October 20, 2014, 05:10:17 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 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 92
406
CPS is aimed for Professionals, and i'm sure if they were to find out that you were not a professional, you could lose your status.  Being both a professional and a CPS member, i find threads like these kind of sad, but, for those who take advantage and bend the rules for your own gain, karma always comes back around...

What is sad are posts like these as they appear to be judgmental and pompous. What, may I ask are the criteria for being a "professional?" Where is the line drawn? Primary source of income? Your main job? How many gigs you've done? How often someone has paid for an image of yours? The level of ambiguity to this determination is huge to an extent to which I don't believe you have given any thought.

I don't quite understand how anyone is taking advantage or bending the rules. I'm quite certain that if Canon/CPS was overly concerned about making their memberships exclusive only to high level pros, they would do so. I tend to believe based on the way things are set up that they are really only concerned about whether you have spent enough money on their stuff.

I have a career which pays me very well which allows me to have the luxury of owning a lot of gear without having to do photography as a job. I do paid gigs for fun here and there and have plenty of gear which doesn't all necessarily get used on those jobs. Does that make me not a professional? Am I not qualified to get my equipment worked on?

Canon sells products and provides a way for you to get them serviced which also costs money. Who is anyone to tell another photog they shouldn't be allowed to have membership if they are willing to pay the money for both?

I'm pretty sure there is a higher likelihood of running into some bad karma when you are being wrongfully judgmental of others and/or being full of yourself.

Well, professional is somewhat defined on the US Canon website (see below).   Full-time is a pretty high bar and would exclude you and me.

Canon Professional Services (CPS) provides exceptional benefits for individual full-time imaging professionals. CPS members receive exclusive phone and e-mail support, expedited and discounted services and repairs, equipment evaluation loans, service loans, on-site support at select events and shows, plus discounts on Canon Live Learning workshops, and more.

407
Lenses / Re: DXOMark: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Reviewed
« on: December 17, 2013, 04:37:57 PM »
Yeah, it only undercuts the Canon because DxO still has the 24-105 costing 1250, which is far above its current street price.  It may be a slightly better than Canon's 24-105, but with the Canon version selling at 600-700, the Sigma isn't quite the bargain as when the Canon sold at 1250.

408
Without trying to be offensive, I often find myself mystified by customers who develop an almost religious faith in brands.  "If The Company did it, it must  be right."  Why?  Why recognize mistakes and press for improvements?

And who are these "customers who develop an almost religious faith in brands"?

Yes, I understand your point, but there are also a lot of others (not you) and a lot of threads already that basically come down to "I want a 5DIII at a 6D or a 70D price" or "I want a FF mirrorless with an EVF that servo AF that is as good as a 5D III for less than a 6D price), which is either not economically feasible for now or would lead to less total profit for Canon over the long term.  And it is long term profits that matter because that is how R&D budgets get planned 3-5 years in advance.  Canon is a stable company and there is a lot of value in that.  I have a lot more faith in Canon being in the camera business 5 years from now than Sony.

FWIW, I started with with film with a Pentax but found their lens selection too limiting.  My first digital camera was a Nikon.  I preferred Nikon's flash system to Canon's (until the RT system), but I switched to Canon because of the 20D.  I used a 5D II for everything, including sports and it worked (center point and crop).  I don't think the 6D is as crippled as you are saying because the 6D's AF is still better than the 5D II's, especially the outer points.  The 5D III solved almost all the things that I found deficient in the 5D II, and a lot of people did a lot of great photography with the 5D II.

The 5D II was an improvement on the 5D an the 5D III is an improvement on the 5D II.  The cameras evolve, but as I stated before, they are evolving in response to the changing market.  I am sure the that next wave of 1D/5D/6D will have a different set of features and differentiators as they do now, just as the 5D III had to improved AF-wise to accomodate the 6D.  No one expected the AF of the 5D III to be that close to the 1DX's.  The 6D has been designed and is selling.  I thought it was smart move for Canon to design something that could go lower than the 1800-2000 that the 5D II was selling at near the end of its life, and I'm guessing that the 6D's price could fall even farther and Canon could still be profitable.  Canon is doing better compared to its peers, which suggests it's getting more things right than not.  You and I individually do not affect marketing and engineering decisions.  Unfortunately, the design and feature set that will satisfy the most potential customers may still not be attractive to millions of other customers, of which you and I might be among.  You and I might not like a company's decision, but that does not make the decision that the company made wrong.

409
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 70D or Refurb MK II?
« on: December 17, 2013, 08:12:56 AM »
With that, my final end all question has to be,

Is it better to go with the 70D ($949 at BH) with a couple of quality lenses, or do I jump straight into Full Frame with the 6D ($1500 at BH) with maybe the ability to buy a fast prime like the 50mm 1.4?

Unless you plan on shooting at or above ISO 3200 regularly, I would go with the 70D + lenses, unless you already have a bunch of compatible lenses with FF.  You had stated that this will be your first dSLR but are you coming from a P&S and don't have any lenses or are you coming from a film SLR with a bag full of lenses?  30% video usage is a lot and the 70D wins there.

If you don't have any lenses right now, I would suggest the 70D + lenses. That will allow you to get some lenses to cover all your shooting interests.  And if you intend on having money to upgrade the setup in the future, then it might make sense to get lenses that will work on both FF and APS-C.

410
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Advice on getting a landscape setup!
« on: December 17, 2013, 07:52:25 AM »
The 10-22 might be slightly better in the corners than your 10-20, but if you're looking for significant improvement, then FF + a top shelf lens will be it but it'll cost a lot of money.  The 6D would work, but the Samyang 24 TS and 17-40 are both soft wide open.

What I would suggest is improving your technique rather than ugrading your gear.  Assuming that you already have a tripod, I would get a nodal slide/pano setup.  That will allow you to use a longer focal length lens and to get more pixels on target by stitching.  Stitching won't work for all subjects but a good stitch with a modest body and lens will easily beat a single non-stitched image from FF with the best lens.

Lighting (or waiting for good light) and postprocessing are bigger factors for making landscapes shots standout, and stitching will give you better details and allow you to print much larger.

411
Perfectly obvious Canon dropped the ball with the 6D, giving it weaker AF than the 60D.  Canon makes mistakes and should be called on them, just as they should be praised for the many cameras they get so wonderfully right.

Note that I don't call the AF issue a mistake simply because I have to pay more for a FF with good AF.  Putting the weak system in the entry level FF was a blunder because Canon needs dSLR customers committed to its entire eos/ef system.  Ticking off current customers looking to upgrade to FF was bad business, as was turning off prospective customers comparing Canon's offerings to those of other companies.  If Canon had simply equaled the xxD line's AF in an entry level FF, they'd have had more customers coming in and more customers with ef-s lenses looking to buy new lenses for their FF.  But Canon was shortsighted, stingy, and over protective of the 5DIII, which was simply out of range for a great many enthusiasts.

We have members of the press in the USA who reflexively cover for their favorite politicians no matter how outlandish the lies or harmful the policies.  But you know what?  Those journalists get paid for their sophistry.

Seriously?  Canon knew what it was doing when it spec'ed out the 6D -- they did not drop the ball.  Dropping the ball implies it was done by negligence or laziness and Canon intentionally chose an AF system for the 6D to be what it is.  Canon has traditionally used AF as a discriminator across camera models, and the 6D is no different.  This is marketing.  Why would you put 90% of the features into a camera that you'd charge 50% less?  The 6D's AF is better than the 5D II's, and the 6D is more sensitive to light than the 5D III and has signficant features that the 5D III lacks -- GPS and wifi.  If Canon hadn't planned on a 6D, there is no way that the 5D III would have a similar AF system as the 1DX.  Canon chose to give the 6D a more advanced sensor, wifi and GPS or would you rather that Canon would have made the 6D without wifi and GPS and with a worse sensor but with better AF?  You might have opted for the second option, but their marketing research guided their decision for the first option.

412
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 70D or Refurb MK II?
« on: December 16, 2013, 11:24:15 PM »
Now that you bring up that point, and seeing how the 6D is $1500 on B&H, I'm very tempted. Even though I do Concerts, I feel as though there isn't AS MUCH movement as something like wildlife/sports which I will never be shooting. So as long as the 6D can be a competitor for Concerts, I think it might be the way to go.

It should be fine.  Lateral movement at a far distance is not challenging AF-wise.  What is hard is when the target is moving erratically and is closer.  I used the 5D II for kids soccer and the AF worked OK.  Is the 5D III better?  Yes, but I got plenty of good images with the 5D II, and the 6D is more accurate than the 5D II.  Using the 5D II with fast primes with the outer parts when the subject was close (thin DOF) was asking for trouble.  The outer focus points on the 5D III are much better.  The 6D's aren't as good, but they're better than the 5D II.  Part of the photographer's task is knowing the limit of his equipment.

413
EOS Bodies / Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« on: December 16, 2013, 01:37:33 PM »
...

PS: This could be the reason why Canon tries to cripple or limit EOS M and its EF-M lenses and will be the last camera maker to release mirrorless FF. The situation with EOS M is not like with usual DSLR APS-C users, the chances that new users of small and tiny EOS M will ever purchase EF-EOS M adapter and EF-S or EF lenses (including big whites) are close to zero -- these are just too large for this camera...

Perhaps true for those that don't already own a EOS camera, but probably not for those that do.  For those that do, the M serves as a more portable solution that can be used in a pinch with other EOS lenses.  The 11-22/20/18-55 setup would be about as far as I'd take the M setup -- a compact travel kit. 

414
Software & Accessories / Re: Tripod Advice for Landscapes with Big Stopper
« on: December 16, 2013, 01:27:35 PM »
I'm 5' 8" and use the TVC-24L with the BH 55m, and it works well.  Most times, I can get away with not extending the last leg section, but in comes in handy on sloped terrain.  I've had no problems using it up to a 70-200II + 2x.  I'd like to try heavier lenses on it, but I haven't had the chance to, but I'm sure it can handle much heavier loads just as easily.

415
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS
« on: December 16, 2013, 01:20:24 PM »
Does weather sealing really even work on this or any other pumper/extending type zoom lens? It has to let air in somewhere.

Weathersealing is one of those concepts that is really hard to measure.  There are no universally accepted metrics about the extent of weathersealing. Weathersealing does not mean weatherproof.

I take any "weathersealing" with several large grains of salt.

I don't think the Sigma 24-105 is marketed for Canon users.  I think that Nikon users will be more interested in this as they don't have a simular specced lens.

+1.  I hate the term "weathersealing" too.  Weather-resistant or water resistent would be better.  With the term weathersealing, some people assume that the lenses are airtight, which they are not.

416
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
« on: December 13, 2013, 11:52:40 AM »
All this drivel about "Canon wants to protect their customers from bogeyman" is just that: drivel. And to some of these "if you spend x000 $ on camera gear, why be cheap when spending y00 $ on batteries": I really shouldn't have to answer to Canon or anyone why I make a purchasing decision, and Canon should be the very last one to slap my wrist after all the money I have spent on their gear.

You can choose to buy Canon or 3rd party equipment as you would like.  Just don't expect Canon to care about maintaining 3rd party compatibility.  You make your choice that is best for you, and Canon will make the best choice for itself.  Canon doesn't owe anything to 3rd party equipment manufacturers, but it does have a vested interest to make sure that all Canon stuff plays nicely together.

You got your benefit in a lower price upfront by going with a third party manufacturer, who sells at a discounted price to offset the risk.  After all, who'd buy a third party part if it was the same price as Canon's?  And clearly you have not spent enough on Canon gear else you wouldn't have any 3rd party equipment.   ::)

417
Lenses / Re: 24 f2.8 IS or 28 f2.8 IS ???
« on: December 13, 2013, 09:02:45 AM »
If you're considering a three lens kit, then the 24/35/50 is a bit more natural than a (24 or 28)/40/50.

For architecture, a 16/17 lens is useful indoors and a 24 is useful for larger rooms and buildings, which favors your 17-40.  If you're going for architecture, I'd suggest bringing your 17-40 over getting another lens even though it is a bit larger than what you're considering.  The 17-40 will also be more flexible for landscapes.

For street, I prefer a 35 if I'm only going to use one lens.  If you opt for the 35 f/2 IS, then you might be able to leave your 50 at home a lot of the time because f/2 would also work well in low light situations.  You might want to consider swapping the 40 for the 35 f/2 IS, and seeing if that one lens will satisfy your needs for street photography.  If you need wider, then you can consider the 24 f/2.8 IS and if you need longer, then bring along your 50 f/1.4.

FWIW, I recently picked up the 28 f/2.8 IS.  It's nice:  the colors are good and it's sharp enough.  The IS is less useful than I thought it would be.  I need to drop the shutter speed a lot before I can see IS making much of a difference (i.e. 1/15 or slower, at 1/30 I'm getting similar IS on/off results).  I chose the 28 because I have plenty of options at 24/35/50 and I got it during a sale for 350.

418
Lenses / Re: Canon 2X III teleconverter
« on: December 12, 2013, 02:50:49 PM »
Hmm, I am just about to pick up one of those. But as it's the first negative experience I've heard of I won't heditate.

 I hope you'll get a good one when you get it changed.

+1.  Just remember to AFMA when using the TC.  Canon bodies store lens and lens+converters separately.  My 1.4x changed the AFMA setting minimally, my 2x changed it by 4 or 5 units.

419
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What camera for a mom
« on: December 12, 2013, 02:46:38 PM »
I would point her at an SL1 with the 18-55 kit.  You can start off in "green box" mode and as experience builds you can start into some of the more challenging modes.

It should do far better than a p/s camera and gives her room to grow.

+1.  The EOS-M is a nice camera, but it stinks at tracking moving objects, especially if her daughter is younger.

I have no experience with Eos M. Is it at least faster than p&s? For mirrorless cameras, perhaps sony is a better choice?  I know too little about mirrorless.

It's typical of p&s, which is not very good.  Other mirrorless offerings by other companies are better but are also pricier.  The AF tracking of the M is its Achilles heel, which is why people are waiting to see the M with the 70D's dual pixel sensor technology.  IQ-wise, it's like most Canon APS-C offerings.  For 300, it delivers a lot of bang for the buck.

420
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What camera for a mom
« on: December 12, 2013, 01:45:51 PM »
I would point her at an SL1 with the 18-55 kit.  You can start off in "green box" mode and as experience builds you can start into some of the more challenging modes.

It should do far better than a p/s camera and gives her room to grow.

+1.  The EOS-M is a nice camera, but it stinks at tracking moving objects, especially if her daughter is younger.

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 92