March 03, 2015, 04:03:59 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 - Aglet

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 75
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 70D Reaction
« on: July 01, 2013, 02:19:11 PM »
A more accurate statement would be that after nearly four years, competitors have finally started to catch up to Canon.

Perhaps more accurate still is that the competitors, especially Sony and their sensors as partnered with Nikon, Pentax and Fuji, have significantly OUTPACED Canon's development in the last 5 yrs.

Canon's DSLRs have provided very good performance, especially at higher ISO since they implemented their CMOS sensor WAY back.  However, since the intro of Nikon's D90 about 5 yrs ago, the competition has steadily improved low iso read performance (& hi iso to a perhaps lesser extent) to such a level that Canon now has an obvious handicap in the fixed pattern noise department.

Whether or not you find this an issue for your own work is not the point, it's just a fact.  I'd like a replacement for my 7d that I can also press into high DR landscape use with fewer limitations.

I'm eager to see if Canon has pulled at least the ears of a rabbit out of a hat with the 70D.

EOS Bodies / Re: POLL: What will be the 70d's price tag?
« on: June 30, 2013, 02:53:04 PM »
i'm going to say around the $1300 range.


likely priced above the d7100 just to try capitalize on perception it might be a better product, at least to the faithful.

OTOH...  it COULD be priced ~ $1k to reduce brand-swapping amateurs, after all, even the $700 d5200 is a seriously well-featured competitor if the 70d's build quality is similar to the 60D.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Spec List [CR3]
« on: June 28, 2013, 12:07:52 PM »
Won't be surprised if 70d's sensor-system is only marginally improved over best recent 18MP unit for read noise performance.  Canon will count on Digic 5's improved processing to get cleaner jpgs out of camera and maybe even DPP's algorithms will be able to pull a bit more from its raw files.
I doubt there is any major sensor improvement in this model but, even if it's a little bit better than the 60d, it'll be a welcome benefit.  Combined with more AF points and the really handy articulating display, I might even buy one to replace my last 60d if DxOmark shows improved SNR at low ISO.

Canon General / Re: improving IQ in landscape
« on: June 19, 2013, 08:50:04 PM »
Nice pic, the colour cast is probably more to do with the ND filter and the way the light is filtering through it than the AWB - I'm pretty sure that someone who has gone to the expense of buying a motorised head isn't going to make a AWB school boy error !

boo-boos can still happen to the best intentioned..  ;)
I haven't used an ND on a wide pano so haven't seen this effect from an ND as such.
FWIW, no CPL filters for wide angle pano work either.

Canon General / Re: improving IQ in landscape
« on: June 19, 2013, 02:59:56 PM »
There is something odd about this image though- like the white balance changes from a greenish cast on left to a magenta cast on the right. Or it could just be my monitor.

perhaps AWB was used during the shot.
Any stitching work should be done fully manual exposure and WB settings to maintain as much shot-to-shot consistency as possible.

A friend of mine likes doing his landscapes with long lenses and 10MP crop body instead of spending big money on lenses and hi res FF body.  Results are excellent but takes him hours compared to minutes for single shot or only a simple 3 to 5 shot pano.  I don't have the patience for panos any more, I did a few that way when I was using crop bodies.  Rarely resort to it now.

For prints under 36" it's rarely worth the trouble if you have a good body with with >20MP.
If you have a lower rez body then this is a reasonable compromise if you don't have to deal with changing light or shifting subject matter.

Sell the 5D2, especially if it's one of the banding-prone early models.
buy a refurb D800 and a new Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC and have more fun w immensely better IQ.

Software & Accessories / Re: New Macpro teased at Mac Conference
« on: June 11, 2013, 03:25:29 PM »
It's a gorgeous and well-spec'd piece of hardware, impressive.

I don't accept the gripes people make about it not being internally capable of holding all their (old) add-ons.  Serious users usually have serious hardware OUTside of the CPU box; now you just HAVE to do it that way.. not that big a deal. (it's only money)  This new machine is just a processing pipe.

What would make me hot for this hardware is if it would actually boot Snow Leopard! The various lions all suck in comparison and I'm not holding out a lot of optimism for Mavericks getting back to anywhere near the power-user-friendly abilities of 10.6.x.
I've been working with, and on, macs since '85 and agree with many of the other old dogs who swear by 10.6; and swear at Apple for taking away so many useful features from those older OSes in the later versions.

Those of you new to the Apple experience don't know what you're missing.

I'll still plug away on my 2010 27" iMac running 10.6 for a few more years of stills editing and my i7 mini server is adept at handling the various other tasks, including day-to-day usage and running 10.8 for what few applications need the newer OS.

I'll likely get a hankering for a nice 4k display tho, and then I'll have to decide what platform I'll use at that time.

Since you've already ORDERED a D600... :)
I have the 14-24, use it on D800.  It's a very fun lens to use.
OTOH, it's a bit lacking for me in FL cuz the range I like to use is covered better by the 16-35.

So here's a combo to consider, and it's cost-effective too.

Get the 16-35 VR.  It will cover a LOT of common UWA zoom requirements and the VR is a useful bonus.
If you need to get even wider, get the Excellent and low cost Samyang/Rokinon 14mm f/2.8.  It has a lot of distortion but it's actually sharper and has less CA than the Nikon 14-24 at the 14mm.  There'e enough sharpness to PP the distortion out and still have a good image.  Both of those will likely still cost less than the 14-24.

And, with that Novoflex or other adapter, as mentioned by others, you can use both of these on your Canon too.
Nikon 20mm f/2.8 is another good fast prime to add to the mix, IF needed.

IMO - good on you for exploring the other side.  These things are tools, and, if you can afford it, it's nice to have the best tools for the job, no matter who makes them.  Getting the extra benefit of using Nik glass on Can bodies with an adapter is an extra bonus.

thanks for those
I knew the Sam 14mm was really good in the corners, but I see the 24mm is better than I expected.

i suppose it is the focus, i only used the centre point and recomposed, but so many the focus is off..

Just to confirm, did you have the AF option set to single-shot? if so, focus and recompose should work fine on that example shot.

If it was set to AiAF or any other mode then the system may be AF-ing on something else as you re-compose.
Even experienced photogs can sometimes miss that little detail when rushed.

Software & Accessories / Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software
« on: May 07, 2013, 12:33:41 PM »
Buy a copy of CS6 and only pay for LR thru CC or if they continue to use retail copy's. you can convert your RAWs to DNGs later on to continue editing in CS6 for years.

That's my plan anyway.

if you already have LR3 or 4, and PS as CS 3, 4, 5, or preferably 6, then those of us who only use it occasionally or as a host framework for plugins are just fine for as long as we care to freeze our workflow.
As long as you can export your raw file into DNG or 16b TIFF you can continue to do a lot of work without really changing workflow.  DPP, ViewNX, DxO, C1 and other 3rd party raw converters are there to do that.

I froze my OS and my PP software a couple years ago and despite what cameras I added it still allows me to continue working the way I'm comfortable with for years to come.  I'll be taking one more iterative step with OS, PS and LR4 and then that machine gets locked down, no more major SW updates.

If you gotta have some g-whiz new feature then you're gonna have to keep payin' for it unless some competition steps up to take the place of PS.
I know the tech already exists, it's just not well marketed yet.  Hopefully the authors will take this opportunity to push their software to improve customer awareness.

For some of the plugin suites, like Topaz, they already have a basic framework that allows standalone use.  I think this kind of functionality may become a little more commonplace.

GIMP, and Corel and some other small players will now get some extra attention and hopefully improve feature sets and usability.  Adobe's CC move is going to cause a bit of a shift in the whole ecosystem.

EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 06, 2013, 11:52:48 PM »
and i always thought it´s the photographers job to make interesting characterful images....
and lens choices matter, many old ones are less clinically accurate in their image rendition, more interesting results can be obtained.  Check out the M42 mount lens fans and the fun they're having. :)

EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 06, 2013, 11:50:19 PM »
All the 7D really needed was a better sensor. Otherwise, Near-Perfect camera.

and what about the 7D's sensor are YOU thinking should be improved?..

EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 06, 2013, 11:49:11 PM »
convinced you to AFMA that new lens then? ;)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Do you trust your camera?
« on: May 06, 2013, 08:53:20 PM »
Of all the cameras I trusted, my 60D is still one of the best for getting that shot, it's my go-to camera if I'm running out of the house to catch something.  Unless it was fast action or other serious focus challenges in which case the 7D did a better job.  (no 1D for me) 40D and Rebels' AF was adequate for most of what I used them for and rarely let me down.
That said, I've never really had to worry much about AF issues with any of my cameras and the only one that ever gave me exposure grief was my 5D2 which could be all over the place tho usually under by varying amounts.  HATED that camera.  My 40D could miss exposure too sometimes but since I use manual whenever possible, these are not common issues.
Some AF misses with the D800 in challenging conditions but otherwise very solid performer that meets my expectations very well.  The little d5100, considering its sparse AF coverage and only 1 cross type in the center performs well beyond my expectations.
Pentax K52s is a quirky beast I'm still getting used to, AF performance varies greatly from lens to lens.  AE performance is often pretty good but I had some odd metering behavior begin with it the other day that I have to test out.

That said, I RARELY shoot multiples of images.  I only machine-gun the subject when it's living, then you have a better chance of getting a good expression.  I'd now prefer to miss a shot here or there than have to constantly wade thru too many.  A leftover from film-shooting days.

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 75