October 01, 2014, 12:32:37 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 - Sella174

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 47
1
Lenses / Re: Would you buy a hypothetical 85mm f/1.4L portrait lens if...
« on: September 29, 2014, 07:06:15 AM »
...
this is just wrong.

...

In short, the above post is just perpetuating misinformation! I hope inexperienced photogs aren't mislead by it.

You keep telling yourself that and all will be fine.  :P

2
Geez, I didn't think things were so bad at Canon ... but this is clearly a desperate act.

3
Lenses / Re: Would you buy a hypothetical 85mm f/1.4L portrait lens if...
« on: September 27, 2014, 08:13:34 AM »
Wide maximum apertures are not only for shallow depth of field.

True, and I said so.

Anyway, the wider the max aperture the better the T-Stop usually is. The better the T-Stop (maximum transmission through a lens), the more light is available for the AF system to work. This can lead to improved low light focusing (all other factors being equal).

Also true, but advances in AF systems are also negating this point.

For flash photography: "Guide Number" / "f-Stop" = range
If you have sufficient DoF, a wider aperture allows you to place your flashes further from the subject (e.g. further out of frame) or to use a lower power setting so you can get more shots from your batteries, while not sacrificing IQ, which would happen if you were to simply jack up ISO.

"If you have sufficient DoF ..." This naturally depends on the lens focal length, subject distance and set aperture. With a 24mm lens (for example) you nearly always have heaps of DoF ... or heaps of barrel distortion.

Wide-field astrophotography??? I know this is a much more niche type of photography but the wider the max aperture the better.  Shallow DoF has nothing to do with it, Ultra high ISO is pointless and IS is irrelevant. With ISO 12,800 you will get tons of noise and when you are trying to photograph little points of light, that kind of noise is seriously detrimental. No current lens will give you the required 9-or-so stops of stabilization for an exposure in excess of 20s.

Yes. So shame on Canon for not making such lenses for the 60Da ...  ;)

4
If AMD did not exist, Intel would have no incentive to invest in improving their processors just to beat the competence. Their only incentive to release more powerful processors would be just to encourage customers to upgrade.

Since when, again? Oh, they add more "cores" to the CPU nowadays, but that's not the same as making a better processor ...

And, of course, without AMD, they could charge whatever they wanted for their processors.

Erm, ever went shopping for a XEON-based system? (Check this out: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html.)

But to be a good analogy, Intel should build their own computers, as Canon and Sony do. In that case, other computer manufacturers would always be afraid of Intel reserving their better processors for their computers.

Actually, they do.

5
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Which Canon L Lens for 7D Mark II?
« on: September 26, 2014, 11:14:40 AM »
I am about about to upgrade from my Canon T2i to the 7D Mark II.  I consider myself an enthusiast trying to make the move to pro.  I decided that with my 7D Mark II purchase I would buy my first Canon L lens.  The plan is to be an all purpose photographer doing weddings and other events. 

Which of the following lenses would you get?

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Standard Zoom Lens

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-24-70mm-2-8L-Standard-Zoom/dp/B0076BNK30/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

Thanks for your input.
or

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Telephoto Zoom Lens

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-200mm-2-8L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B0033PRWSW/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

Neither and none.

(This is why I keep harping about Canon not making EF-S L lenses. How can you seriously market a camera like the 7DII ... and the 70D and the 100D ... without lenses to match?)

6
Is this really important? Or just a matter of pride?

7
EOS-M / Re: EOS-M and EF-S 60mm Macro ...
« on: September 26, 2014, 11:03:18 AM »
The adapter has a (removeable) tripod foot which would likely be a better mounting option than the tripod socket on the M.

Even better.

8
Lenses / Re: Inexpensive standard walk around lens question
« on: September 26, 2014, 10:57:58 AM »
EF 35mm f/2 IS if you need to take a DSLR; otherwise the 22mm f/2 on the EOS-M, plus perhaps the EF-M zoom.

9
EOS-M / Re: EOS-M and EF-S 60mm Macro ...
« on: September 26, 2014, 10:48:46 AM »
One never knows ...  ;)

10
EOS-M / EOS-M and EF-S 60mm Macro ...
« on: September 26, 2014, 10:41:30 AM »
I need a camera and macro lens for the copy-stand. I already have the EF-S 60mm macro lens. Seeing as the EOS-M is rather cheap and can be extended with MagicLantern, it is an option.

Does anyone know how the EOS-M, using the EF-M to EF adapter, works with the EF-S 60mm macro lens?

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Poll: Would you buy a high MP Canon EOS 5DIV?
« on: September 26, 2014, 10:35:49 AM »
I would buy if it had a crop mode so I didn't have to download horrendously huge files.

That feature is called a 70D and you already own one.  :D

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Looking Into a New Mount System
« on: September 26, 2014, 10:34:06 AM »
I don't think that's a sensible strategy. I sold my canon gear and moved to Fuji, as I didn't want to wait for years for Canon to make a move, and Fuji have rewarded my leap of faith with great cameras like the XT1 and lenses like the 56mm 1.2. Many others are jumping ship now and if Canon leave it too long, it might be too late for them to join the party. Just look what happened to Kodak!

Same here ... and now it seems that those few EF(-S) lenses I haven't yet sold won't be usable as-is when/if Canon finally brings a decent mirrorless camera to market.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Poll: Would you buy a high MP Canon EOS 5DIV?
« on: September 26, 2014, 10:19:41 AM »
Event-only photographers are a niche market?

A niche market need not necessarily be a small market. Diapers are also a niche market ...  ;D

Also interesting is that you mentioned four different cameras as being used by "event-only" photographers. If Canon was really on the ball with their cameras, then all "event-only" photographers would be using the same camera. But four different cameras simply means that these photographers are compromising due to what is offered. (And then we're not even counting all those RX100's and X-Pro's in use by said niche market.)

14
Lenses / Re: Would you buy a hypothetical 85mm f/1.4L portrait lens if...
« on: September 26, 2014, 07:45:03 AM »

I'm holding out for the 85mm f/1.0 L, myself.  More light, not less.  IMO, the notion that sensor improvements negate the value of fast lenses is just silly.  Sensor improvements make fast lenses more capable.  :)

Yes.  I want to be able use my aperture as much for creative decisions as just technical(exposure).  It's baffled me for years hearing the excuse thrown around from manufactures and other photographers alike that we no longer need fast glass because cameras are now capable of ISO speeds in the realm of science fiction when all you had was film or even just 5-10 years ago with digital.  Hell, because we have cameras that can shoot in the 100K+ and 200k+ ISO realms, should manufactures just start making all lenses starting at f/8?  8)

Depends, as there are two sides in this. There will always be a need for lenses with large apertures in certain focal lengths for the depth of field effect. However, at the other end, both high-ISO sensors and IS has negated the need for large aperture lenses for pure low-light photography. This means that an 85mm f/1.4 lens makes sense, because the aperture is used for DoF effect (29cm @ 5m); however, a 24mm f/1.4 lens makes absolutely no sense as such a focal length has already way too much DoF for it to be of any artistic value (423cm @ 5m), hence the huge aperture was purely for "available light" - which is not necessary anymore now with 4-stop IS and ISO12800 sensors being "standard".

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 26, 2014, 07:25:51 AM »
I was browsing at YouTube and saw this interesting video on 7D2... the interesting part is not the 7D2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAJBbrGs6JY

What tickled me was when the photographer was switching the primary AF point ... he was actually missing some the action. Why still no eye-control?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 47