March 05, 2015, 07:16:03 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 - JoeDavid

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
EOS Bodies / Re: Skipping the 5D-s. What do you want in 5D4?
« on: February 15, 2015, 09:58:27 AM »
A FF version of the 7dII, with good low and high ISO performance and between 24 and 30 MP.

Absolutely for a general purpose FF camera.  I took a 7Dm2 and a 5Dm3 on a photography trip in January and ended up shooting more with the 7D than the 5D.  On trips like that one I shoot every thing from landscape to occasional wildlife to street photography and use the silent shooting mode a lot.  It doesn't sound like much but being able to push the rate up to 4fps from 3 is great.  The only thing missing from that camera is a touchscreen for use with live view shooting.  The image quality of the 7Dm2 sensor compared to the last crop sensor camera I'd used was eye opening.  I would take a scaled up version of the 7D's AF system too.  I had the opportunity to shoot some surfing during the trip with the 7D and the new version of the 100-400.  Even when shooting with strong back lighting the camera locked onto the surfer and tracked them flawlessly.  The "in focus" rate was almost 100%.  Amazing...

The report on the in camera GPS is not as glowing.  Slower to sync up and quick to loose lock compared to the 6D.  Maybe the rugged body design has I little too much metal for the in-body approach to be as successful as the 6D.

EOS Bodies / Re: Who is going to buy the new 5Ds's?
« on: February 05, 2015, 08:05:46 PM »
Of course 50mp is still 50mp.  Everybody knows that.  But 50mp (in a 5Ds) is also $3,500, and it's in a much bigger camera.  Handheld and moving subjects is just not what the high-res feature is made for, so "not so cool handheld" is hardly a criticism of it.  It's designed for a specific use:  tripod + still subjects.  For that, it looks excellent.  It even avoids that ugly moire that the D810 produces.

For such a limited use feature, it isn't worth the money of investing in another camera system when I already own lots of Canon gear and several of the new lenses that may actually let me get some real benefit out of the 50MP resolution.  If the specs are correct, the 5Ds appears to be a much more versatile camera than most people are giving it credit for.  Sure it has 50MP but it also does 28MP MRAW and 12.4MP SRAW (remember when 12.8MP was fantastic in the original 5D!). I do wish they had gotten it up to 6FPS or offer a faster frame rate in the lower MP modes (M and SRAW and crop).  I'm also curious whether they are putting an EF-S compatible mount on it for use in the 1.6x crop like Nikon does with their FF cameras.  Nothing mentioned points to that capability so I doubt they did but I guess we will find out for sure tomorrow.

EOS Bodies / Re: Who is going to buy the new 5Ds's?
« on: February 04, 2015, 07:44:00 PM »
In terms of having the filter removed, there is more involved than just removing the filter.  Do a search on D800 vs D800E for details.  Since I would use it primarily for nature images and skylines, I do not believe moire will be an issue and I will definitely want the sharpness improvement.

You may be alright using one without an AA filter but, for people who shoot architecture, it can be a real issue.  I see it all the time with cameras with AA filters.  Windows with blinds are a good example.  All those finely spaced horizontal lines can turn out some pretty ugly moiré patterns.  I've seen it in daytime skylines too with buildings that have horizontal or vertical patterns in the architecture.  I would expect Canon to issue a new version of DPP with a moiré removal algorithm but that doesn't help if you don't use DPP in your workflow. 

Nikon produced some images early on with their 800 and 800E to illustrate the differences in both Moiré and detail.  With those cameras I wouldn't risk the additional Moiré for what little additional sharpness not having the AA filter provided.  Canon may be a different story though.  They seem to use AA filters that are stronger (maybe trying to hit a happy medium between the needs of still versus video shooters).  Hopefully Canon will do the same as Nikon and shot the same images with both cameras to illustrate how much of a difference there is with the two cameras. 

Also, unless Canon makes a point of pitching it as having "improved dynamic range", I wouldn't count on it.  That would take some major work on Canon's part.  I also wished that they would have pushed the FPS up to 6 and deliver a 3FPS silent drive mode.  With the 5DM3 and new 7DM2 I use that drive mode all the time when hand-holding the camera and, yes, I would hand-hold this camera sometimes.  I would probably also be shooting MRAW or SRAW most of those times and save the full RAW for tripod based images with lenses that might actually make use of the extra MP...

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Film Simulation for Canon Cameras
« on: January 01, 2015, 08:52:12 PM »
You should also consider Alien Skin's Exposure product:

Lenses / Re: Quick Comparison: Canon's new 400mm Options
« on: December 19, 2014, 08:30:00 AM »
He must have picked an excellent copy of the original 100-400 for his comparison.  I'd say my version 1 lens is average but the version II lens is excellent.  My copy of the new one is much sharper wide open plus the much improved IS and twist zoom is a "must upgrade" if you use this lens a lot.

Lenses / Re: 100-400 II - first shots
« on: December 13, 2014, 11:36:38 AM »
Well I just received and unpacked the lens.  It may be tomorrow before I can really try it out.  I must say, outside of a "big white" with its own suitcase, this lens was the most protected Canon I've received as far as packing goes.  It even had foam padding INSIDE the lens hood!  Two features, one much appreciated and one odd one.  The sliding door access to adjust a polarizer or variable ND filter is great and it does snap closed so hopefully it won't become loose.  The odd one is the tightening collar which is similar but not the same as the one on the version 1 push-pull design. Why?  Mine is smooth but very tight on the "smooth" end of the collar setting.  I don't think it will have lens creep even with a lot of use.  Maybe Canon is not as confident as I am or there is a wide variation in how loose it is in their manufacturing of the lens (worrisome if that's it).  I would have preferred just the locking switch similar to the 70-300L which, by the way, this lens is not just a bigger version of that lens.  This lens reminds me more of the 70-200/2.8L IS II and has that quality of fit and feel to it.  It is also not near as compact as the 70-300L even though it is a similar design with the lens barrel extending as you zoom out.  This is a pretty big lens even at the 100mm setting.  Oddly enough it doesn't feel like it weights more than the 70-300L even though the specs say it is about a pound heavier.  One last thing is the collar design with the removable foot.  I am on the fence about the removable foot versus being about to remove the entire collar. 

Lenses / Re: 100-400 II - first shots
« on: December 12, 2014, 09:25:06 PM »
Mine arrives tomorrow via FEDEX Saturday delivery.  I'll try to shot with the 7DM2 and 5DM3 over the weekend if I have the time and post something.

EOS Bodies / Re: Another 50mp FF DSLR Mention [CR2]
« on: November 24, 2014, 12:04:25 PM »
If they do release another mirrorless M body, we need to get out the "torches and pitchforks" and storm the castle if they don't use a Dual-Pixel sensor.  That tech would actually make an M attractive.

Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 06, 2014, 08:17:34 PM »
I wasn't one of the few lucky ones to have a sharp copy of the 100-400.

I don't think there is such a thing.  The existing 100-400 is an OK lens but not a great one.  It's a good range but sharpness isn't one of its strong points.  I've quit using mine altogether in favor of the 70-300/L IS.  It won't take much for Canon to improve on the original quite a bit; i.e., sharper and better IS. I just wish they had at least made it an f4-5.6...

EOS Bodies / Re: \
« on: October 13, 2014, 09:04:19 PM »
I think one of the other posts eluded to the fact that this is not a new video.  It was on some of the other Canon sites from day 1.  The sad thing is that Canon USA is so screwed up that they just got around to posting it.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 11, 2014, 05:11:20 AM »
 From a video perspective, one thing that the 70D does quite well will be unavailable on the 7DM2 if it doesn't have the touch screen.  That is the ability to "pull focus" by touching a different point on the LCD.  It is very useful and the 70D does it at about the right speed and with no focus hunting.  Maybe the spec is wrong about the touch screen but, if not, I may opt for a 70D instead.  I don't do a lot of video but that feature coupled with the dual-pixel focus is very good to have.

EOS Bodies / Re: A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: June 11, 2014, 11:32:53 AM »
If they are going to use a pro style (and size) body, I'd have preferred that they keep the 1.3x size sensor of the 1DM4.  To me it was always a good compromise; i.e., a 300mm because a 400mm (OK 390) so just enough boost in mm but I could still get decent wide angle with standard L lenses plus marginally better IQ for the same MP of the smaller sensor.

My next camera body for landscapes may just be a high megapixel body:

Not much more than the 1D X when I purchased it.  Of course I'll have to build up the lenses over time.  Given that the sensor appears to be the same Sony sensor that Phase One and Hasselblad are just coming out with in camera backs that are megabucks, it should make high quality medium format "affordable" (relatively speaking).

PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 11, 2014, 02:42:59 PM »
Could have been a nice "always carry" camera if they had updated the sensor to the dual-pixel type of the 70D.  At least then it could focus well for both stills and video clips.  As it is, not very interesting except for the optional EVF.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8