 2014, 11:40:46 PM »

In fact, I've even been considering selling my 70-200 2.8L II and picking up a 135L (and change), although I haven't been able to bring myself to do it yet.  If they bring out a 135L IS, that might well convince me ... although I'm still tempted by the 135L as is.   (And no, I don't want to just add a 135L to my kit. I really don't need any more lenses!)


Lenses / Re: Canon 24-70 f/4L IS disappointing?
« on: July 25, 2014, 11:30:02 PM »
FWIW I'm really bored with 24-70 zooms, so I ditched mine (24-70 f/2.8 L) and got a Ʃ35 f/1.4A instead to bridge a gap in my range of wide to standard prime lenses. I find that I am shooting with primes more and more often, with really satisfactory results. Often I will have a wide or standard prime on the 5DMkII  and a tele-zoom on the 5DMkIII. My 24-105L and 17-40L get most of their use when I travel, the 17-40L is almost exclusively for holiday use .

Yes.  I have the Sig 35 Art and it just forces me to make better composition, and its colors and sharpness are just insane.  I almost can't take a bad image with that lens. 
I plan to pick up a 7d2 (if it isn't just a Bigfoot riding a unicorn) and then keep he 35 on the 6d and the 70-200 on the crop.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 37