August 22, 2014, 07:39:21 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 - MichaelTheMaven

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1
Focusing system sounds pretty sweet.

Boggles the mind how Canon is ignoring the 4K and video features that Panasonic is winning droves of new customers with.

2
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs Sony A7s vs GH4
« on: August 07, 2014, 08:31:50 PM »
+1 on the lens selection issue. Sony has my attention now, but the lack of internal 4K, cost, sports focusing and lens selection make it hard to beat that $1700 price point of the GH4, which can do internal 4K. That Shogun external recorder is another $2000, Id rather have 2 voightlanders for the GH4.

The 55 1.8 was by far the best lens i tested on Sony. Id even say that might be a better first lens than the 24-70 f4, which is ok, but the 1.8 was amazing. If Sony has a wider selection of fast glass they will be a force to be dealt with. I also tried the 12mm 2.8 Zoutt, was not impressed with it (the Panasonic 7-14 on MFT was actually wider @7mm (?!?)

3
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs Sony A7s vs GH4
« on: August 07, 2014, 02:24:19 PM »
Been shooting with both cameras side by side for 6 weeks now. The lack of native focusing lenses, no internal 4K and the sports focusing sums up my gripes about the A7s. I was able to get some nice voightlander glass for the GH4, wow...what a difference that makes.

Thought you guys might enjoy the final review, which summarizes how they compete against each other. Im still looking for a reliable way to test DR without needing expensive software. Any suggestions or recommendations are appreciated!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdMypfYrKgw

http://youtu.be/qdMypfYrKgw

4
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs Sony A7s vs GH4
« on: July 03, 2014, 01:01:50 AM »
Those are some great reviews you shared- thank you!

The A7S is growing on me the more I shoot with it. Did lots of sports type tests and there are a few weird things Im seeing. Definitely not a sports shooting camera, but can be used for the occasional shot if you have nothing else.

I did check out it's low light focusing ability again. Far off the charts of anything Ive ever seen or can measure with a light meter. It almost appears as if it is boosting the signal into live view and focusing off of the boosted signal. Only when I went into a very dark room with all the lights turned off did it actually start to struggle.

M

5
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs Sony A7s vs GH4
« on: July 02, 2014, 03:42:39 PM »
It is tempting to bring the 6D into the tests as the next closest competitor, the A7S is so good at low light focusing I am shocked. It has me loving it one second and being disappointed the next. Took it out for sports shooting this am. 1.5fps on servo focusing?? Really? The A7S is not a camera for sports.

Ill have to redo the ISO noise chart of the A7s vs the 5Diii (a touch out of focus), but the A7S vs GH4 Noise Chart is now up. Huge advantage to the A7s.

We resized the GH4 down to 12MB. Also, from what Ive seen, the A7s has about a 1 stop advantage over the 5Diii in higher ISOs when resized, Again Ill have the 5Diii ISO chart up soon.

http://www.michaelthemaven.com/?postID=3290&sony-a7s-vs-panasonic-gh4-iso-noise-comparison-charts

M

6
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs Sony A7s vs GH4
« on: July 02, 2014, 02:04:41 AM »
I have the A7s in hand, also have a GH4 and 5Diii. I've done some initial testing and should have more show later tomorrow (July 2nd).

I have mixed feelings, but in my limited time playing around with it here are some thoughts:

- Great ISO performance, but the higher ISOs are indeed pretty grainy.
- Incredible Low Light focusing sensitivity. More than anything I have ever tested, but only with native Sony lenses.
- Im already wishing Sony had many more lenses made for it with very wide apertures
- Paired with the Metabones Speedbooster and wide aperture glass, it could be a low light monster, especially for video.
- The Metabones Adapter, (not the speed booster) AF pretty much did not work, at all. I might have a bad copy. I hear it is slower, but is still supposed to work, but I had no such success with it.

I was very impressed with the DR and colors it could see beyond my own eyes, as grainy as it was:

http://www.michaelthemaven.com/?postID=3288&sony-a7s-low-light-portrait-test-maxed-out-at-iso-409-600

There will probably be a sweet spot for low light portraits, but I would imagine it is around ISO 25,600.

Ill post the ISO charts later today.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs Sony A7s vs GH4
« on: June 25, 2014, 03:30:18 AM »
That is one thing I have already noticed about the E Mount, is that there aren't a lot of really wide aperture lenses for it, seems most of them are f4 or f2.8, only a handful of comparatively expensive 1.8s.

I have actually 2 different EF adapters I am testing, one has Autofocus, I hear it is a little slow, but I will definitely test it, I have a bunch of wide aperture Canon glass Ill put on it.

Now if only that Shogun Recorder was available....

8
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs Sony A7s vs GH4
« on: June 24, 2014, 01:13:50 PM »
Thank you for the input everyone- I appreciate it. I have all over you suggestions on my list.

I think the astrophotography comparison is a great idea, especially with the high ISO performance of the A7s. Ill do the low light focusing too (its rated down to -4 EV which is supposedly better than the 6D), and the noise performance tests.

Ill post any preliminary stuff here for feedback as well.

Thanks again and keep the ideas coming if you have any more

9
EOS Bodies / 5Diii vs Sony A7s vs GH4
« on: June 23, 2014, 10:15:06 PM »
Hey guys, Im planning a comparison video between the 5Diii, A7s and GH4. I have gotten a lot of good insight from you all in the past, but I am opening this up to suggestions you might want to see?

I looked at the GH4 and have one now, it is very impressive for video work. (Like amazingly). It ran into issues with sports focusing. 

What tests would you guys like to in a match-up between these three other than the typical ones I normally do:

- ISO Noise
- Sports Shooting
- Dynamic Range
- HDR
- Portrait Comparison
- Video Moire
- Etc?

  I thank you in advance!

Michael


10
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Setting up 600ex speedlite system
« on: October 31, 2013, 12:56:53 AM »
I have a pretty good training set on both the 600EX RT, as well as the ST-E3.
http://www.canontrainingvideo.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=1&products_id=48 (this comes with a download)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/888466-REG/Michael_the_Maven_mtm_600_Canon_600EX_RT_Speedlite_Crash.html This is the DVD only.

MM

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 70D vs Nikon D7100 Epic Shootout
« on: September 12, 2013, 06:28:05 AM »
Question:  Does the live view give quick focusing on the "first focus"?  I know Canon said that the smooth focus changes were there intentionally, but does it snap to the first selection between shots well?

Question- It kind of depends on a few things. I am learning that it helps to have your subject fill the frame, when it gets small is when it gets erratic, it isn't so much distance, its how large the subject is in the frame. The amount of contrast also seems to play a role, a hard edge seems to focus quicker than say a grey wall.


I am hesitant to use many RAW images for analysis in these comparisons for a few assumptions (which also may be incorrect):

1. Everyone has a different way to process RAW, and in many cases, some people will be more or less effective & creative in processing RAW files than others. The variation you can get between someone who really knows what they are doing in RAW vs someone who doesn't is pretty wide.
2. Even converting the RAW files into JPEGs to display in the video often changes how they look comparatively. 
3. I'm more interested in what the processors are doing in camera, as the typical user (example: soccer mom) wont even use RAW files.


That all makes sense to me, and the "soccer mom" model may well be as good a target audience as any (assuming such a buyer seeks out reviews such as yours in the first place!); it underlines the point that comparing image quality is difficult given the almost infinite number of variables a user can play with.  But maybe next time, if you have the time, you could toss in a couple of minimally processed (e.g. nothing more than LR's default import settings) RAW files along with the rest.

If you want to see if Rockwell's "fix" for the green bias works on the D7100, here's his recipe for the D600 (I've no idea how well it works there, either):

MENU > SHOOTING > White Balance > AUTO > right click to AUTO Normal > right click to the rainbow chart > click one down to M1 > OK.

Set M1, and the green goes away and the LCD looks fine. My biggest whines about this is that we ought not have to tweak it to get neutral color, and when we do tweak it, exactly like the other 2012 FX Nikons, the jump between M0 and M1 isn't fine enough to let me dial-out the green exactly how I'd like it dialed out.

Good info worth sharing. Thank you!

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 70D vs Nikon D7100 Epic Shootout
« on: September 09, 2013, 08:34:08 PM »
All good questions. I will try to answer them the best I can:

- The lenses used were both 24-70 2.8 from their respective companies, in the case of the Canon it was the L II
- I used AWB (Ill explain why in a second)
- I used the Standard, default picture style on both cameras
- Could the green tint be fixed by shifting the WB, styles, or other settings? Probably, the one problem there is being able to say "this is how you do it in every case" as many users may be having different experiences depending on their lighting, lens, subject matter etc. So I try to stick more with "this is what I am seeing"

I believe the green cast is part of the camera's processing for 2 reasons:

1. Im not seeing it through the lens when the picture is taken.
2. The intensity of the green shade seems to be amplified with greater ISO. If you look carefully at the ISO color charts, you can visibly see this amplification happening each step up, both in the green swatch as well as the black border. It is also demonstrated with the ISO of the model at 400.

The suggestion on the RAW files is also appreciated and I know where you are coming from. I think the next time I do a buffer test it will be with JPEG only and RAW only.

I am hesitant to use many RAW images for analysis in these comparisons for a few assumptions (which also may be incorrect):

1. Everyone has a different way to process RAW, and in many cases, some people will be more or less effective & creative in processing RAW files than others. The variation you can get between someone who really knows what they are doing in RAW vs someone who doesn't is pretty wide.
2. Even converting the RAW files into JPEGs to display in the video often changes how they look comparatively. 
3. I'm more interested in what the processors are doing in camera, as the typical user (example: soccer mom) wont even use RAW files.

Part of my shooting philosophy is that the more changes you have to make to a camera right out of the box, for example, changing WB for every lighting condition, changing & tweaking picture styles, converting RAW files a certain way is all useful and relevant, but the vast majority of users of these cameras do not want to have to change anything.

They want to open the box, shoot and get results and that is what I try to stick as close to as possible, what the "real world experience" with the camera will be, not so much how someone with an advanced knowledge will be able to "tweak it". I personally do not like changing WB and if I have a camera that requires it, I see this as a disadvantage, so I tend to shoot with AWB on both cameras to see how they differ. If that makes sense.

Im absolutely open to any ideas you guys have in terms of testing, and have implemented many. I really do want to make these tests as high quality as possible, so I certain appreciate your comments & feedback.

M




13
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 70D vs Nikon D7100 Epic Shootout
« on: September 09, 2013, 06:32:47 AM »
Wow thank you so much for your support, everyone. I really appreciate it. Cameras and photography are all I do for a living full time.

When I was first getting started, my training videos were being pirated so frequently that I barely survived, I was selling a couple a month while the files were being distributed everywhere. It was only because of a handful of few honest supporters that also gave me referrals that I was able to survive, so I truly appreciate everyone's support where ever it comes from, so thank you very much!!

The first "epic" video I did on the Canon 6D vs the Nikon D600 took about 6-7 weeks, simply because I had never done anything like it and had to figure out what the best ways were to do things. This last one only took about 10 days, but it was non-stop during those 10 days.

Ive also gotten some important feedback from CR users, so it has been a very much win-win.

I think Rienz you must be very happy with your D7100 and I especially appreciate your support, even if the video may not help you due to your experience- it means a lot to me. The D7100 especially surprised me with its Moire performance and overall image quality. All that said, the 70D is so much FUN to use- just a great shooting experience.

If you guys have any suggestions for future testing I am all ears. I would like to do these videos when I can and make them the very best, reliable I can.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 70D vs Nikon D7100 Epic Shootout
« on: September 08, 2013, 10:16:01 PM »
Thank you Orbits!

15
EOS Bodies / Canon 70D vs Nikon D7100 Epic Shootout
« on: September 08, 2013, 04:03:55 PM »
As promised on my one of my other threads about the 70D (yes the one that got ugly) here are my findings about both cameras. I appreciate all of your inputs and any suggestions for future improvements are welcome, enjoy!

http://youtu.be/bOM4r1gxsbs

The 70D's moire & low light focusing are it's weak points. Wish it had a head phone jack, but other than that....holy wow, the 70D is a GREAT camera. 

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5