February 01, 2015, 04:14:33 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 - SambalOelek

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 5Dc as an entry for FF? yay or nay?
« on: October 01, 2012, 04:53:38 AM »
Nay from me given your current situation. I'd rather invest in some good EF lenses. In most situations, your 500D can produce pictures that are indiscernable from a FF camera at equivalent focal lengths.

I've owned several 5Dc's, most recently right before 5D III hit the stores. Coming from a more modern camera (5DII), I have to say the LCD was a bit frustrating to use. It's nigh impossible to determine if the image is tack sharp, or just slightly OOF. I also found the colors to be off (greenish cast).

On the other hand, the images are really good, and I didn't really miss the IQ of the 5D II/III (at ISO<1600). It's a "no frills" image making machine.

One thing to keep in mind is that a lot of used 5D's will come with dirty sensors, and if you're not comfortable cleaning it yourself, you may want to factor in that additional cost.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony A99 24MP Full Frame Press Release
« on: September 12, 2012, 06:18:46 AM »
They would need to seriously catch up with the glass!

What glass are you exactly looking for?  I find the Sony and Zeiss lineup comparable though some are expensive are comparable to Canon lineup.

Sony shooters have some very good lenses at their disposal, such as the ZA 24-70mm f/2.8,  ZA 85mm f/1.4, ZA 135mm f/1.8, and the 70-200 G, 70-300 G and 70-400 G.

However, in targeting the professional market (as they obviously are with the A99), it is a drawback that none of the abovementioned lenses are weather sealed. No wonder they're making a huge point of the fact that the new 300 f/2.8 and the A99 grip are sealed.

Any other points I may have left out or should be aware of? Thanks in advance.

Here are my thoughts from having owned both these cameras at the same time, and using them more or less "side by side". Your mileage may vary.

Overall, I've found the 60D a bit more enjoyable to grab for a quick, informal, shoot, mainly because of the following:
  • Working Auto-ISO in M mode. 5D II Auto-ISO is fixed at 400 in M mode.
  • Better AWB. Indoors, the 60D will often hit the mark where the 5D II misses completely. Both have problems with the really yellow tungsten lights.
  • More sensitive peripheral AF points.  Having 9 fully usable cross-type points reduces the need for focus-and-recompose on the 60D. The 5D II often struggles to lock with the outer points.
  • Built-in flash which can trigger Speedlites remotely.

However, for more "serious" work, I would take the 5D because of:
  • Overall better IQ, especially at high ISO. However, the difference is often negligible at ISO 100
  • AF Microadjustment. Not having this is my biggest pet peeve with the 60D
  • Increased creative potential wrt. depth of field on FF
  • Better viewfinder on 5D II.
  • Better selection of lenses in the 24-85mm range (considering the crop factor)
  • Overall better controls and construction on 5D II

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X AF at f/8 with the Kenko 1.4TC
« on: September 06, 2012, 07:13:35 AM »
Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 L + Kenko 2x (effectively @ f/8-11) = Slow/difficult to lock focus

... a 1.4x tc is the absolute max for the 70-300L unless you mf, but imho the iq with the 1.4x Kenko is "just" ok so I wouldn't want to try a 2x.

In fact, I found that the bare lens performance at 300mm is only okayish, which is somewhat disappointing considering the max aperture. I have two of these so I may run a quick check to see if there's any discernable difference.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X AF at f/8 with the Kenko 1.4TC
« on: September 05, 2012, 06:20:28 AM »
I've used Kenko 2x with the lovely Sigma 100-300 f/4 on 5D III, and it worked like a charm. Very sharp and snappy AI Servo AF with both manual and automatic.

Sigma 100-300 f/4 + Kenko 2x (effectively @ f/8) = Works 100%
Sigma 100-300 f/4 + Kenko 2x + Canon 1.4x (effectively @ f/11) = Only automatic AF point selection, fast lock
Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 L + Kenko 2x (effectively @ f/8-11) = Slow/difficult to lock focus

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Cheap Camera Ideas...worth it?
« on: August 23, 2012, 04:23:57 PM »
Keeping in mind that the Rebel XT has very limited high ISO capabilities, and that the 18-55 non-IS is not exactly great, an affordable, high optical-quality prime (35mm f/2, 40mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.8) will certainly bring out the best images you can get on a $200 budget.

Lenses / Re: Lens creep. Is this normal?
« on: August 10, 2012, 05:28:28 AM »
I've owned five of these. Out of those, three or more had creep with the lens hood attached, and two of them had creep without an attached lens hood. My current sample has creep with or without an attached lens hood.

Bummer - guess I got lucky. Mine has the hood and a UV filter.

But really, how bad can it be?  For comparison, ever shot with the 70-300 DO?  I had one for a while, now that's a lens with serious creep in its double-extension design.  I was shooting fully extended once, tracking a bird in flight, and as the bird flew overhead, the zoom slammed back in so hard I swear I'm lucky the eyecup on my 7D didn't give me a black eye...  :o

Forgot to mention I was using UV/CPL on all of them. I've used the DO, but not for BIF. I actually like that lens, and wouldn't hesitate to recommend it if it'd been priced similarly to the 70-300 IS non-L. It even has a (much needed) zoom lock IIRC :)

Lenses / Re: Lens creep. Is this normal?
« on: August 09, 2012, 06:55:17 PM »
I've owned five of these. Out of those, three or more had creep with the lens hood attached, and two of them had creep without an attached lens hood. My current sample has creep with or without an attached lens hood.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« on: July 22, 2012, 10:11:06 AM »
donĀ“t you think the AF will be as good as 5 year old cameras who do wildlife shots pretty well?

Are you referring to five year old cameras such as the 1D III or the 40D? If so, my answer would have to be a resounding "heck, no!"

EOS Bodies / Re: Skin cover for 5d3 / 1dx
« on: July 06, 2012, 04:28:56 AM »
I've never seen the point in screen protectors for a camera. #1, my screen never gets scratched, and thats with professional use, #2, if it does get scratched... so what? The screen doesn't take the photo. Who cares? The camera is a tool. A carpenter doesn't put a protective cover on his hammer so the nail doesn't scratch it up. :P

Resale value :)

I heard the 5D Mark III screen would be more scratch-resistant. Not so.

Technical Support / Re: How much space to get to macro?
« on: July 04, 2012, 03:37:34 AM »
Lovely project  - go for it!

I hate to spoil some of the fun but a macro used wide open is not very usable for anything else than abstracts. DOF is very thin. So you need to be able to set aperture somehow (that means electronics)

Dismounting the lens while pressing the DOF preview button will allow you to pre-set the aperture (causing a very dark VF if set much below f/4).

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: 40 Shorty Test Shots
« on: July 02, 2012, 06:48:57 AM »
Seems we have two camps forming here. Those that have it and love it, and those that haven't got and can see nothing but problems even though the reviews praise it for the low price and high IQ

And a third camp for those who have it and appreciate the size and optical quality, but are dissatisfied with the AF and the quirky manual focusing. :)

Pricewatch Deals / Re: 5D Mark III Special Kit from Adorama
« on: June 29, 2012, 06:06:41 AM »
Is this a way of clearing old stock, isn't the MK3 able to way out perform those lenses?

The 18 megapixel APS-C sensors have way higher pixel density, so they are a lot more demanding in terms of center sharpness. It's not even close, the Mark III has about the same pixel density as the 20D.

The standard kit lens for the 5D Mark III is the 24-105 which, IQ-wise is not in the same league as the 50mm f/1.4 @ f/4.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: upgrade to a 7D?
« on: June 27, 2012, 08:29:38 AM »
I do a lot of night time, night time HDR, panoramic photography and just wondered if the 7D would be up to the job for this.  I often do long exposures, in a few shots i've done 20-30 minute exposures on a beach at night and while the 550D was good it wasn't quite perfect, so I wouldn't want to upgrade and lose that performance i have currently.

One thing that may be worth mentioning is that the 7D LCD is slightly inferior to the 550D's in terms of resolution and aspect ratio. That said, the 7D LCD is of course very good.

On the other hand, the 7D viewfinder is a huge upgrade. Once you've grown accustomed to pentaprism viewfinders, the entry-level OVFs seem tiny in comparison.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III vs 5D Mark II Raw Image Quality
« on: June 26, 2012, 07:41:10 AM »
So yes, he is right that some NR was inadvertently applied by ACR, not you, and that you can knock it from 25 to 0 and get more noise, but he is wrong about how much noise and what kind of noise...  Minimal difference in color noise between 0 and 25 and it is luminance noise more than anything else, which is to be expected, and cleans up quite nicely.

If you are referring to what Sambal Oelek said about the cat at ISO 6400, I'm not sure I agree, but maybe I got you wrong. I'll try to post three 100% crops: one without any NR, one with the default 25 chroma NR, and one with 69 (!) luminance NR without chroma NR, which makes the chroma noise easily distinguishable form the luma noise.

What I was expecting was to see a lot more color noise (chrominance noise or chroma noise for short), similar to filo64's result. Luminance noise is already visible in the jpg (the "graininess" of the OOF areas), so i figured that at least some chroma NR was being applied by the RAW converter.

Thanks to kevl for uploading the file.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4