July 29, 2014, 02:03:37 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 6 ... 86
46
EOS-M / Re: Canon EF-M 55-200 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Gets Official
« on: June 17, 2014, 10:48:18 AM »
you're not going to see a significant difference between 5.6 and 6.3 for any of your issues though.

yeah, but
1. every bit worse hurts ... anything from f/5.6 onward is twilight zone anyways ;-)
2. especially considering how ALL manufacturers LIE about focal lengths and f-stops ... in reality f/5.6 often really means T/6.2  and f/6.3 means T/7.9 ... or so  ::)

Not necessarily.  What is the T-stop of of the 35 f/2 IS?  T/2.  What is the T-stop of the 24-70 f/2.8 II?  T/3.  Modern coatings are much better than they were a decade ago.  It's time for you to sell the 55-250 and buy the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II because that is what you really want.   ::)

47
Lenses / Re: EF-M 55-200 4.5-6.3 IS STM Coming Shortly
« on: June 16, 2014, 04:33:04 PM »
This is the lens that I've wanted for the system.  I often carry the 70-300L along with my Tamron 24-70 VC + 6D while traveling.  I also bring the M for the moments when I want to go out very light, typically with the 22mm.  Being able to leave the 70-300L home would be sweet; I use a tele sparingly for general travel, so as long as the image quality is pretty decent this should do the trick for me.

Somewhat surprised by the f/6.3 aperture; I've not known any Canon to have a maximum aperture smaller than f/5.6, although the practice is not unusual among 3rd parties.

Given that this is a mirrorless system, the PDAF baselines and traditional max aperture values may not apply...

48
Lenses / Re: EF-S 10-18mm - a few early photos on SL1 & Sony a6000
« on: June 16, 2014, 04:29:01 PM »
According the the digital pictures image quality post, this lens is...good only if you dont want to pay for the 10-22, and lose a fair amount of zoom capacity.

Sharpness is pretty much the same as the old bird. corners are smushy. Ive used the 10-22 on a 7d, t2i, and an eos m...there's only so much sharpness you can expect of of that lens. So if this is the same, its pretty pointless.

at this point since i mostly use my 10-22 on an M, id gamble on getting a 11-22 EFM. I f the image qulity is thta much better (its not listed on TDP) , then it woudl be worth it.  I think i saw it in japan for about 550 or so.

Or you can get it from Canada for less than 400.

49
Lenses / Re: EF-M 55-200 4.5-6.3 IS STM Coming Shortly
« on: June 16, 2014, 04:28:02 PM »
Much less excited about this lens than the 11-22, 22, 18-55.  Will wait for the reviews on this one.  Would have like to see one with a wider aperture like Fuji.  Also will be interesting to see if MII/III will be able to track moving objects with this lens.

f/6.3 looks like it was done for diameter/weight reduction.  22% reduction of length isn't that impressive when it gives up 25% of the longest focal length relative to the EF-S 55-250.

50
Lenses / Re: Thinking of replacing a couple of lenses
« on: June 14, 2014, 10:04:53 PM »
The issue that you have with your 28 f/2.8 IS is most likely something that can be solved with AFMA because it focuses accurately with LiveView. 
T3i doesn't have AFMA...though I agree with you, it's something it would solve (and the 7D2 would have AFMA)

That said, if you've already got the 24-105, I don't see the point of having the 28mm. That extra stop won't make as big a difference as having something like a 35mm f/2 or 30mm f/1.4 would.

How about a 7D2, the 10-22, and a Sigma 18-35?

Jim
Sigma 18-35 would also be a nice option. You could turn the 10-22 and 28mm into a 10-18 and 18-35 and come reasonable close to break even.

Part of it depends on what you shoot. Unless you are doing night photography or some action work in mixed light, I don't find the wide, fast lenses that great on crop cameras.

I know the T3i does not have AFMA, which was why I suggested that stop down slightly and move the target distance back to check that it is something that AFMA could fix.  It is also why I suggested he hold onto the 28 f/2.8 IS until he gets the 7DII because it will have AFMA.  The OP has already stated that he'd rather not send the lens/body into Canon for calibration.

51
Lenses / Re: Thinking of replacing a couple of lenses
« on: June 14, 2014, 08:02:48 PM »
The issue that you have with your 28 f/2.8 IS is most likely something that can be solved with AFMA because it focuses accurately with LiveView.  If you stop it down to f/4 or focus on something a bit farther away, does the target fall into the DOF?  If so, then AFMA should solve the issue. If you know you can wait until the 7DII, then hold onto the lens and make the decision to switch to the 35 until you've evaluated it on the 7DII.

I think the 35 f/2 IS will suit you.  It is a bit bigger than the 28 f/2.8 IS, but the additional stop is very useful.  You should also look into the f/1.4; APS-C cameras need faster glass than FF.  Most people choose the 17-55 f/2.8 IS to cover their normal range while still having IS.  I find that the 28 f/2.8 IS is more suited to FF, but it is a very travel-friendly lens on either platform.

52
EOS Bodies / Re: More EOS 7D Replacement Buzz Going Around [CR2]
« on: June 14, 2014, 09:26:53 AM »
I'd expect most crop-body shooters to use EF lenses for primes and for longer focal lengths beyond their primary zoom lens, but I'd expect them to rely on at least a couple of EF-S lenses.  Specifically:

  • The EF-S 10–22 (or, in the future, possibly the 10–18) is the only lens that's ultra-wide on a crop body.
  • I'd expect most folks to also use an EF-S lens for the primary zoom (e.g. an 17–55, 15–85, or maybe a 17–85 if they started shooting Canon crop bodies before those other two lenses appeared on the market), since the 24mm end of the EF zooms isn't particularly wide on a crop body.

When those folks move to full frame, that's more than a grand worth of lenses that they can't use, and will need to replace with EF lenses that cost about twice as much.

With that said, I suppose it depends on the shooter.  If you can deal with 24mm as the widest range for your primary zoom (like shooting with a shorty 40 as your widest lens on a full frame), then yeah, EF lenses are fine.  Or if you can deal with a 16–35 as your primary zoom lens (equivalent FF range 26–56), you could go that direction.  Unfortunately, both approaches are a pretty significant compromise because EF focal lengths aren't a very good fit for crop bodies.  If they were, Canon wouldn't build any higher-end EF-S lenses like the 17–55 and the 10–22.

That is where high resale value helps.  Lost only about $100 on selling the 17-55 (due to fees) and about $30 on the 10-22, but yes in general, FF, is more expensive.

53
EOS Bodies / Re: A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: June 13, 2014, 01:08:22 PM »
I've never been a fan of a separate battery grip either.  The vertical controls weren't exactly the same as the original set, but the thing that bothered me the most was the flex at the BG/body joint.  If it came with an integrated grip, then I'd be more interested.  That and I'd rather not buy 2 L-plates or fiddle with taking the grip on/off so that I can use it on a pod.

An integrated design is lighter, stronger and more water resistant.  That is an idea that I can get behind.  And as for the size difference and being less discrete... how discrete is any DSLR with a 70-200 lens on it amongst Rebels with kit lenses, iPads/iPhones?

The least discrete camera on Earth is an iPad.

I assume you mean discreet, but I will admit that an iPad's camera isn't typically discrete, either.

True that the iPad isn't small, but I have yet to see someone taking photos with one being hassled or getting as much attention as one with something bigger than a Rebel + kit lens.

Good catch on the discrete/discreet!

54
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark-II as an action oriented DSLR
« on: June 13, 2014, 09:03:49 AM »
Before the 5DIII, many people carried 5DII/7D combos.  I can see Canon making the 7DII good enough to make that happen again (5DIII/7DII).  For that to happen, the 7DII will have to have a much higher frame rate and good AF performance, so...

The 60D and the 7D have the same MP, so I'm guessing 20.2MP, 10+ FPS with 5DIII/1DX AF-lite (smaller sensor means smaller AF module, which means fewer points and/or with smaller baselines).  DR and ISO similar to 70D, but maybe a smidge better, but it still won't come close to matching FF performance.  If it comes in at 8 FPS, then the difference is not big enough to entice 5DIII owners.

To keep the FPS up, I wouldn't be surprised the MP remains at 18MP.  18MP is still a much higher density compared to FF, so there is you "reach", and to keep the same battery, 18MP is a lot easier to process than 20+ MP at 10+ FPS.  If the MP remains at 18MP, then I'd expect the 7DII to have slightly better high ISO performance than the 70D, but still much lower than FF.

55
EOS Bodies / Re: A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: June 13, 2014, 08:27:40 AM »
I've never been a fan of a separate battery grip either.  The vertical controls weren't exactly the same as the original set, but the thing that bothered me the most was the flex at the BG/body joint.  If it came with an integrated grip, then I'd be more interested.  That and I'd rather not buy 2 L-plates or fiddle with taking the grip on/off so that I can use it on a pod.

An integrated design is lighter, stronger and more water resistant.  That is an idea that I can get behind.  And as for the size difference and being less discrete... how discrete is any DSLR with a 70-200 lens on it amongst Rebels with kit lenses, iPads/iPhones?

56
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS Sample Images
« on: June 13, 2014, 07:23:39 AM »
I have had this lens on preorder direct from Canon since the middle of may, scheduled to ship on 6-27-14. I just received a notice from them that started out with "We regret to inform you that here has been a change in the Estimated Ship Date" and expected a disappointment. To my complete surprise, the estimated ship date has been moved SOONER to 6-20-14. I just thought I'd throw that out there for those who are anticipating this lens as much as I am.

I got the same notice.  I was hoping to get the lens before a vacation starting on 6/21, but I won't get it if they ship on 6/20.  Bummer!

57
Technical Support / Re: OMG Cookie Hell on Canon Rumors
« on: June 12, 2014, 05:04:08 PM »
Naïve... Not really. That's why I wanted to see what third party cookies were up to.

BTW, Fredmiranda only had 2 cookies and POTN and zero cookies that I encountered.

BTW, the default Chrome and Firefox even if you invoke private browsing still have cookies enabled by default. Try to find Chromes setting to disable cookies. Its buried.

Maybe this is just a rant. But I think this is getting out of hand. It would be much more transparent if there was positive opt in not negative opt out. BY DEFAULT.

Oh and BTW, add 2 more cookies here for serving-sys and another cookie for bs.serving-sys. That's 27 cookies by my count.....

Now try Facebook and see the number of cookies rise, rise, rise...

58
EOS-M / Re: How crazy is this?
« on: June 12, 2014, 12:04:09 PM »
I would be tempted to convert the second body to IR-only, like WickedWombat did.

Also just picked up a 11-22 (after seeing all of wickedwombat's gushing praise of it  ;D), and it is quite a gem!

59
EOS-M / Re: Got my new IR eos-m!
« on: June 12, 2014, 07:42:43 AM »
Sweet!

60
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D or 5DM3 need your help guys
« on: June 11, 2014, 01:53:49 PM »
okay guys :)

Just bought the 6D with EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM ..... also 270ex ii and RC-6

is this flash good ? or shall i replace it with 320ex

the seller give good deal for these flashes ......

now i think i need good tripod and EF 135mm f/2L USM

I have a 270ex ii, which I use on the EOS-M.  It is a bit underpowered if it will be your only flash.  A 430ex ii is the minimum that I'd use as a primary flash.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 86