September 22, 2014, 12:30:58 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 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 37
241
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: right now i am not happy to be a canon user
« on: December 20, 2012, 02:12:08 PM »
Sigh.  You really reap the whirlwind when you dare express UNhappiness about Mother Canon on this site. 

Always the same gems too:  "Expressing unhappiness does no good, blah, blah.  You are getting me and other Canon users stirred up blah, blah.  The equipment is irrelevant because a great photog like me can get awesome shots on a $2 camera blah, blah.  So just bite me, and sell all your gear at a loss and then buy it all back in Nikon/Sony, blah blah.  Ansel Adams blah, blah."

I wonder why no one complains about the futility of expressing HAPPINESS with a Canon product, which surely must be of equally low practical effect?
No one ever prefaces a gushing rave about their beloved new camera or lens with wisdom like: "Though the equipment is meaningless, here is a shot I just took with my new blah, blah."

Negative posts do not bother me.  I kind of like them, or at least the idea that they are possible and acceptable.  What would bother me is if this site (or any site) is expected to be a propaganda organ like a North Korean newspaper, where no praise is too effusive, and no criticism will be tolerated. 

Everyone needs to lighten up.  No one is slamming anyone's mother or sniggering at anyone's manhood by saying they are ticked off by something Canon did.  But I guess it is 2 sides of the same coin, isn't it?  People on both sides who have invested heavily in a camera system naturally react emotionally one direction or the other.  If you are heavily invested and start thinking Canon is trailing the competition and/or raising prices, you are ticked and want to say so.  Conversely, if you are heavily invested and some ticked-off guy starts saying so, you are unhappy to have to think about how he could have a point about the quality of your equipment and the wisdom of your investment.

242
Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS Exists as a Working Prototype [CR2]
« on: December 19, 2012, 10:15:26 PM »
I see this being $2899 at introduction in around 2014. This was planned all along. They release the non IS 24-70 first and tempt all the early adopters in to dropping $2300 bucks. Then, 2 years later, they make a new latest and greatest 24-70 IS, and get all those early adopters to fork over top dollar for another version.
They could have made this lens last year, but then they wouldn't have sold so many non IS versions to people who will eventually upgrade to the IS(like so many on here.)
There are only a few zoom lenses that can create this much anticipation and excitement, and Canon plans on maximizing that excitement in to as much sales as possible.

The price would have to be about what you say, or else who would ever keep buying the Non-IS version? 
Only Zeiss could keep a straight face charging that price on a normal zoom.  Of course to compete with Zeiss, they would also have to deliberately disable IS AND AF at the same time they jacked up the price? :)
 

243
Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS Exists as a Working Prototype [CR2]
« on: December 19, 2012, 08:19:27 PM »
Exactly.  Now that they decided to hit the world up for $2,300.00 on the NON-IS version, what the heck are they going to price the IS version at?  There has to be a limit ofo what the market will bear, and I think they already went to that limit on the NON IS.

244
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: I feel like a kid again....
« on: December 19, 2012, 02:58:59 PM »
Good thing she doesn't read this forum and this specific thread.  Pull out the battery and charge it up, she'll never know. :)

good plan... on it! ;)

Seriously good idea. 

245
When you use an f/2.8 lens on a camera that has a high-precision f/2.8-sensitive AF point, you get the benefit of that high-precision AF point that you don't get with a lens slower than f/2.8 ).  This is specified by Canon as 'accurate to within one depth of focus' for normal precision and 'accurate to within 1/3 the depth of focus' for high precision.  AF systems aren't perfect - any given shot will be within some range of 'perfect' - using a lens that enables the high-precision point generally means that more shots, on average, will be closer to 'perfect'.

Yes.  Thanks.  That was exactly what I was referring to.

So... even if I was shooting that f/2.8 lens at a narrower aperture (f/4 or f/16) the "precision AF" would still work to improve shots on that lens?  Or does the precision AF only kick in when you actually dial in an aperture f/2.8 or wider?

246
Is there any loss of, well, anything, in the AF function of a 6D when using a lens with max aperture of f/4, vs. its performance with f/2.8 or wider/faster lens?

I have seen here and there that certain AF points (center usually) do things at f/2.8 or better that the point can't do with wider lenses?

Relevant at all with 6D and 24-105 f/4???

Thanks!

247
@dlleno

I I think you are right about Canon" planning its response" but probably only in the sense that there must be a chalkboard somewhere with notes about 5D4.

248
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D vs 5Diii vs 5Dii - Speedlite AF Focus Beam Assist Tests
« on: December 18, 2012, 12:55:02 PM »
My serial is xxxxx4xx5xxx and has the IR focus issue.  I've had it for 2 weeks from an authorized seller.
In -2EV of light my Rebel 550D was faster than the 5D3 (1/2s vs 1s).  In 1EV of light the 5D3 is faster.  The test was simple.  Fully depress the shutter simultaneously on both bodies to see which shot first (images were in focus). 

[The setups were different (5d3+600ex+70-200ii vs 550D+580ex2+24-70v1) but I found in previous tests that  combinations of lens and flash did not make a difference to the outcome.  Subject was a uniform tiled wall at 8 feet.]

By themselves, these data do not concern me greatly -- a 1/2 sec penalty for the extraordinary AF accuracy of the 5D3 seems reasonable. and thanks for being specific about the light level!  But -- with the AF assist beam active, the AF systems are seeing greater than -2EV of light, especially since both beams were active at the same time!  So to me this is describing a marriage problem between the 5D3  AF system and the assist beam.  The fact that the 5D3 focus lock time improves with an increase in light suggests that it is not even looking at (or isn't making very good use of) the assist beam. 

now then, take off the flash and force both cameras to focus in -2EV (and other levels of) light.  how do they perform?

take both cameras into a closet and close the door ("pitch dark") both cameras should utilize the AF assist beam and should take photos, when tested separately (don't let both assist beams fire simultaneously)

Try it with Yonguo 565ex and see if the beefier af beam helps.

249
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Only 1 lens
« on: December 18, 2012, 12:46:38 AM »
Congratulations on your 9-month-old!  And congratulations on having the instincts of a good father!

I am older than you, but I sold my 2-year old Harley Davidson the week after my 2nd daughter was born, and now I have 3rd baby!  Funny thing is, it hurt a little at the moment because of my pride, but given the joy of the kids I honestly never (almost) miss it.

The thing is, your main photo interest has kind of changed too.  I found that having a baby around seriously decreased my interest in landscapes (and travel shots!).  You need at bare minimum a kit capable of taking great baby shots.  You will NEVER get those precious days and months back ever.  And at 25 with a baby it probably doesn't seem like it, but you WILL have money again some day!  Honestly!

I agree with Neuro that you won't get a lot for a used 5D2 nowadays.  I'd be inclined to keep it for that reason, but if not, then a T3i (also as Neuro said) or even a T2i, would be great with your nifty fifty for baby portraits.  If you kept your 5D2, maybe an 85mm f/1.8 or a 135mm 2.0?

Bright side:  The way bodies depreciate, and lenses stay theh same, you can sit out for a few years, then buy a new design body that kicks the butt of current cameras, and you can re-buy the lenses for the same price you sold yours!

Merry Christmas!

250
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Going FF very soon; what to do about lenses?
« on: December 17, 2012, 10:14:27 PM »
For miscellaneous and who knows, the 24-105L is a great choice, and you can't beat the price as a FF kit lens. The 85/1.8 is great for portraits on FF.

Ditto.  +1  The 24-105 was my first L lens and that was on crop.  It's a great deal for a lens when packaged with the body.  Just do that first.  Don't over think it.  The 85/1.8 is pretty inexpensive and a fantastic portrait lens.  Get that too if you like.  And the 24-105 isn't bad for portraits either.  Don't buy any more lenses for a while.  Learn to use those first.  Buy lighting or reflectors or books.  Enjoy the camera.  Don't get too caught up in the equipment.  Heck, you already have a 70-200!  You'll be set for a while.  How do you plan to carry it all?  Good storage or carry systems aren't cheap either.

Enjoy your FF camera!!   :D

Good advice.  I think I can make do very nicely with the 24-105 and maybe an 85 f/1.8 prime.

I am thinking that dark/dim shooting is worth more to me than fancy sports shooting.  At least until my little ones get faster!  That gives me 4 or 5 years.  I think I will wait for the 6D plus 24-105 to finally drop a few hundred below $2699 at B&H or Adorama, then grab it.

251
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D or 5D3 (or wait for 7d2?)
« on: December 16, 2012, 08:44:00 PM »
I am struggling with the same decision.  90% of my shots are indoor sports...with fast moving action and poor lighting.

I have a 40D now...and my go to lens is a Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS II...and my walk around is the Canon 17-55 f2.8.  I have a couple of other lenses, but these two are responsible for most of my shots.

A 7D Mk2 would let me keep the 17-55 and give me great sports photography.  A 6D would give me the better low-light performance that I crave.  I suppose if I had to do it today, I would go for the 7D Mk2...if it existed...and looked like it had decent specs...and the price was not ridiculous.  I suppose the 7D's final specs and price will be the final decision maker for me.

Funny we have the same lenses, and the same thought process, although you are more seriously into the sports shooting.  I would love to keep with crop (a 7D2) and my 17-55, but between the fact that it must be at least a year or more away, and the fact it probably won't gain more than 1/2 stop in ISO performance, I think I am deciding to go FF.

252
@Rusty:

How early a model was your first body, and how recently did you get the new one? 

Trying to gauge whether the "old" units have been flushed out of inventories yet.  Probably have been at the high-volume dealers, but maybe not at the smaller volume dealers.

253
Thanks Rusty.

254
Very nice.  It has a (COOL) Star Wars-y look, at risk of going full-nerd.

255
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!


Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 37