December 19, 2014, 09:37:54 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 - kubelik

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 54
31
Lenses / Re: small primes to go with SL1?
« on: March 22, 2013, 11:27:58 AM »
michael, thanks for sharing that! the Voigtlander 20mm f/3.5 Color Skopar looks very cool. I actually had no idea they designed any lenses natively in EF mount. too bad there's nothing faster, like a 2.8, but yeah, I could definitely see something like that pairing quite well with the SL1 body.

funkboy, it's funny that you mention the nifty 50's focus ring turning too easily, one of the few things that annoys me about my 50mm f/1.4 is that the manual focus ring is very gritty and often snags

32
Lenses / small primes to go with SL1?
« on: March 22, 2013, 09:27:16 AM »
I'm actually pretty excited about the announcement of the SL1. price-wise and function-wise it seems very competitive against m4/3 cameras which I've been considering for a while for a back-up/casual camera.

the weird thing to me though, is it seems that there's a mismatch now between body and lens. the shorty-forty (40mm f/2.8) pancake lens seems to be a great physical fit for the body, but I'm not at all a fan of the 64mm-equivalent focal length that it creates. I'd love to have a 35mm equivalent pancake prime to go with a SL1, but does such a thing exist? I'm aware that Sigma produces a DX 30mm f/1.4, but even that just gives you a 50mm-equivalent, which I hate. I have a Canon 50mm f/1.4 on my 5DII, and while I love the lens for many things, I loathe it as a general-purpose walk-around lens. I enjoy shooting architecture and landscape, so the 24 to 35 range is much more my cup of tea.

it seems silly to buy a tiny, compact, reasonably-priced camera to walk around with, and then have to mount a honking 15mm f/2.8 Zeiss lens on it to get the right focal length. am I missing something? any suggestions? do we think Canon is going to start producing EF-S pancake primes to follow onto the shorty forty, or was that a one-off?

33
Olympus for their Tough series, they're a little more professional looking than Canon's option. depending on where the XZ series goes for Olympus versus where the G series goes for Canon, I may switch to an XZ cam as well.

34
Canon General / Re: Which eye do you shoot with?
« on: March 14, 2013, 10:10:50 AM »
Shoot with left eye . . . literally.

Used to drive my grandfather crazy that I'd pull up a .22 and rock my head across it to aim (right-handed).

Do the same with the camera now that I think about it.

As for 2-eyes vs 1-eye, only shoot with the right one open if I'm trying to track something.

just curious, do you still shoot like that? even though I'm right handed I've just gotten used to shooting left handed so my eye (and head and neck) doesn't have to be in a weird position. frankly, I've found the handed-ness of firearm operation not a big deal (it is annoying with the bolt on the wrong side, but I guess I don't shoot for speed so it's not been an issue)

35
Canon General / Re: Which eye do you shoot with?
« on: March 13, 2013, 05:31:17 PM »
I am left eye dominant which has been further reinforced by an injury to my right eye, so I use the left eye in the viewfinder. it leaves smears on the LCD screen and mashes my glasses into my face, but it's still more comfortable than shooting right-eyed.

oddly I shoot pistol with both eyes open but I find that I naturally close my right eye when shooting with a camera.

36
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Spec List [CR2]
« on: February 20, 2013, 12:13:07 PM »
I agree with the others who have pointed out that people who are truly into photography don't give a rat's rear about what market segment their gear supposedly fits into.

before the 6D came along, the 5D Mark II was Canon's "entry-level" full frame camera. despite being "entry-level" in marketing-land, in photography-land the camera was a heavyweight champion and there are tons of working professionals who shot award-winning, top-flight work with that camera.

buying a camera should never come down to whether or not you want the top grade APS-C or the cheapest FF. it should be about what you want to shoot, how you want to do it, and which camera will do the most out of the things you want it to. if you're picking a camera because you're worried about how people will judge you for it, you need to work on your mental game and focus on what matters - the image.

37
Lenses / Re: Rebate Ending Soon? When's The Next One?
« on: January 31, 2013, 02:45:41 PM »
I'm waiting to see $100 or $150 off the 35mm f/2 IS before I buy it... I can wait until summer if need be

38
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon may be expensive but...
« on: January 29, 2013, 12:43:41 PM »
I also hope Canon wouldn't put IS in a 17-40 lens just to boost the price. For a lens whose primary use is on a tripod, that would be silly

I hear you there. but their current trend of releases tends to suggest that, if they do update the 17-40, it will most likely have IS built in.

that being said, I'd dispute the fact that the majority of its buyers use it on a tripod. I know lots of people that use the 17-40 specifically as a wide-angle walk-around (or hike-around, rather), and would love to not have to bring their tripod along.

39
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 100 f/2.8L IS Macro
« on: January 29, 2013, 12:40:47 PM »
I am worried about the Hybrid IS since someone in this post said that, because of it, his/her photos were soft (and sharp when tuned off). Though, it was only 1 comment going that route.

Nah, that's either a broken lens or people simply don't realize that IS doesn't stop the world around them and the effect diminishes to nearly zero when going near 1:1 mag. And with very fast shutter speeds you should turn IS off because the lens shutter speed is faster than the IS sampling rate resulting in a bit of blur.

The advantage of the hybrid is over other IS systems is that esp. with a 7d/5d3-type af system the lens speeds up the sample rate, so tiny adjustments are adjusted plus it also compensates for forward/back movement next to panning. It's a theoretical advantage esp. when shooting med distance handheld macros, but I wouldn't make a lens choice Canon/Sigma depend on the hybrid is - the downside is that it's noisier and might be more prone to failure since it's more complicated.

agree with marsu, I don't buy the "IS makes it soft" thing at all, unless it's a broken lens. just this morning I spent tome extra time messing around with my 100mm f/2.8 L Macro and it delivers crisp images handheld at 1/15 shutter speed. if I'm patient I can get good-but-not-perfect images at 1/8.

40
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon may be expensive but...
« on: January 29, 2013, 10:56:33 AM »
And I was wondering what the other lens they were announcing would be.  I knew the 18-35 was being redone, but the 800 was a surprise.
Seems like that price point for that lens drives the nail in the coffin of any "update the 17-40" efforts. The going rate of an entry wide-zoom seems to be $750-$850, and I doubt they go cheaper.

I don't know, if Canon can update the 17-40 f/4, and possibly add IS ... it would be wider on the wide end, longer on the long end, a fixed max aperture, and have IS. then they could definitely justify pricing it above this quirky Nikon UW zoom.

41
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS ll USM
« on: January 29, 2013, 10:51:42 AM »
really like the second image (blue bird with black+green background)! congrats on the new lens, I wish I could "pick one up" but then I'd probably get 'picked up' soon afterwards by the police

42
EOS Bodies / Re: Where are you EOS 70D?
« on: January 25, 2013, 02:00:02 PM »
thanks for that version of the translation, tim. also, good on the interviewer for being blunt and to the point. I'm a supporter of canon products but I do think they still need to look at themselves with a critical eye and work on continually improving, just like every company should.

43
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II
« on: January 24, 2013, 02:32:51 PM »
man, I remember seeing Audra McDonald in the original run of Ragtime. mind-blowing. Brian Stokes Mitchell also has the perfect voice to compliment hers. the recorded version is also excellent and very much worth getting.

wonderful shot, Chris!

44
EOS Bodies / Re: Which is better? 5D MKII or 6D?
« on: January 24, 2013, 02:27:40 PM »
the more annoying thing about snapsort is sometimes they flat out get the specs wrong.

45
EOS-M / Re: Micro four DoF and lenses
« on: January 23, 2013, 10:01:58 PM »
unfortunately, AF with the speed booster is slower than using the EOS M, according to Roger Cicala. so maybe a fruitless pursuit after all.

Don't know that I care about AF with a lens at f/0.5 - what would it possibly fix on? I'm thinking MF w/liveview. Agreed, not for every lens, but I would really go for a 24mm (eq FF FOV) f/1

well, I know if I were using a 24mm f/1.4 L on a full frame DSLR, I'd certainly expect its autofocus to work

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 54