March 03, 2015, 06:35:22 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 - Random Orbits

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 97
Lenses / Re: What the better value?
« on: January 12, 2015, 11:35:03 PM »
I've finally saved up some money for a new lens and I wanted to take a little poll.

Would you rather purchase the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM ii, or purchase both the 70-200 f/4 L IS USM and the 100mm f/2.8 L Macro?

The way I see it, with modern ISO performance on FF cameras, f/2.8 isn't as critical as it use to be, but I wanted to read some discussion.


Your signature lists a 7D and an EF-S 10-22, so are you planning on staying with APS-C or moving to FF?  If you plan on staying with the 7D, it is better to go with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II because crop bodies can use all the light they can get.  Even with FF, I'd still recommend the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II over the other option for most users.  And if you have kids or need to shoot events indoors, f/2.8 is the slowest you want to use when the light is low.  Shooting at ISO 6400 and above indoors with f/2.8 already restricts DR and editing latitude significantly.  Having to go to ISO 12800 with an f/4 lens is worse.  So, I'd suggest trying the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II in the store and see if the weight and size suits you.  If it does, I'd opt for that option over the 70-200 f/4 IS + 100L.  You can always get the macro later.   ::)

EOS-M / Re: Why do I keep my Eos M?
« on: January 09, 2015, 03:55:05 PM »
I love my Eos M, and here's how I use it:
1. Dinners, parties and get togethers- a conveniently sized camera that doesn't yell "photographer", is easy to use for someone asked to take the shots (especially as most people on the road seem to prefer an LCD to a viewfinder for composition), cheap enough to give to someone to take the shots, and far better low light capability and IQ than a smartphone or point and shoot.

+1.  Took the M + 22 f/2 and 270ex ii to a surprise dinner for a friend at a fancy restaurant.  The 270ex ii was just powerful enough to be used bounced of the ceiling, and yet I was able to keep the camera and lens in one jacket pocket and the flash in the other.

Canon General / Re: New Gear Resolutions for 2015
« on: January 09, 2015, 01:32:45 PM »
Number 1 is pretty dangerous especially if you already have a lot of lenses (looking for upgrades of the 35L and 50L).

To cast the resolutions is a more positive light:

1.  I will upgrade to the 100-400L II after the price has dropped 10% or more from its inital 2200 price.
2.  I will only considering upgrading the 5DIII to the 5D(whatever) if I get to shoot a wedding gig this year.
3.  I will not spend as much on computer hardware as 2014 (after having 3rd HDD failure in 5 years and having installed a NAS, and upgrading network switches in the house, etc.).

EOS Bodies / Re: 2015 wishlist
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:10:51 PM »
I have full insurance to cover all my gear. But still it would be pita if I lost stuff. On my FB circles I see occasionally people posting about stolen gear. Wouldn't it be nice if those would go away?

Acutance has good point about 3rd party. But I'm not sure if they would dare to do that.

They'd have to figure out how to accomodate the used gear market though.  Seller sells gear but did not "deregister" it first.  Now buyer can't use it because it's registered by someone else.  And if the seller wasn't the user of the gear (i.e. estate sale) and knows the account passwords then it gets more complicated.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III Replacement Talk [CR2]
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:06:22 PM »
I agree the naming is important as the 5 series is the sacred cow. But I dont think Canon ever makes a model badged the 90D.  Sounds way to much like the old Nikon D90.

What happens after the 90D?  Suddenly Canon mid-tier camera is 3 digits, the realm of lower end cameras.

Numerical naming can be tricky - especially long term.

How about A0D?  Just kidding.  Naming the Rebels Txi in the US was a smart move on Canon's part although having the SL1 known as the 100D wasn't such a good move...

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Preparing for the switch
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:01:33 PM »
I prefer and have the 24-70 f/2.8 II.  I take pictures of people and I generally need faster shutter speeds than 1/30s (absolute slowest) to get the shots I want, so IS isn't as important.  Are there times I could have used it?  Absolutely, but the number of those instances are a lot fewer than times that I preferred having f/2.8 rather than a maximum of f/4.

EOS-M / Re: Why do I keep my Eos M?
« on: January 09, 2015, 11:53:49 AM »
I used it for a hike with the 11-22 and sometimes I use it with the 70-200 with a 2x, but my wife uses it more.  She uses it for taking pics of our kids at school events because she is not willing to bring the DSLR.

I use it more as a video cam now.  It is a better videocam than our dedicated 1st generation HD videocam HV20 (sp?  and it recorded to DV tapes) that we got when our first child was born.  I'll use the DSLR for pictures and put the M on a monopod/tripod to take videos of the kids performances.  I've used the 24-70 on the M with the adaptor to record video while having the 70-200 on the DSLR.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samyang/Rokinon vs. straight lines.
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:03:03 AM »
Take a look at Dustin's review.  He likes it.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: POLL: Do you need 1/8000s shutter speed?
« on: January 07, 2015, 08:47:38 AM »
I wish the 6d had it.if you want to shoot the 50l wide open (that's the reason you buy it) in bright daylight  you have to use a nd filter.

But then again, just having one stop faster shutter wouldn't save you and you'd have to use a nd filter anyway?

Many times it is just enough.  I did a similar thing at the beach, and I had to put on the CP and drop the ISO to 50 to get it into min shutter time of the camera.  Sometimes the highlights are still blown slightly, but it's better than blowing out the midtones.

Lenses / Re: Canon 28-300L 'super-zoom'
« on: January 07, 2015, 08:12:13 AM »
I'd only consider the 28-300L if you really can't change lenses where you intend to use it and need the focal length range.  If you're considering covering that range with the fewest lenses possible, you might consider a 24-70 f/4 IS or 24-105 f/4 IS paired with a 70-300L.  The combo will cost less, weigh less and provide better IQ.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: POLL: Do you need 1/8000s shutter speed?
« on: January 06, 2015, 09:00:05 PM »
For 2013 and 2014, I've used 1/8000 0.7% of the time.  Combined 1/4000 + 1/5000 + 1/8000 is about 3% of the time.  I almost always shoot using Av, so I'm setting up for freezing action for subjects in the shade, and then shoot something under direct sun, the shutter speed will get up there.  Most popular ISO that it happens at is 400, although it still happens quite a bit at ISO 100, especially with fast lenses.

I'd bring the 6D + 16-35 f/4 IS + 50 f/1.8.  Unless you know you'll need the tripod for a specific shot, you might consider leaving that at home as well.  If you're staying in the cities, then the wider focal lengths will be more useful than the longer ones.  In cities, I tend to favor the 16-35 over the 70-xxx range.  The 50 f/1.8 is nice for available light, indoor scenarios, etc.

I have a "standard" travel kit of 16-35/50/70-xxx, but "standard" doesn't apply very often.  It's the starting point to figure out what to bring but is rarely brought.  The ultrawide zoom or telezoom might be dropped, but I almost always bring a fast prime either for more artistic shots or for low light.

Whatever you do, insure the gear that would be costly to replace (i.e. 6D, 16-35 f/4 IS).  The peace of mind far outweighs the insurance cost.

The IQ differences are not big enough to be a prime differentiator between the three lenses, so you're looking at cost, focal length range, weight and constant maximum aperture.  I have the 70-300L and the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, and for outdoor travel, the 70-300L is a good choice.  It is about 0.5 lb heavier (about the weight of 1.4x III) than the the 70-200 lenses you're considering, but it goes to 300mm.  What you get with the 70-300L is very good IQ in a compact size that handles well.  It's fatter but shorter than the 70-200 lenses, which may make it easier to pack depending on what type of bag you're using (vertical storage vs. horizontal).  So, if you intend to use the 200-300mm range much, then the 70-300L makes more sense than the 70-200 f/4 + 1.4x.  The 70-300L will weigh about the same, handle easier (more compact at shorter FLs), be easier to pack, and would not require fiddling with extenders.

Lenses / Re: buying advice: get a 135mm f2, or use existing 70-200mm f2.8?
« on: December 25, 2014, 10:16:24 PM »
For sports and general use, I choose the 70-200 f/2.8 over the 135.  The convenience of the focal length range wins out.  For portraits or for low light events (if the focal length suits the venue), the 135 will be chosen.  The 70-200 is is one my two most use lenses, the 135 is not.  The 135 has better bokeh (smoother, less nervous) and the extra stop can be helpful.  But really what it comes down to, is whether your money would be better spent on a 135 or the next piece of kit that you'd be interested in.  For most, getting a lens that expands the focal length range is more useful that a more specialized lens that would get periodic use, but it really depends on you.

Software & Accessories / Re: Lightroom and DXO OpticsPro workflow question
« on: December 22, 2014, 10:50:27 AM »
After playing with it on about 100 pics over the weekend, I like some of the things that OpticsPro does, but I'd still rather do most of the editing in LR.  Where is shines is denoising (Prime) and then lifting the shadows locally in LR.  I don't like the preview in Optics Pro.  The pics look flat The denoising preview was a bit different than what it produced, so it took a while to play with the settings to get what I was looking for, and since it takes about 2 minutes to process a file, it took a while.  In batch, the average time drops because it processes multiple files at once.  I guess I'll use it for processing high ISO pics esp. those that require lifting the exposure or subrange quite a bit.

I have yet to play with the volumetric correction using wide angle lenses.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 97