December 19, 2014, 01:38:46 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 - Aglet

Pages: 1 ... 38 39 [40] 41 42 ... 73

But again, just because you can print a portait large and it looks good doesn't mean a landscape photographer shooting with the same camera can print a photo large and have it look good. So I'd advise against making blanket statements about others not knowing what they're doing just because they say they could use more resolution.

MP are not really the issue, even for some landscapers
it's the Canon-patented pattern noise.

I never shot with a 1Ds3 but I think it's actually got slightly better low ISO shadow performance than the 5d series.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Olympus OM-D E-M5
« on: March 26, 2013, 01:01:53 AM »
I fell in love with this camera when I held a production prototype equipped with the grip and extra battery.  But that's the key, I'd want both those add-ons as the plain body is ungainly to my hands.

I'm still considering getting one to replace my 60D as a walk-around but can't really justify the price of it over the 60D. it'll cost me a lot for a camera + accessories + a few lenses I'll need to acquire.

The Oly's sensor outperforms the 60D in SNR at all ISO and, importantly to me, shadow noise regions are better by over a full stop from my estimates.
If I get rid of more of my Canon gear, disappointed as I have been with some of it, that'll free up some scratch and the OMD EM5 is at the top of my list for m4/3 gear should I go in that direction.
Altho good, i didn't much like the EVF.

An alternative to this, for me, is the very impressive new Fuji gear with the X-trans sensor.  but it has very few lenses to choose from right now.

I really like both of these non-slr camera systems.
But, from an IQ performance/$ standpoint, i've already got Nikon's excellent, cheap little D5100 and more than enough lenses already to cover most situations.  The d5100 is a small, light camera with an even better sensor, even if it does not have the same overall performance; I rarely need speed.  I take this little APS-C sized IQ monster, with one 16-85mm lens, or the 18-105mm, both are optically stabilized, and I have a very compact and capable walk-around or travel cam that makes me wonder why i still keep the 60D+15-85mm.  It must be some remnant of loyalty to the brand I spent the most years with.  :-\

I'd love to see a new body from Canon, crop or FF, that actually makes a measurable (by DxOmark) improvement in low ISO read noise.  Canon's done great guns at improving higher ISO across the board from compacts to pro SLR
but they still lag grossly at low ISO shadow SNR - sure, it only affects a few of us to any significant extent, but I won't spend any of my money on another Canon body until they actually show some serious improvement in that area.

Nothing they've brought out in the last few (to 10) years has made any significant improvement in this area.  So much so that not only will I not buy another Canon body until they improve, I've sold the more expensive newer ones that failed to deliver anything over the older bodies I already have. AF improvements, video and other features are nice but I'd just like a much improved stills shooter, please.

BTW, my favorite new under-puppy Pentax might release a FF body this year, likely a conservative 24MP unit.
If it performs anything like their K5 series, their market share is likely to double!  from darn near nuthing to twice that!  ;D
However, as an enthusiast camera maker, Pentax has a small but very loyal user/fan base, many of whom still own some FF compatible old film-era lenses so if they do release a reasonably priced (and they're as bad for this as Canon) new FF body, I can see some uptake from existing users who'd prefer not to go CaNikon to get FF goodness.  count me in as one of those who'll be willing to give that new FF a whirl.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« on: March 20, 2013, 03:11:05 PM »

There are guys with numerous cameras at most sporting events. If I could afford it, I would probably have three as an ideal number, as it is I have to make do with two. Some major newspapers have or use photographers that only have one camera.

You have 4 bodies. Good for you. Well done. Big cheer.

Are they all DSLRs? Are they all one brand? What are they?

Interesting question. I wonder why Canon sticks two memory cards in it systems. One reason is that you can double your memory capacity, another is so if you want you can write to both cards at the same time, just in case....

And your point about swapping lenses taking time in the case of a camera failure is really rather moot (not the word I want to use) considering that if you had two different systems you would not be able to swap lenses at all....  ::)

1) What is your point? Apart from the tired sarcasm, and just saying my opinion is totally invalid?

You have a camera shop strung around your neck while you shoot weddings, that's your choice, I see nothing wrong with that. But I would never shoot sports with more than one camera system and I do not know anyone that does. But when I am next at an international event I will check and report back to you.

Well, weddings are a lot slower than sports so 3 Rebels and a 40D were used on my last wedding shoot about 4 yrs ago.
1006 shots taken; 1002 delivered, 2 held back for legal reasons, 1 shot of my foot, 1 focus miss.
10-22mm, 17-55mm, 18-250mm, 70-200/2.8 for the formals (outside)
3x 580EX2s and 420EX for occasional fill
So, plenty of cams and lenses BUT THE BODIES WERE CHEAP, LIGHT, AND ADEQUATE for that kind of work.
Even tho I used gear that shared a lot of common accessories, it would not have mattered if if one cam was another brand with that kind of lens coverage.

Frankly, at the speed weddings typically move at, I could have shot them with a G-series PowerShot using wide and tele adapters, 2 flashes, and one SLR with a couple lenses.

Funny, never had a memory card failure either. May be cuz i only use premium ones that I’ve tested beforehand and I don’t pop them out of the camera every time I DL images like some like to do.

missed-shot’s a missed shot, no matter what the excuse

HIgh end competitive sports is a different shooting environment, I’d likely select gear similar to your requirements if I did such gigs.
More importantly, I’d need something to keep me awake cuz, to me, there’s nothing so boring as what passes for commercial spectator sports. (gag)  Weddings are a close second, FWIW, and I don’t care to do either of those, or other events, any more.
Trying to have FUN with my gear now, shooting whatever I like.

So, I’m saying your point is only valid in a very limited situation, in many others situations, it’s not at all critical.

Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« on: March 20, 2013, 12:51:04 AM »
This thread is now almost 2 years old, but I'll play...  :D
very nice image
but...  something about it looks a little uneven to me overall  ???

what did you do in post?
I find the owl to be in an uneven, not quite circular or symmetrical halo which i find stands out a little on the small sized 4:3 image displayed here

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« on: March 20, 2013, 12:36:22 AM »
One very important reason why it would be very silly (being polite) for a pro to use both systems, is that if one of his/her cameras breaks down, s/he cannot use the glass of one brand on the other camera which is of another brand.

Do not forget NPS and CPS work very differently from one country to another - very different regulations, set up and benefits. They might offer a replacement while they fix the broken one, and that replacement might be free, or it might not. But regardless, by the time you get it to Canon you have missed the shot(s) you were trying to get.

For landscape photographers that may not be a problem (I do not know as I rarely shoot landscapes), but if you are at a sports event and your long camera dies leaving you with only a wide angle camera, you are going to have problems, very big problems. If, in this scenario, you have the same brand of camera you can swap and change your lenses to your hearts content if one dies. Might not be ideal to only use the backup but at least you do not miss the shots and potentially your job or rep.

Now, there may be some very rich pro that can buy every lens for every brand to cover such an eventuality, but most can't. And even if they could who is going to carry that much stuff to an event!!

I do not care if you use Nikon, Canon, Sony or a paint and brush, but using both is just asking for trouble. It makes no sense.
Really?... Serious sports shooting pros only have 2 cameras?..
how impoverished
i shot weddings with 4 different bodies hangin' off my neck with enough overlap that if a battery happened to go dead (they never did) then i could still cover the event
Same goes for back when we had to change film.

sarcasm aside (geez that's hard to do) how often do you break your gear that this would be a problem?
even if you HAD 2 of the same brand, swapping lenses is gonna cost you time and you're still gonna miss shots a bit like if you had 2 different systems.
I fail to see you making a valid point against using 2 different systems but as long as you convinced yourself into such a corner...

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« on: March 18, 2013, 01:05:34 PM »
I’m glad to see more people speaking up in a positive way about using systems other than Canon.
Golly, the way some Canon die-hards react to this idea is comparable to the voiciferous objections one might expect when publicly inviting a highly pious individual to partake in an orgy of debauchery.  Sure is a lot of denial and nay-saying but I bet if the denier got the chance to have their way with one of “the others” for a week, in private of course, and actually discover its values and merits, opinions would likely change in a more accepting direction.
Canon certainly does not have ALL of the best photographic solutions and if you don’t mind learning a bit more by using other mfr’s equipment you may acheive something closer to photographic equipment nirvana.
Of course this may not work for everyone, there’s gonna be some who will stubbornly maintain their faith in monocamy while others of us have no hesitation of belonging to a bicamy or even a polycamist group. ;)
(Aint that right my darlings Pentaxia, Nikonia, Olympia, Sony-Sue and Pana-Lee?  You can all get along with my first, Canonella, just fine.)

Lenses / Re: Nikon 14-24 Novoflex adapter
« on: March 17, 2013, 04:58:50 PM »
I'm using the 14-24, but on a D800, not with the adapter.
Great lens, low distortion, CA is manageable.
FWIW, I usually have it smacked over to the 14mm end all the time.

BUT, worth considering as an alternative, is the Samyang 14mm prime.  It does have a lot more distortion than the nikon zoom, but if you're shooting landscape you can usually work around that by keeping any straight lines running near the centerlines of the image.  It's sharper and less CA than the nikon zoom in the corners too. and 1/3 the price, or less.
I'm going to be evaluating whether or not I keep the zoom or just use a 14mm and 20mm prime instead.
Tough choice, that zoom sure is nice to use, even w-o any easy ND filter options.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« on: March 17, 2013, 03:54:41 AM »
(OP) If you are not making large prints, like posters, you aren't gaining anything with the D800..
I have seen/made gallery prints taken with everything from 5D, D700 to 5DmkII and D800, and unless you are talking about the finest detail that can't quite be reproduced by upscaling a 21/24mp image for poster prints you aren't going to be able to tell any significant difference in the output other than the difference created through post-processing.
If you just want to have that marginal detail whether you print big or not, like just in case you have/want to print big, then pick up something with higher mp...
I mean at the upper end of landscape photography, MF bodies, its not like everyone who shoots MF no longer owns or uses a DSLR. No capable mechanic only owns/uses one wrench...

Also remember that it is the accurate capture and reproduction of light and color that resolves detail, not mp.. but mp do give you a digitally larger image file.

(Note to Nikon trolls - your teenage Penthouse forum fantasy tales are boring.)

it's the post work, in some cases, that benefits from the reduced pattern noise afflicting some Canon bodies
..and it's more like missionaries ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: Frustrated with Canon
« on: March 17, 2013, 03:44:36 AM »
Ya, this can be a tough crowd, especially if you're new here and the first posts you make can be construed to criticize Canon.

If you can justify using other equipment that works better for you, no need to look for supporting opinions, just use it.

If you have a 1ds3 to work with, unless you wore it out, what exactly was the benefit of the D800e for you?

FWIW, I added Nikon's D800/e and Pentax to my kit, dropped the disappointing Canon bodies.
If Canon doesn't bring out seriously better midrange bodies this year, I'll probably start dumping some of their glass too.  At least it's held it's value or even appreciated above what I paid for it from the pressure of their rather high pricing lately.
Seriously hoping a 7D2 or even 70D (and everything else they make) will have a sensor with greatly reduced pattern noise.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« on: March 16, 2013, 06:07:22 PM »
DO IT, no regrets! :)
I LUV my D800/E!

Sold off most of my under-performing Canon gear while still worth something and shoot mainly Nikon and Pentax now.
Still keeping a good pile of Canon glass and older bodies for now, hoping a 7D2 will be worth the wait and still considering a 6D when the price drops more.
Also, with a decent adapter, all those Nikon lenses can be mounted on a Canon and used manually, not a problem when shooting landscape or still life.

Golly, that otta have been a checkbox thing instead of an only-one button thing

Pentax - cuz they feel good in my hands and work fantastic for some of my uses
Nikon - cuz they completely outperform the Canons they replace
Panasonic & Sony - because I have them too and they're good at what they do
Olympus and Fuji - on the purchase list

When printing or adapting for electronic display, it’s the shadow areas that get lifted, moreso than the highlites getting lowered, that compresses the DR of the image to fit the output medium.
Therefore, having clean shadow performance from the camera and sensor system can be quite important, especially when presenting on large prints or displays.  If you like to portray most of those darker shades as indistinguishable, which I see many do, and i often find distasteful, that’s your choice.
I prefer to have a system that gives me more options in post.
And I’ll define CLEAN once again:  the absence of fixed pattern noise is what’s more important than overall DR. Random noise, that looks like film-grain, does not create obvious distractions for the viewer.  Plaid-like patterns and strong vertical striping surely does.
If these points are important to you, choose your gear and-or limit your post-processing accordingly.
If not, don’t try to convince others, who may not share your viewpoint, that technical advantages like more DR and no FPN are irrelevant and it’s only the shooter’s skill that matters.  If that were true, why would anyone upgrade to better gear, especially the pro’s? We could all continue to compensate, and limit ourselves to fit the constraints of the gear we have, and we’d all be so happy with it.

Interesting discussion. One does wonder though what would happen if Canon came close to Nikon's DR in low ISO at the cost of losing a stop or two in High ISO.

Now who would want that camera?

I might.
I still prefer Canon's user interface and controls to Nikons, and only slightly over Pentax, but not enough to switch back until such an improved Canon camera is a reality.
And, for the sake of correctness, I'm not even asking for more DR, I'd like to see no FPN in new Canon sensors.  The 6D comes very close to being acceptable.  Hopefully a 7D2 will be similarly or more improved.  But, right now..
When it comes to low USO DR and lack of FPN, SoNikon cleans up on both of those metrics.

As for some of the other arguments, when it comes to difficult lighting situations, the camera with the superior sensor system is going to provide a lot more latitude and better IQ potential than the more limited one.  I don't care how good one's technique is, better tools allow that same person to expand their envelope of capabilities.
The same ones who are presently crowing how their technique is all it takes to make up for an inferior sensor system are likely going to be crowing even louder when/if they ever get their hands on a better performing camera.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DxOMark trashes the Leica M9 sensor
« on: March 12, 2013, 03:01:19 PM »
I've never even cared for DxO marks tbh, and dont get why anyone does, photographys an art, not a game of top trumps
You are certainly free to treat photography as an art-form only. Why are you then spending time on a forum about gear?

I see photography as a marriage between art and science. You can't have one without the other.


Even Ansel Adams spent tons of time in the old-fashioned  camera lab working on how to improve tech and get the most out of what he had.
Best way to know when you're pushing the limits of your gear is to know what and where those limitations are.

Pages: 1 ... 38 39 [40] 41 42 ... 73