Messages

46

EOS-M / Re: My First EOS-M Review

« on: November 17, 2012, 10:07:47 PM »

I also made a final decision to hold off on buying an EOS M. One of the reasons I own a camera is to take pictures of my son and it's just not going to work for that. I am actually saddened. Here's hoping for that firmware update or I'll be waiting and hoping that the second generation will have improved af speed.

I'm glad you are liking yours, though wickidwombat.

My main interest in the EOS M has been as a replacement for my G11, which is starting to show wear and tear.  After playing around with it in a store, my current feeling is that I want to wait a few months until Canon announces the next EOS M body - hopefully with an EVF - for an interchangeable lens camera, I really do want a viewfinder. - I can accept that an EVF will make it slightly bigger, but that is a price I am prepared to pay.

I found the tap-to-shoot functionality novel, but slightly awkward.  I struggled a little to hold the camera and leave one hand free to tap with.

In all fairness, considering the target market for this camera (P&S upgraders) it doesn't seem bad.  It isn't targeted at someone who has been using a SLR in manual mode however.  Unfortunately, enthusiasts are probably in the minority.

47

Lenses / Re: Advice 5d3, wide angle

« on: November 15, 2012, 07:28:46 PM »

everyone will say if you have money go for the 16-35 f2.8..

in the past i was taking pictures in clubs. "weather" sealing is great. Was tested by a drunk person who spilt half a glass of vodka red bull over my 17-40  . -> still works like a new lens

very durable, good priced L lens.

I think there needs to be some perspective - ultra-wide angle lenses are difficult to build.  We all have a tendency to knock the 17-40mm for its performance at 17mm wide open.  When stopped down it does quite well for landscapes though, and by the time you reach 20mm, performance at f/8 is nothing to complain about - in fact not much worse than the 21mm Zeiss which costs a lot more. - Provided you can work within the limitations of the 17-40mm, it is a very attractive option.

Mine has also taken a good shower and is none the worse for that.

My view is that unless you need to shoot at wide apertures get the 17-40mm.  If you to shoot a lot at apertures of f/5.6 or less, consider the 16-35mm.

48

Technical Support / Re: Best Methods For Long Term File Storage ??

« on: November 15, 2012, 01:56:49 AM »

Lots of VERY questionable advice here in my opinion.

By far the easiest solution is to get a raid5 NAS box and use it as your primary storage medium.  On a regular schedule you can make a redundant copy to an external drive and store it somewhere else.

One point to take into account especially with RAID5 or RAID6 - you probably want to make use of enterprise drives (not desktop drives) to be sure that you get the reliability you want.

49

Lenses / Re: Best Lens for photographing children

« on: November 15, 2012, 01:36:36 AM »

I also have a 70-200 zoom, but that just scares the kids and I can't run around the place as easily with the monster zoom

My wife does the photos for one of the daycare centres in our neighbourhood, and the setup she has been using until now is a gripped 5DII, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II and 580EXII.  (The 5DII has just been relegated to backup duty.)

To reduce the "scare factor" of the big white lens she made an owl with big round eyes that fits around the end of the lens - the front element/hood is the owl's tummy.  It looks quite amusing, and the kids love it.  She forgot the owl on the first morning's shooting this year, and one little girl actually remembered it, and asked what had happened to it!  After lunch, owl was back on duty. ;-)

What helps your mobility with the big white lens is a shoulder strap (like a BlackRapid) which allows you to have the camera hanging at your side.

50

Lenses / Re: Thinking about a 17-40 f4L USM. Thoughts?

« on: November 14, 2012, 06:04:28 PM »

Was wondering how big of a difference of 1mm really is between the 17mm of 17-40L lens and 16mm of the 16-35mm L lens.

not much in fact the 17-40 range would be nicer and more flexable
however I love 2.8 on the 16-35 and the 16-35 is sharper at wide apertures too, for me the 16-35 f2.8L II is my ideal travel lens

The flip-side to that being that, if you want to shoot at small apertures, there is not much between the two lenses - at f/8 and smaller, they are similar in terms of sharpness.  If you are predominantly shooting landscapes, then weight and price probably weigh in favour of the 17-40mm.
As a walkabout lens on APS-C, I am now starting to lean more towards the 24-105mm f/4L IS USM - the loss of wide angle is made up for by better sharpness at f/4 and the IS.

Some examples using the 17-40mm on APS-C (7D) - at 17mm, if I recall correctly:



and full frame - 5DII - at 19mm, if I recall correctly:

51

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images

« on: November 14, 2012, 05:55:01 AM »

One of the things that has impressed me is the colour rendition and sharpness of the 24-70 f/2.8 II together with the 5DIII.  This was a test shot using the 5DIII together with the 24-70 f/2.8L USM II, ST-E3-RT and Speedlite 600-EX-RT, together with a 100% crop.

52

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Im looking into getting a new camera

« on: November 14, 2012, 12:02:15 AM »

My budget is about 1000 which I know isn't much but I wanna make sure I get the most bang for my buck. Any suggestions?

5Dc + 50mm 1.8/1.4

done.

+1

A lot of people cut their teeth with only a 50mm in the days of film.  You could do far worse than that, and that combo will produce great images, and teach you good habits.  In a way, I have regrets starting out with a 35-70mm on my first SLR (an EOS 650), rather than a 50mm - I certainly developed some bad habits from starting with a zoom.

53

Technical Support / Re: Best Methods For Long Term File Storage ??

« on: November 13, 2012, 09:14:50 PM »

I don't use any optical media (DVD/Bluray) because they become unreadable after a few years.

How many is 'a few'?  I recently listened to The Cars Greatest Hits, a CD that I bought in 1985.   

That's also a pressed CD, vs a burned CD/DVD. The material in a burnable CD/DVD is, generally, at least partially organic and over time degrades. Some of them are 'archival' quality, but I believe that's generally only guaranteed for only 40-50 years. Not sure, I'd have to look that number up, but I know it's not forever.

Makes sense, thanks!

A bit of reading I did into DVD/BluRay media recently basically indicated that there are no real standards for archival optical media, and quite honestly, your mileage may vary. - It is rather uncharted territory, and there seems to be no consensus as to how long a burned DVD or Bluray disk could last.  (I have some CD-Rs which are around 20 years old, and still readable. - Is that pure luck?  I have no idea.)

The bottom line is that for data backups you need to have a policy of copying to new media every few years.  That however tends to happen by default as existing drives become too small and larger, cheaper drives hit the market.

To be heretical: the most reliable long-term storage medium for a photo still seems to be paper. Provided a print is stored under controlled conditions, you may achieve the rated life of around 200 years for archival paper. - I don't think any of us would be around to confirm.  Of course, that does not answer the OP's question!

54

EOS-M / Re: My First EOS-M Review

« on: November 13, 2012, 09:05:48 PM »

its more expensive here in australia i think around $1350 or something
I got credited back what the fuji x10 cost me before which was around $800
so I only had to pay $550 for the eos-m
And i know a few people snapping up new 5Dmk2s for around $1500

I was quoting Australian pricing. ;-)  The twin lens + Speedlite kit is available for AUD 1011.12 and the adapter for AUD 131.12.

True - there are 5DIIs floating around (parallel import) for just under $1600:
http://www.d-d-photographics.com.au/categories/Digital-SLR/Canon-Digital-SLR/Canon-5D-Mark-II/

55

EOS-M / Re: My First EOS-M Review

« on: November 13, 2012, 08:27:00 PM »

I can get my hands on a 600D to compare but not a 7D
i'll try borrow the 600D and the 18-55 EF-S kit lens on the weekend to compare sensors and kits lenses too

AFAIK, the 600D and 7D sensors are exactly the same.  The 600D just doesn't have the problem of having dual data paths that the dual-DIGIC architecture in the 7D introduces (apparently visible at times).

That would be a really cool comparison.

It might be worth waiting to see if a firmware update comes out cleaning up some of the issues and also if a price drop makes it more appealing as it stands the eos-m kit plus 22mm, 18-55, EF adapter and ex90 flash is not too far off the cost of a 5Dmk2 body brand new.

Hmm,
I see the dual lens kit with the Speedlite goes for around $1011 (incl GST) - RRP is $1149.  The EF to EFM adaptor goes for around $131 (RRP $149).  That's a total of about $1142 (incl GST).  Where are you getting your 5DIIs from? ;-)

Depends how bad you want one really, you actually get used to the touch to shoot pretty quickly, I'm really liking it

That is what I am thinking - that is how you would mainly use it with the 22mm lens, which would probably be the most used lens.

One other thought: with the EX90 Speedlite, have you thought of the idea of using a short TTL cable and holding the flash in one hand and the camera in the other to achieve bounce flash?  (Of course you couldn't use touch to shoot then, unless you were a three-armed mutant!)

56

EOS-M / Re: My First EOS-M Review

« on: November 13, 2012, 06:30:17 PM »

To be totally honest the more I use this little guy the more I like it.
I think the quality of the little 22mm f2 plays a part here  its a nice combo.
I think even iso3200 is useable if you absolutely make sure nothing is even close to being under exposed or contains heavy shadows.
I still think if it were cheaper it would appeal to alot more people, I feel the price will come down relatively soon though.
I have also noticed battery life is not fantastic I guess it goes with the territory of being permanently in live view
and having that great screen.

I would be interested to know if there is any difference in high ISO performance to the 7D.  While they have sensors based on the same technology, the DIGIC chip is still involved even in RAW processing.  (That said, I have also got some pretty decent ISO3200 shots off the 7D - again where there are not too many shadows.)

I am conflicted about jumping to buy one of these little fellows.  I did really want something with an EVF, but at the same time, my G11 is starting to show wear and tear.  I probably should wait for the price to drop, in which case, I can focus mainly on the money spent on lenses and the adapter, and accept that I will replace the body when something better comes out.

57

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D600 Review with images

« on: November 13, 2012, 03:53:56 AM »

It seems that regular readers of sites like NikonRumors.com have been disappointed by the camera, pointing to one spec or another that causes them to shake their collective fists

So it's not just people on the Canonrumors forum who whine 

Don't you know:

• Nikonrumors: Website where people whine about Nikon and threaten to switch to Canon
• Canonrumors: Website where people whine about Canon and threaten to switch to Nikon

58

EOS-M / Re: My First EOS-M Review

« on: November 13, 2012, 03:51:03 AM »

I know you were underwhelmed by the 18-55mm kit lens - it would however be interesting to see some examples shot with that lens, and possibly some crops as well.

yeah sure i'll do a head to head vs the 16-35 f2.8LII this weekend

That would be awesome, although a kit lens against the 16-35 is like taking a knife to a gunfight!  It should give a very good juxtaposition though.

59

Lighting / Re: Entering the world of needing a flash at darker weddings

« on: November 13, 2012, 12:38:05 AM »

I have Stofens for my 430 and my 600.  I don't really like using them.  The colors/contrast I get from a bounced flash are much more pleasing.  The stofen might be a little more useful on the 430 as it does not have a catch light panel but I still find it much more useful to just use the flash directly. 

If you're looking for more interesting shadows, I'd use it off camera anyway...and I still don't use the stofen. 

I'd recommend the 580 or 600 for the higher output and easier controls.  (yes, it makes a difference in the real world).  For example, when bouncing flash straight up to an extremely high ceiling, like the ones found in reception rooms, the extra power is nice.  Also, when manually adjusting the output, the dials on the 580 and 600 are much easier to adjust quickly rather than having to hold down the center button for a few seconds and then pressing the +/- buttons, which are a bit tricky to press...minor gripe but it does slow me down a bit.  I mainly use my 430 to light backgrounds or if I need the extra power for bounce flash...usually off camera.

The controls on the 600 are far more intuitive - they are a big improvement in terms of reliability.

For wireless control, while it is probably the most expensive solution, the 600-EX-RT plus ST-E3-RT is probably the most bomb-proof solution.  If you are going to set up an off-camera flash, this combination has the added advantage of not having to attach a separate trigger, which gives for a faster and less error-prone setup to get your off-camer flash working.
Another added bonus is that the 600 comes with colour-correction gels for tungsten lighting.

60

EOS-M / Re: My First EOS-M Review

« on: November 12, 2012, 06:14:14 PM »

I know you were underwhelmed by the 18-55mm kit lens - it would however be interesting to see some examples shot with that lens, and possibly some crops as well.