July 30, 2014, 01:19:24 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 - privatebydesign

Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 ... 139
451
Software & Accessories / Re: Advice requested re travel tripods
« on: April 25, 2014, 11:02:46 PM »
You all probably know this, but ... always pack your tripod in a checked bag when flying. If you carry it on by itself or in your carry-on bag, it will be viewed as a threat (a "club" specifically) and it will not be allowed. Domestic or international - same thing.

This depends on the airline and (I'm guessing) the discretion of the person doing the screening.

I've flown more than once with my MePHOTO in my backpack.   :D

But you've got a point. I haven't really had a "PLAN B" in case they disallowed it.

I have flown all over the world with a tripod as carry on, alone, on the outside of a bag, and inside a backpack. Never had an issue, well once in Japan they measured it but it was well under the regulation 100cm in length. That includes into and out of the USA, where TSA are prone to overreach at any opportunity. I think you might have just got an over enthusiastic agent, how did you get the tripod to Italy?

452
I know I'm the minority here, but I still believe SMALLER NUMBER OF PIXEL large size enables better performance at high ISO. ??? I understand that the "down convert" 36 megapixel functions as a kind of noise reduction. However, until now no one could convince me that 36 megapixel "down convert" to 12, will have less noise than other sensor the same size, with 12 megapixel native. ::)

So what to cameras and what iso settings do you have in mind?

I defend the idea that Canon continues to make new camera models "low resolution" as 12 or 15 megapixel, using updated technology. ??? I think that with current technology, a 12 megapixel camera at ISO 25600 would have performance much better than the old 5D original had at ISO 3200.

Canute sat on his throne and commanded the sea to not wet his feet too.......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Canute_and_the_waves
But if you have two current cameras in mind then let us know.

Sony manufactures 36 megapixel full frame sensor, and also 12 megapixel. They are designed for very different purposes from one another. Which one will be the biggest sales success? Sony A7R or else A7S? Maybe none of them. But it's good to have options to choose from. I will not buy Sony A7S because I have too much money invested in Canon lenses and accessories, but it is tempting to see what you can do with a 12 megapixel sensor with current technology.


Which one will sell more is a completely different subject from your belief that "SMALLER NUMBER OF PIXEL large size enables better performance at high ISO.", isn't it?

453
I know I'm the minority here, but I still believe SMALLER NUMBER OF PIXEL large size enables better performance at high ISO. ??? I understand that the "down convert" 36 megapixel functions as a kind of noise reduction. However, until now no one could convince me that 36 megapixel "down convert" to 12, will have less noise than other sensor the same size, with 12 megapixel native. ::)

So what to cameras and what iso settings do you have in mind?

I defend the idea that Canon continues to make new camera models "low resolution" as 12 or 15 megapixel, using updated technology. ??? I think that with current technology, a 12 megapixel camera at ISO 25600 would have performance much better than the old 5D original had at ISO 3200.


Canute sat on his throne and commanded the sea to not wet his feet too.......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Canute_and_the_waves

But if you have two current cameras in mind then let us know.

454
I know I'm the minority here, but I still believe SMALLER NUMBER OF PIXEL large size enables better performance at high ISO. ??? I understand that the "down convert" 36 megapixel functions as a kind of noise reduction. However, until now no one could convince me that 36 megapixel "down convert" to 12, will have less noise than other sensor the same size, with 12 megapixel native. ::)

So what to cameras and what iso settings do you have in mind?

455
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« on: April 24, 2014, 03:11:52 PM »
I do not know why so many people hate this lens... I love it! I don't care what Sigma or what ever present, that 1.2L Glas is so damn lovely! <3
Shot on a 5D Lr + Ps for Skin. (all at 1.2, except the last one at 1.4)

The problem with "examples" like that is they are post process driven, I could give an image shot taken with any 50mm lens at any aperture (at the same shoot) to a decent post processor and get them to look very similar.

456
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: FUJIFILM'S latest, X-T1 ?
« on: April 24, 2014, 08:35:13 AM »
One day after making the previous post, the camera store called and said my X-T1 had arrived. I've been playing with it for eight days now (two of which were in pouring rain), using my old Asahi Takumar lenses as my only lenses, i.e. MF all the way. My assessment, seeing that this is a forum dedicated to Canon gear, and you may freely quote me, is simply: "Goodbye Canon."

Bye.

457
Lenses / Re: New TS-E Lenses for Photokina [CR2]
« on: April 23, 2014, 07:40:51 PM »

Photo Credit, hotlinked from hartblei.de


Holy moly, that's cool!  And EXPENSIVE!


And next to pointless..............

458
EOS Bodies / Re: 1d IV vs. 7D II
« on: April 22, 2014, 05:00:24 PM »

You dont get it, do you?



Oh yes, I get it, but you obviously didn't. I am calling you out and asking for actual images of yours that support your theory. And now note you arlimiting the comparison to focal length limited situations, which isn't particularly valid most of the time for most people.


Read my posts again and look forposts where I did not clearly said the example is  for reach limited situations.


Read my posts again and show me an example of what you believe you are seeing, that the 7D outperforms the 1D MkIV in focal length limited situations, because the crops of yours I have seen support completely the opposite.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=18368.msg342370#msg342370

459
Reviews / Re: Review: Canon 1V HS
« on: April 22, 2014, 03:32:48 PM »
I'm putting my two, both with very low roll counts, boxes, papers and all, on eBay in the next week or so. I love the idea of having them more than I end up using them, I got them new years ago but very soon after got rolled up by the digital wave, they sat in my bags as backups for years and then were relegated to the gear box, but I just don't have a use for them now.

Crazy but true that such good cameras are sidelined.

460
Canon General / Re: $10,000
« on: April 22, 2014, 12:30:32 PM »
Same as my current setup ;)

Er that would be $30,000, not $10,000

461
EOS Bodies / Re: 1d IV vs. 7D II
« on: April 22, 2014, 12:12:33 PM »
Such a pasionate debate over the relative merits of an obsolete camera against an imaginary camera.....

I imagine that the imaginary camera will be superior in every way.... therefore the imaginary camera wins...  :)

Don, I was happy to leave well alone until they starting comparing two actual cameras. I have no interest in speculation about a 7D MkII.

Yeah....

The problem with comparing two cameras is that there will be some things camera A does better than Camera B, and some things Camera B does better than camera A.... and some things equal. Which one is better depends on your priorities so the debate can continue forever without resolution... plus, the thread was a comparison to an imaginary camera, one that will be a lot closer to 70D specs than 7D specs..... so if they are going to pick an actual camera to compare against, why not the 70D?

I didn't pick either of them, nor the specific aspect of that comparison. Ergonomics for example can be argued until the cows come home, and then some, but a specific claim of comparative noise and resolution from somebody claiming to be familiar with both cameras should be easy to post their own actual images illustrating that. I am a bit of a loudmouth here sometimes, and to those who don't like that approach I apologise, but I regularly post images that illustrate and support my assertions.

If the comment had been about a 70D I would not have been drawn in as I have no experience with one.

462
EOS Bodies / Re: 1d IV vs. 7D II
« on: April 22, 2014, 11:05:57 AM »
Such a pasionate debate over the relative merits of an obsolete camera against an imaginary camera.....

I imagine that the imaginary camera will be superior in every way.... therefore the imaginary camera wins...  :)

Don, I was happy to leave well alone until they starting comparing two actual cameras. I have no interest in speculation about a 7D MkII.

463
EOS Bodies / Re: 1d IV vs. 7D II
« on: April 22, 2014, 11:04:44 AM »

You dont get it, do you?


Oh yes, I get it, but you obviously didn't. I am calling you out and asking for actual images of yours that support your theory. And now note you arlimiting the comparison to focal length limited situations, which isn't particularly valid most of the time for most people.

464
Canon General / Re: $10,000
« on: April 22, 2014, 09:12:36 AM »
I wouldn't buy anything but the flashes and cards new.

5D MkIII
Grip, batteries, cards etc.
15mm fisheye
16-35 MkII
24-70 MkII
70-200 f2.8 IS MkII
100mm Macro L
50 f1.4 or 85 f1.8
600-EX-RT X2
ST-E3-RT
Manfrotto 055CXPro3
Arcratech GP Ballhead
ThinkTank Airport International to put it all in

465
EOS Bodies / Re: 1d IV vs. 7D II
« on: April 22, 2014, 08:35:01 AM »
Typically I bring both cameras in the field, if possible. However, if I have to choose one it will be the 7d. Thats because the extra pixels on the subject gives me more details and less noise after pp and downsampling of the 7d crop to the same images crop  as 1d4.

Haha, what?  I've had both and the 1DIV is vastly superior in every way -  IQ, AF (especially tracking AF), noise handling, etc + I can crop deeper into a mkIV image without it turning into a noisy mess than I ever could with my 7D.  The 7D is useless past ISO 800 imo if you intend to crop at all, which, if you are shooting birds, you will be 99.995% of the time.  When I first got my 1DIV I was positively giddy at how much better the images were to work with and how much better they look.  Whatever small advantage can be gained with the crop factor is absolutely steamrolled by every other aspect of the APS-H and the 1D body.

Actually, the one thing I really do miss about the 7D is the precision center AF point.  That was pretty badass.  I don't miss how it dropped focus every other frame in servo mode, however.
Sounds like you are shooting jpg only.  ;)
To compensate for the higher amont of pixels on the subject you need to put a extra tc on the lens on 1d4.
This will cancel out the one stop iso advantage 1d4 has vs 7d.
Also the af will be slower due 1 stop slower lens (with tc).
If You are in a reach limited situation with the 500mm + tc's and the two bodys, what combination would you use?
1d4 + 2x tc or 7d+1.4tc?
The 7d combo will win regarding details and AF speed. Noise will be equal.
Maybe you would stick with 1d4 +1.4 tc. In this case the 1d4 af will be better.  7d will have better details but more noise. However, you can easily pp the more detailed image from 7d and then downsample to show same subject size at 1d4. Again, the 7d will win. At least for isos up to somewhere betwen 1600 and 3200.

You said spot af is the only thing you miss from 7d. What about a quick way of change shooting setup from BIF mode to static mode? If you are a birder and dont miss that, I doubt you seriously have used these bodys. Or maybe you can give me a good tip ;)

You are making two different arguments and neither tally with real world use.

First you say you the 7D has "the extra pixels on the subject gives me more details and less noise after pp and downsampling", then you say "To compensate for the higher amont of pixels on the subject you need to put a extra tc on the lens on 1d4."

But your assumption, one I have found normally propagated by people who don't actually have the gear, is that all pixels are equal, are you seriously trying to tell us a 7D pixel is worth exactly the same as a 1D MkIV pixel? Because that is what you have said, and it is not true.

Market forces determine camera output, it is funny but true just look at the drop in value of the 1D MkIII since the 5D MkIII came out, a 7D can be had for $600 -$900, the 1D MkIV is still around $2,500.

So would you mind showing us a couple of your images that illustrate your conclusions?

Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 ... 139