August 20, 2014, 11:21:33 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 - risc32

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 31
406
 reduced from what, the 1dmk4 or? really, you know they would love to leave that out. Then they get a free pass to say anything they want.

407
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5d3 not soft anymore?
« on: April 28, 2012, 08:53:39 PM »
If i had a mk2 i would post up a sampler like viggo did. I've also got some little white boxes! but alas. Well, i could throw up a mk3-vs-mk1, or a few others but i'm not sure how that would help anyone.  I see what you are saying Viggo. DarkKnightnine's problems seem different to me. His EXIF data was wiped so i can only speculate, it's hard to find anything there really in critical focus, and since i don't know the shutter speed,f-stop focal length i would guessing. But since he has top gear stuff, and i'm feeling that he knows what he's doing, there wouldn't be much to learn there anyway. I have a close friend who does lots of band/concert photography. He's got a 30d,40d, sigma 30mm, my canon 100f2,and a canon 50f1.8. he gets it done.

408
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MK3 vs. D800 - fredmiranda
« on: April 28, 2012, 08:17:30 PM »
From nearly every test i've seen anywhere, the sony sensor is amazing. But I have to ask, are many of you guys boosting shadows by these amounts?  Maybe it's just me, but I've never come anywhere near doing this stuff. Let me repeat, the sony sensor is amazing, but isn't this just silly?

409
I guess i'm not as critical as many of you, or i'm just lucky. i haven't strayed from the factory defaults for the AF system settings. I'm just using one sensor, and using my thumb to bump it around as needed. only using the cross type. I haven't fooled with the micro adjusting either. It looks good to me, at 100% views. Even my 300mm2.8 wide open at the minimum focus distance. I've getting a better hit rate than i ever did with my 1dmk2.

410
EOS Bodies / Re: The Last Generation of the Crop Sensor Cameras
« on: April 26, 2012, 01:41:35 PM »
 actually i did bet on betamax, and it did out live and outperform vhs. Sure in the long run we'll all be dead, but i still bet i'm right. but god and my wife know i'm mostly wrong. either way, it's not like it matters to me or anyone for years to come. I thought of something that hasn't been replaced by some new cheap little thing thats also better. a properly setup vidikron "vision one". i think they were 40k back in 98' or so. no tuner, no scaler(another 20k back then for a quad jobby) no sound. nothing but pure awesomeness when tuned in. holy cow, it makes me think of the parallels to my 63+year old 4x5. hmmm.

411
EOS Bodies / Re: The Last Generation of the Crop Sensor Cameras
« on: April 26, 2012, 10:25:30 AM »
i agree that crop frame SLR cameras days are numbered. Not in the next couple years or anything, but surely they won't make it out of this decade. Death from FF slr's, mirrorless things, or something else will take them out. Sure most people don't know the difference, they use their camera phones. But when then go online or walk into a camera shop they will be told about the differences. sensor prices will continue to fall, hence ff camera body prices. the lens lineup with consolidate, new ef-s lenses will stop being designed. they will likely be MADE for a good while after new designs have halted, and repairs will continue for a good while after that happens. but the day will come when they are no more. Are crop frame bodies , with lenses attached considerably smaller than FF stuff to justify their existence on size alone? Compared to mirrorless offerrings? Can someone name something electronic that hasn't gotten faster, smaller, cheaper, and better for less? that's a real question, perhaps there are examples, i just can't think of any. DSLR's are computers in highend cases.

412
EOS Bodies / Re: Shoot JPEG again with 5D3
« on: April 26, 2012, 08:22:12 AM »
Since DXO, my preferred RAW converter, isn't really ready to work with the mk3's RAW files, i've been shooting more jpgs than i have in years. i've been impressed with the mk3's jpg engine. If the exposure is good, and the WB suits you, i really don't see a RAW file making much of a difference. That said, once DXO has a handle on the files i'll likely go back to mostly shooting RAW for most everything but there are surely times when i wouldn't hesitate to shoot jpg. Confusing, isn't it.

413
Lenses / Re: Is anyone interested in the 24mm2.8IS?
« on: April 24, 2012, 10:58:09 PM »
i guess not. Perhaps the video guys might be interested in it, and they aren't here?  :-\   Otherwise it looks like Canon might be laying eggs with the 24/28mm IS lenses.

414
Lenses / Is anyone interested in the 24mm2.8IS?
« on: April 22, 2012, 09:05:06 PM »
I'm wondering what I should expect from this lens, IQ wise. Where will it place in the canon lineup? i know the older nonIS isn't highly regarded, i know the 1.4 is a pretty awesome 1.4, and this will have the distinction of having IS. I even like the idea of sharing filters with my 85 1.8.

415
I've been feeling the same way. out shooting, having a good time, and the camera is working great. A friend of mine emailed me about that light leak thing, saying oh, no, are you going to return it. I said, no way, but if the light leak "fix" ends up messing up the good exposure system i would be mad.

416
Lenses / Re: 400 DO f/4 vs 300 f/2.8is with x1.4 vs 400 f/2.8
« on: April 22, 2012, 10:30:18 AM »
I hope you get some user info about this. I'm curious also about the 300mm2.8IS +1.4tele versus 400mmf4DO. I've never really read much positive about the DO lenses other than the size weight advantages, but sometimes that alone might be of very high importance.

417
Lenses / Re: Is This Normal?
« on: April 17, 2012, 10:08:15 PM »
Yeah, it stinks that DXO doesn't have the software yet, but i'll wait.

I just don't see how this lens stinks. Out of the dozens of reviewing sites i look at from time to time I've never found a review that came to that conclusion. I find things like hey, nikon's 14-24 is the best thing ever, much sharper than that canon. but i've yet to see them tested against each other. Everyone's fav, Kenrockwell used to say that. then he got an f-EOS mount converter and he never pitted them against each other. Then he went to saying that some tokina was as good as the canon, which was in turn as good as the nikon.  Besides, if it was such crap, why do so many pros have it and use it so much. Occasionally they must need a clear image out of the thing right?  That said, i'm actually thinking of selling mine to reallocate the funds. But, i'd miss it.

418
Lenses / Re: Is This Normal?
« on: April 17, 2012, 07:13:26 PM »
I've yet to shoot with my 16-35 on my mk3, but these photos you guys are posting don't look as good as what i  expect to see when i do. really, they don't look as good as what my 16-35 does on my 5d. From my exp with my 5d, stopped down to 5.6 or f8, that lens is actually respectably sharp. Granted, i'm used to shooting RAW and letting DXO do my processing with minimal input from me.

419
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DII Vs 5DIII for my needs
« on: April 16, 2012, 08:30:34 AM »
racing... yeah, you are better off with the mk3 for sure. I feel that the 5d does fairly good with AF but ONLY with the center sensor. the mk3 is worlds better in that regard. Sure it still feels like a slow poke with it's operations, but the mk3's AF is very good. the question i guess is how important are those racing photos to you, because otherwise the mk2 will get it done.

420
EOS Bodies / Re: Mark III metering
« on: April 16, 2012, 08:21:13 AM »
I'm very please with the metering of my mk3. I'm also really liking the auto shadow highlighting thing procedure.

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 31