April 21, 2014, 03:22:41 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 ... 76
46
Lenses / Re: 70-300mm F/4-5.6L IS or 70-200mm F2.8 VC?
« on: February 22, 2014, 12:24:23 AM »
Good point. One issue: no I'm not earning money out of it, and it means I will not get a single cent out of it too. Seems like most of you guys are pro-aperture in here then. I understand most people stated that Canon's speed is good, but does the Tamron lag behind much? How big is the difference? Seems like you guys are saying the speed is worth twice the price? It will be used mainly indoors I believe, hence it seems like I'm more of going for the Tamron for now. Definitely will use it outdoors at times, but the fact that I'm a hobbyist means that there's a good chunk of it being indoors.

I think you know what your choice will be:  Tamron.  Stick with your budget, and you'll sleep better.  There is no point in extending yourself financially for a hobby, but before you buy, drop by a store and try both.  See if the Tamron satisfies your requirements, and if the price difference is worth saving the extra funds.

47
Lenses / Re: A 500mm f/5.6?
« on: February 21, 2014, 01:39:55 PM »
Guys, there's one point that maybe I didn't explain all too well. My observation is not about the feasibility of a 500/5.6 or a 600/6.3 for 2500€. It's about the feasibility of such a lens at the same price of the current Tamron 150-600.

The overall hypothesis is that if a 600/6.3 is viable, then a 500/5.6 should be too. It's not a wishlist thread, I would like to discuss the technical implications of that. Comments on that?

Designing and building a 500mm prime is arguably easier than a 4x-600mm zoom, so that should offer the basis for better optics. Comments on that?

If Tamron built a 500/5.6, it might be more expensive/heavier than the current 150-600.  According to Dustin Abbott, the Tamron is at f/6.3 starting at 411mm.  If it were at f/5.6 at 500mm, then you might have been onto something...

48
Lenses / Re: 70-300mm F/4-5.6L IS or 70-200mm F2.8 VC?
« on: February 21, 2014, 09:35:41 AM »
Seems like everyone's pro Tamron's 70-200mm F2.8 VC. Is this a testament to the IQ of Tamron? How would the zoom fare in comparison? Is the motor comparable to Canon's USM? F2.8 is really a big lure, bokehlicious and everything. How sharp is it in comparison to Canon's 70-300mm? Both lenses are priced rather closely as mentioned, so it really boils down to how versatile and useful it is in normal daily life (travelling, events, gatherings and stuff like that: read mundane. No wildlife, but sports might be used a bit.) On a side note, is 6D and a 70-xxxmm a good combo for sports?

I think a lot of people are giving their experience with the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, and not the Tamron's.

The reviews I've seen on the Tamron is that it is a good value relative to Canon's 70-200 f/2.8 IS II.  It's not quite as good as Canon's, but it's price is major asset.  The 70-300L is a fine lens.  It is as good if not slightly better than the Canon 70-200 II with an 1.4x III near 300mm, and that is saying a lot.

I think a major factor for you is whether or not you have or intend to buy a high speed telephoto in the future (i.e. 135L).  The 70-300L is great if you're outside and have enough light, but it's not fast enough for indoor settings.  Something like the 135L will complement it nicely for indoor work and portraiture.  If not, then a 70-200 f/2.8 may be a better choice.

49
Lenses / Re: what lens's to bring to Hawaii?
« on: February 21, 2014, 08:31:22 AM »
For me, it comes down to whether or not there is some place you can store it securely when out on excursions.  If you will have secure storage, then bring it all.  You won't have to carry everything with out all the time.  Just choose what you need for a particular activity.

17-40 and 24-70 as a walk-around
70-200 for playing on the beaches (especially with kids involved)
24-70 and 100 for hike
50 or 85 at night (I'd only bring one of these two to save space)

If you will not have secure storage and will need to carry all the gear all the time, then I'd bring the 17-40, 50 (skip if you don't plan on using it at night) and 24-70.  That will fit in a small camera bag.

50
The scenario you lay out does not take advantage of the 1DX's core strengths:  AF, continuous frame rate, etc.  So, the 6D wins on cost.

51
Lenses / Re: f2.8 16-35mmL vs. f4 17-40mmL
« on: February 20, 2014, 12:53:28 PM »
The 16-35 does a little bit better in the midframe and the edges at larger apertures, but the differences are minimized at f/8 or smaller.  The 16-35 will also vignette less at larger apertures.  However, neither lens will approach the sharpness of primes (i.e. TS-E 17, TS-E 24, 24L II), especially at larger apertures, and the IQ gap between the 16-35 and primes is bigger than the gap between the 16-35/17-40.

If you have a higher price sensitivity, then the 17-40 makes sense because it will get you most of the 16-35 performance for much lower cost for landscapes.  If you like to take photojournalist style pictures, then the additional stop and midframe sharpness might be worth it.

52
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D body deals
« on: February 20, 2014, 07:57:57 AM »
Thanks brad-man for the link. I found out the difference b/w authorized/unauthorized sellers and so price difference.
About refurbished, there is around $150 difference in new and refurbished camera by canon usa. Is it worth spending extra to get a new camera or refurbished with one year warranty is equally good?

Canon refurbs used to only carry a 90 day warranty, but now they carry the same 1 year warranty as new.  It is a bit more of a hassle to fix something that does go wrong because you don't have the option to return it to a local brick-and-mortar store.  That said, I've been happy with 10-22 and 5DII, and a couple 600EX-RTs that I've purchases as Canon refurbs.  It's also a better deal when the Canon refurbs are on sale.

53
EOS Bodies / Re: $1200 1DX discounts on eBay... Anyone bought one?
« on: February 20, 2014, 07:49:28 AM »
In many cases posted on this forum, Canon has covered repairs under warrranty equipment not bought from authorized channels.  That said, it is still a risk, but the difference in price is the value of self-insuring it.

I bought the 5D3 through BVI last year for 2500.  It's been over a year, and any warranty on it has expired.  It saved me a lot of money by effectively insuring it myself. 

54
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 19, 2014, 03:52:11 PM »
Picked up my 28 f/2.8 IS for 350 during the last holiday season's sales from one of the NYC superstores.  It's a nice lens, but not very popular.
Wow, you paid a good price for 28mm IS. It is a shame that other countries outside the USA there is no discount on prices of lenses. However, I actually prefer the focal length 24mm APS-C. Actually, I'm very envious of EF-M 22mm F2.

The 24 is more useful than the 28, but the 28 was on sale and the 24 was not.  I think the 24 and 28 f/2.8 IS are more suited to FF because there are so many zooms that have IS for APS-C in the range.  IS can be useful, but I don't use it much because most of my pics have people in them and I typically need a faster shutter speed anyway.

Agreed, the EF-M 22 f/2 is a gem.  The smaller and noisier the sensors, the more "necessary" faster lenses are...

55
EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: February 18, 2014, 09:59:00 PM »
I'm keep hearing people say: "I bought EOS-M as a backup camera".

Let be honest here guys, many of us(including myself) bought the M due to half price reduction.

If this EOS-m still selling @ $700-$800, I wonder how many of us would consider the M as backup camera?

From 5D III owner POV, it doesn't make any senses to have EOS-M as a backup - from slow AF, unbalance, IQ.

Let say you go out and shoot BIF or action event. Your 5D III or 1D X is not working, would you rather have rebel, 60d, 40d etc as a backup?

My 2cents: current EOS-M is death and Canon has no interest bringing this system up to date in US market yet.

I got the EF/EF-S adapter and have used it only twice because my 5D III has not failed.  Price was a key factor for me buying into the M system, but if it was worthless then I wouldn't have bought into it.  It took the role of a small portable camera that the S90/HS230 had, and delivers better IQ.  Cheaper than a rebel too.  My wife uses it because she prefers the small form factor compared to a DSLR, so it serves multiple purposes.  Would I prefer having a A7R and an adapter instead?  Yes, but I'm not willing to spend 2k+ for something that will not be used as much as the 5D III.

56
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 05:45:22 PM »
Sometimes I get jealous of my friends who shoot with Nikon. :( One of them bought Nikon 35mm F1.8 DX lens, and that's great. ::) When I see the flash SB700 (medium model) also serving as master wireless, am ashamed of the 430 EXII not do the same. >:( When I complain of the lack of APS-C primes (here in CR) tell me that I can buy Sigma 30mm F1.4, or Canon 28mm F2.8 IS. :-[ Seriously, Sigma costing $500 without image stabilizer, and Canon  costing $550 for only F2.8? :-X APS-C allows a lens 24mm (or 22mm) F2 very compact and below $300. Come on, Canon! I'm waiting.

Picked up my 28 f/2.8 IS for 350 during the last holiday season's sales from one of the NYC superstores.  It's a nice lens, but not very popular.

57
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 05:39:16 PM »
I see little value in that.  A person bringing both the 24 and 40 and possibly something else might be better served by the 17-55.  Either that or pick up the M with the 22 f/2, which is still less inconspicuous than an APS-C body.

This is why: http://camerasize.com/compact/#448.303,448.345,ha,t

For me, I do adventure sports, which either involves long treks, or being put into a small case in the back of my boat. That weight makes a very big difference over miles, and it effects how the camera handles.  The EOS M can't AF, which makes it of limited use for multi-frame bursts. It's the same issue with basically all the mirrorless cameras; I need portability AND the ability to shoot action.

Moreover, if the new lens ends up being about the size of the 22 STM, I can own it and the 40mm pancake and still have $400+ and 1lb of weight saved. If it ends up being f/2 instead of f/2.8, then its even better off than the 17-55 (IS is of no use to me in action shooting)


That's a great size comparison except if you need to bring other lenses for other focal lengths anyway...

I hope you're right about the new lens being the same size as aperture as the 22 f/2, but I'm guessing it'll closer to 28 f/2.8 in size rather than the 22 f/2.

58
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 12:41:19 PM »
Something like this would only make sense if it's f/2 or faster.  17-55 f/2.8 IS covers the range and has IS.  Yes, it's more expensive, but it's focal length range is useful.

I disagree for form factor reasons.  If it's a pancake lens, there's your value proposition.  It might not be for you, but many folks would love to turn their APS-C rigs into inconspicuous + easier-to-bring-with-them-everywhere 35mm FF equivalent walkaround setups. 

So I think that a fairly quick (say F/2) wider prime in a pancake format would be very well received I think.

- A

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but what if it was a f/2.8 lens without IS like the EF 40?  I see little value in that.  A person bringing both the 24 and 40 and possibly something else might be better served by the 17-55.  Either that or pick up the M with the 22 f/2, which is still less inconspicuous than an APS-C body.

59
Canon General / Re: Canon lack of innovation
« on: February 18, 2014, 12:00:37 PM »
It should be no surprise to anyone that they pay employees who secure patents. I would be very surprised to find a large high tech company that didn´t and I would also be surprised if they only paid 2k$.

I wish my company gave out money for patents.  Alas, it doesn't...

60
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 11:49:10 AM »
Something like this would only make sense if it's f/2 or faster.  17-55 f/2.8 IS covers the range and has IS.  Yes, it's more expensive, but it's focal length range is useful.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 76