October 22, 2014, 10:30:03 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 - Gcon

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8
Time to settle this once and for all.

The reason why they build GPS into the camera bodies is primarily because of countries like China and North Korea. They don't like GPS built in, and don't allow the sale, so they don't.

With point and shoot cameras - they make "for China" and "for the rest of the (free) world" models. For top end DSLRs, they can't justify the expense of having two models - a GPS-enabled one, and a GPS-crippled one. So they don't - they just put it as an accessory and not sell the accessory in China.

I for one like the accessory in that it doesn't drain the main battery. I can just switch it on when I need it. Granted - it would be nice to have it like an iPhone and I could turn it on/off via software.

Lenses / Re: A Brief Hands On: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II
« on: May 27, 2012, 08:29:41 AM »
I went to the PMA exhibition in Melbourne today and got to play with the new 24-70mm f/2.8 II USM and I gotta say I was really impressed with the size, build quality and focus speed. Can't comment on IQ ans I couldn't take images away.

If you look here http://camerasize.com/compact/#312.289,312.286,ha,t  they have it wrong - the mark I is about right, but the mark II - there's no way it was that big next to the mark I.  I took my mark I lens in with me and held the two size by side and the mark II is substantially smaller and lighter, which put a big smile on my face, as I find the mark I just a bit too big and bloated - especially the fat lip at the end. The mark II seemed just right - like a 24-105mm - very nicely balanced on the 5D3 body (no I don't work for Canon!!)

Some other observations:

1. Hood. Damn I love the lock-in hood! I've shot weddings where my mark I hood has turned a little (mine's very loose) and I've got the black hood in the corners. The mark II hood snaps in with the same firmness as the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II USM - inspires confidence.

I do like the smaller hood immensely. I shoot landscapes with filters a lot without hoods and find that flaring is very rarely a problem. I think with this hood - sure it won't be as deep as the mark I but in reality - I can't see that as being a problem at all.

The only time that I prefer the old hood is when it's raining - the front element has greater protection, as does the lens extension barrel.

2. Focusing. zing! super fast! Really though I don't know how much of that was the 5D3 though. I wasn't allowed to put the new lens on my 5d2.
When comparing side by side, the old lens focus has a lot greater distance from 1.5m to 3.0m to infinity.  I'd roughly put it at 1.5 times the turning amount to go from 1m to infinity on the old lens. The new lens - gonna make it a bit harder for manual focusing hitting the right hyper-focal distance as the markings are so close, but the trade off is most-likely to be the faster autofocus.

3. Build quality - no complaints. The big amount of rubber is nice to handle.

4. zoom feel. The old lens feels loose-ish around 70mm and tightens around 30mm and requires a bit more force to twist it to 24mm, whereas the new lens feels more even in tension throughout the zoom range.

Not sure what else I can tell you. If it was a choice of saving size and weight with no IS, or keeping the same size and weight and adding IS, I'm glad they went with no IS and gave me the weight and bulk saving that I'm really happy with. (remember IS does nothing for a moving subject!). To keep everyone happy, they really should release an IS version of this lens though.

It'll make for a great all-rounder lens. I think it will be fine for street. Not as good as a 50mm f/1.2 or 85mm f/1.2, but a lot better than the 24-70mm mark I due to the smaller size, which makes it easier to whip out of the shoulder bag.

7D is a great body but just has a horrible sensor. If they improve the sensor to remove more noise, it'd be a great little bit of kit.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The 5D Mark III Fix
« on: May 03, 2012, 03:52:40 AM »
Now I know why they didn't call it the 5DX - it was missing that black-tape X-factor. People should be thankful that they are getting this 5DX upgrade for free!

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5D Mark III Light Leak Resolution (Canon USA)
« on: April 24, 2012, 03:31:47 AM »
I was going to buy a 5D3 straight up, but now I think I'll let it mature a bit with firmware and also for the hardware fix for this issue to flow through as I don't want a “xxxxx1xxxxxx” or “xxxxx2xxxxxx”  serial number body.

I'll keep an eye on the forums for when stocks of newer bodies show up in shops and then order then. I've got a massive month of shooting in August, so will look to buy in mid August. 3 months will hopefully be enough time to flush out these "non-issue light leak" bodies.

Lenses / Re: Lenses: 35L II & 85L III Next Up? [CR1]
« on: April 24, 2012, 03:27:35 AM »
Canon are pushing to get all their L lenses, with the exception of the L-series TS-E lenses, updated to fully weather sealed specification.

The Tilt shifts will never be weather sealed due to their design.   All the others will be though.

Thus, the current L 35mm and 85mm will be updated again, and include weather sealing.  The 35mm will also get rounded aperture blades, which is another L-series feature that Canon are pushing, and for good reason - it creates smoother bokeh.

EOS Bodies / Re: The Big Megapixel Body in 2013?
« on: April 19, 2012, 05:39:27 AM »
nikon just announced a 24 MP aps-c camera.

nikon and canon have truly switched paradigmas in only 1 year....


OMG! 24MP in a crop sensor - where will this madness end?! For me personally - the 18MP in the 7D is too much for the amount of noise I like. I prefer my crop bodies in the 12-15MP range. Preferably 12MP like the Nikon D300.  It's ironic that their bottom-of-the-line (excluding D3100) is now 24MP crop sensor, and their top-of-the-line is D4 is 16MP full-frame.

As for the topic at hand - I'd love a 35MP full-frame Canon sometime next year. It could shoot 2 frames a second and I'd be fine with that. As long as it has high DR, high color depth, and low noise at base ISO (100) it would become my go-to body for landscapes. I'd still have at least one 5D3 for weddings, events, sports and travel. It wouldn't want to be any more expensive that a 5D3 or D800 though.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Delayed Again? [CR2]
« on: March 30, 2012, 07:14:37 PM »
Nooooooooooooooo!  Given I am not a CPS member and that B&H has already charged my card in full (international order) this mean I already paid for the camera and may not even get it before July! (after CPS!)

 :-[ :-[ :-[

What the hell?! Those grubby b@stards! I use Digital Camera Warehouse and love them - they only ever charge my card on shipping.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Delayed Again? [CR2]
« on: March 30, 2012, 07:12:13 PM »
Is it just me, or is that pushing perilously close to the Summer Olympics?

Not just you - that's the first thing I thought of. Not much time for sports photogs to get them and test them with their lenses and get familiar with the gear.  Just 118 days to go: http://www.london2012.com/

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: A Nikonian Reviews the Canon 5D Mark III
« on: March 30, 2012, 03:22:19 AM »
Great review. I found the description of "pushed" exposures the most valuable bit. I don't expect perfection from either camera and I still plan on getting the 5DIII!

250k frames per year! whoa, no wonder his photography is at such a level.

Thanks again for sharing.

Yeah it's huge! He must outsource his processing!

Lenses / Re: Patent: A new 16-35 f/2.8 or Faster Concept?
« on: March 30, 2012, 03:20:14 AM »
16-35 f/2.8 - happy with that. Make it punchy and sharp like the 24-70 f/2.8L II, and keep the 82mm thread.

17-35 f/2.8-4 - God no! No variable aperture please!

16-35 f/2-2.8 - See above although this one is nicer than 17-35 f/2.8-4.

high-ISO abilities of the 5D3 negate the need for this wide apertures somewhat for faster shutter speeds, and I'd rather be stopped down a bit so focus isn't as hard to nail.

This is good news in any case.  Looking forward to the 16-35mm f/2.8L III.   Third time's a charm!

EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II? [CR1]
« on: March 27, 2012, 04:00:22 AM »
For all those 7D fanboys who got all up in my grill earlier in this thread because I said the 7D noise is horrible compared to the 5DII (and then made themselves feel better by -rep'ing me), I wasn't talking out my backside.

You can clearly see here:

Click on the ISO100's and you'll see the difference. That the 7D has quite a fair bit of noise, even at base ISO100.  Look at all those grey areas - they all look pretty grainy to me. No click on 5DMarkII - much cleaner. That was readily apparent to me in real world tests with the naked eye, well before I saw this link.

Seriously - being objective and telling a 7D owner that their image sensor is inferior to a full frame is like telling a religious zealot in a strange cult that their God doesn't exist. Some people seriously need to get over themselves and realize it's just a camera, and not an extension of their ego.

If there is a 7D mark II, then hopefully they take a leaf out of the D800's book - Nikon managed to do some really good work at high pixel densities, with a lot less noise than that at base ISO.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Distagon 15 f/2.8 ZE Official
« on: March 17, 2012, 11:49:12 AM »
It takes screw in filters, but with the built in lens hood it doesn't look like you can use ND grads, etc.

That's what I was thinking. I actually got mildly excited about this lens before I realised the metal hood can't be detached (unlike the plastic hood of the 8-15mm L fisheye).

I'll make do with the 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM, until which time that Canon updates their wide-angle offerings sometime in the next 12-18 months.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark III Manual Online
« on: March 16, 2012, 08:07:24 PM »
It's interesting that my Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM can only use a single double-cross AF point (group B lens), and that my Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM can't use *any* double-cross AF points (group C lens). Both of these are fairly recent EOS lenses, and I was led to believe that the five centre double-cross AF points were usable with f/2.8 or wider maximum-aperture lenses.

For the case of the macro - it must be due to the really close focusing distances. Still, it should enable group A functionality from 0.5-infinity, and group C from 0.3-0.5, but I guess it defaults to the lowest common denominator. Since I don't shoot sports or track subjects with this lens, it's a moot point really.

For the case of the 24-70, I wouldn't be surprised if the reverse zoom mechanism has something to do with making it a group B lens and not a group A lens. Unfortunately the 5DIII manual doesn't mention what group the new Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM lens is in, although I'd be very surprised if it wasn't a group A lens. Since I'll be upgrading to the version II lens, I can live with this. I do use this lens for some sports work (on the second body) so it's important to me.

EOS Bodies / Re: The Megapixels are Coming [CR1]
« on: March 15, 2012, 03:08:35 AM »
A 28MP APS-C sensor?   ewwww.

I'd love their new wide-angle zoom. If it could match the MFT goodness of the new 24-70 then it's going to be one wicked zoom.

I'm going to get two 5D3's (should hopefully have one next week). That'll do me for everything I do including landscapes. Once I've got all the lenses I could possibly want, and then want to blow away some cash on a third body, I'd be mildly tempted by a 36MP full-frame monster, although at that stage I'd probably be more interested in medium-format digital.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8