March 06, 2015, 04:18:12 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 ... 97
Banding only occurs after a lot of postprocessing, and only the op can know how much he's into it and if he's able to ettr or use bracketing ... as for the af, the -3lv center point sensitivity is a big plus over the +0.5lv 5d3 (afaik) if you need it, but you're the first one to discover that the outer af points are a significant step forward :-p

I'm assuming you're referring to the 5D2 above; the 5D3 has -2ev sensitivity, although the darkest I've tried and kept with the 5D3 is closer to -1.

Second but ... based on your "usage list" I'd also have a serious look at a secondhand 5DII, instead of the 6D camera. I'm saying this, because I don't think the 6D offers anything much better than the 5DII ... for instance, I read up on how the GPS part works and, based on the literature, I feel it is badly implemented and will lead to severe headaches for the serious geotagger ... but I'm probably wrong, as usual.

-1.  When the 6D was first announced, it was trashed by many in forums who said that they would buy the 5DII over the 6D, but now that it is out, very few would say that unless they had a specific requirement that would be satisfied by the 5D (i.e. ergonomics, better weather resistance).  The 6D has much less banding than the 5DII, has greater center point light sensitivity and the outer AF points work better.

Except that there are how many native lenses?  28-70 and a 55?

For Canon landscape shooters, the A7R may be the perfect solution right now.  Manual focus is preferred so AF is not an issue AND you get to use superior Canon glass:  TS-E 17, TS-E 24, 24-70.  Nikon can't match those lenses and neither can Sony/Zeiss.  And if one wanted to use the 14-24, then an adaptor can be used rather than introducing another camera system.

Zeiss FE 35, 55, 24-70 and 70-200…don’t you think this is decent list for NEW small camera? What else do you want – 400mm, 600mm for BIF? I wish they have UWA prime instead of 70-200.

I don’t own Canon TS-e17, 24 so I will not comment on that. However, I have about 40 photos taken with A7 + Zeiss FE 55mm f1.8 that I compared to:

1. 5D III + 50L from f1.8 to f5.6 – ISO 100, 400, 800, 1600(50L ONLY slightly better @ f1.8, from f2 to 5.6 zeiss has upper hand)
2. 5D III + 24-70 II @ 50mmish - f2.8 to f8 – ISO 100, 400, 800, 1600

All shots were on tripod and raw files were converted through LR5 with just +25 sharpness, +10 contrast.

On my 27” LG monitor, the Zeiss FE 55 seems to be as good as Canon, even slightly better. I have no problem sharing these photos. Are you willing to share your TS-E 17, TS-E 24, 24-70 more superior than Zeiss?

You should read what was written more carefully.  Orangutan was pointing out that are those that would profit from using a A7R with their existing lens set, and you lambasted him for it.  I agreed with him -- different tools for different purposes.  There is already another thread on this forum where a canon pro uses the a7r for landscape purposes and the a7r gives him higher resolution and shadow recovery while allowing him to keep his canon glass.  He also noted that there MAY be issues with the a7r at certain shutter speeds with telephoto focal lengths.  I agree with this as well, which is mostly what I posted earlier about how the a7r can be useful to canon landscape shooters.

It is not a surprise that viewfinder cameras can have sharpness advantages over DSLRs.  Leicas have had the resolution advantage over Canikons for years.  The Zeisses are also optimized more easily than adapted lenses for peripheral microlenses).  And no, the 35, 55 (just came out), 24-70 (is it out yet?) and 70-200 (is it out yet?) are not enough to rely on Sony as stand-alone system.  And no, many of us can not AFFORD to buy multiple systems like you are able to.

True, I don't post ANY photos of my family or friends on the internet.  I have done some jobs for home builders and friends on the side, but photography remains a hobby, but here are 2 taken with the TS-E that were posted last year.

Canon General / Re: Review: Canon Speedlite Transmitter ST-E3-RT
« on: January 31, 2014, 09:56:19 AM »
But, if the extra power isn't required, that 'one size' could be a set of 4x0EX-RT flashes instead of a set of 600's, and with multiple flashes that would be significant cost savings.

True, although I'd probably still opt for the 600s anyway, especially if the 4x0EX-RT does not zoom to 200mm.  The 600 doesn't have that much power at 200mm for a large group (wide area) at a distance, but for smaller targets, it is handy.

Canon General / Re: Review: Canon Speedlite Transmitter ST-E3-RT
« on: January 31, 2014, 08:55:48 AM »
I know, this is mainly about the ST-E3-RT, which is "OK" [it should have included AF assist light] but overall I find the Canon RT system to be rather limited. Only one big, expensive speedlite and one expensive controller. The system has been around for quite some time now and still there is no

* small and cheap RT transceiver to integrate optical-only Canon speedlites [580/430) into a RT setup, and ideally also 3rd party flashes [at least in M mode] as well as studio strobes 
* 430EX-RT
* overhaul of the ancient Canon wireless ETTL protocol to finally enable remote 2nd curtain sync and remote control over zoom-reflector setting

I find it easier to have just one size for the speedlite.  It makes changing manual settings much easier when you don't have to remember which "group" is the smaller flash and compensate for it accordingly.  So much so, that I my 430 sits unused nearly all the time.

I do wish the the ST-E3-RT had an AF assist light.  It's hard to focus in a dim, low-contrast setting when the ambient lights are down.

Thanks for all the replies, comments, suggestions, experience reports, etc. I'm going to respond only just where I have to add something that might add to the discussion. Still, I really appreciate all of them and I'm happy that there were also some voices against the 6D/FF now.

<Wall of text>

The Tamron 24-70 VC would satisfy your mid-range zoom requirement for <1k, or if want to go prime, then the 24 f/2.8 IS and 35 f/2 IS would work well too.  The focal lengths of your lenses will also be more useful on FF (100, 70-200) for portraiture.

Macro can still be done with FF handheld.  The advantage that Marsu is claiming with APS-C is not as significant as it might seem.  There are plenty of cases where DOF is not deep enough in either case and focus stacking is required.  Besides, people were taking macro shots for years FF with film before APS-C came along.

ASK yourself a question before buying A7R mirrorless. If compactness, IQ and balance are not important, than why not just shoot with Canon/Nikon DSLR.

I simply don't give comment and suggestion on something that I haven't touched. The Zeiss FE 55mm f1.8 is a SOLID piece of glass. The IQ is good or slightly better than my 24-70 II from f2.8 to f8.

The Zeiss FE series is design to bring the best of Sony A7 series. Not to mention, AF speed of Canon lenses on A7 series is REALLY slow. Have you ever shoot EOS-M with original firmware?

If you want to play the game, play it right. If you want the best IQ from A7r, stay with native lenses

Except that there are how many native lenses?  28-70 and a 55?

For Canon landscape shooters, the A7R may be the perfect solution right now.  Manual focus is preferred so AF is not an issue AND you get to use superior Canon glass:  TS-E 17, TS-E 24, 24-70.  Nikon can't match those lenses and neither can Sony/Zeiss.  And if one wanted to use the 14-24, then an adaptor can be used rather than introducing another camera system.

So what? What does the op need high iso for - posed portraits? no. (tripod) macro? no. architecture? nope, not with vanilla lenses. landscape? only for the superior postprocessing leverage of ff - and in this case, a used 5d2 might be even or better (a bit more mp, a bit sharper at base iso).

The other advantage of the ff is thinner dof, looking at the op's gallery he could profit from that - but expensive zooms or primes are needed for it ... much more than just a camera body upgrade. Last not least the infamous 5d2/6d af plus missing crop factor isn't made for shooting squirrels or alligators from a distance, so what he ends up is our popular setup: either a 5d3 or 70d/7d+6d combination. That's a lot of $$$ for camera bodies that loose value in no time, it might be smarter to get some nice primes first.

The OP mentioned night shots.  If this includes starscapes, then higher ISO capability is welcome. 

He also only has 1 EF-S lens, the 17-55 f/2.8 IS, which retains its value and can be sold easily.  His other lenses are EF.  The same EF lens on FF will seem to have better sharpness, and he would also get an immediate DOF benefit by moving to FF even keeping the same EF lenses.  If anything, APS-C cameras place a higher premium on lens quality. 

Lenses / Re: Which lens is should I buy.
« on: January 30, 2014, 01:13:05 PM »
I have no experience with longer lenses, but as far as i know "bird photography" and "walk around lens" can't be attributed to the same lens. :-P
Among those you listed, the 70-300L seems to be the one, but i suggest you look into the 100-400L, which would be better for the purpose, IMHO.

+1.  How much do you value weigth and range?  If you plan on using it exclusively outdoors, then the 70-300L works well.  Compact and well suited for travel (relatively light), but it will not get you close enough to birds.  The Tamron 150-600 weighs 75% more than the 70-300L but gets to focal lengths that birders typically use.

Canon General / Re: Canon's Fiscal Year 2013 Financial Results Released
« on: January 30, 2014, 11:38:03 AM »
..., the EOS 5D Mark III and 70D advanced-amateur-model digital SLR cameras ...

Did they just call the 5D3 an advanced-amateur-model?  :o

Indeed they did.  The 1-series are the 'pro' bodies.  OTOH, Canon Europe lists the 5DIII in the pro section.

Oh good!  DxO Optics Pro should then move the 5DIII to the standard version and save US customers $100.   ::)

Canon General / Re: Canon's Fiscal Year 2013 Financial Results released
« on: January 30, 2014, 09:29:20 AM »
I would guess by the way they worded this, that they lost market share, but still maintained the lead.  If they had increased their leading market share position, they almost assuredly would have stated that here.

Just making a point about the clever way that statements can be worded to give a positive (or negative) spin.

Canon might have lost share this year, but the relevant comparison is market share over several years.  From past charts I've seen, market shares can shift several % points year-to-year.

I did have both in my hands a couple of times and with different lenses on them. Unfortunately I can only just try them "on the spot" and shooting the interior of a shop is not exactly what I'm interested in.

Yes, but if you bring a lens that you routinely use for your shots and test the ISO capabilities on both bodies then you'll see whether or not you'd take advantage of the higher ISO capabilities of a FF camera.  Stores tend to be relatively dim, so they can be a good spot for tests.  If you don't have a high speed prime, see if you can try one in the store on both bodies and see if the shallower DOF is to your liking.  Better yet, take someone with you and use him as your model.  These don't have to be keepers -- they just have to show you whether you value one camera's IQ enough over the other.

Lenses / Re: Why aren't new lenses weather sealed?
« on: January 30, 2014, 07:59:41 AM »
Weather sealing is not the same thing as weather proofing or being watertight.  Throw enough "weather" at the equipment and it will fail.  You're better off bringing plastic bags, umbrellas etc. if you can.  It is not a good feeling when a lens fails because of a nick in the rubber.

Lenses / Re: More EF pancakes?
« on: January 30, 2014, 07:54:30 AM »
I'm guessing "no"... at least not until after Canon develops something like the A7R.  Have you looked at the 24, 28 and 35mm IS lenses?  I have the 28, and it's a lot smaller than L lenses.  A pancake will require the removal of IS and correcting elements, and I don't think the general market will go for that. 

+1 for the 6D.  Full frames have ~2 stop advantage in high ISO (although you do lose some DR).  Full frames also give you greater control over the DOF, which is an advantage in portraiture.  There are many more options for WA, UWAs on FF, and it allows you to use UWA lenses to their full capabilities.

You'll learn to work with the 6D's quirks.  Go to a camera store with your own memory card and try out both bodies.  The experience you gain first hand will mean more than forum recommendations.

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 97