March 04, 2015, 03:47:52 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 - KKCFamilyman

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 32
196
I tried posting a test I took tonight between my 24-70ii and the sigma and my 24-70 was spot on and the sigma was soft which means its front focusing I think either way they should have been close. I also tried to upload pics but it is just freezing when I try to attach.

197
I'd say the Sigma 35/1.4 has better IQ.  But, if it can't focus where you need it to, a blurry shot isn't 'better'.

Any suggestions for a test? To determine that I can post?

198
TDP mentions servo issues with the new Tamron 24-70, seems to be a common issue with 3rd party lenses.  My 35L does very well in servo mode, old though the design is...

So would you say the older 35l is better?

199
I just got the sigma 35mm 1.4. I thought that the lens would be a dream come true. The truth is the af seems to front focus. It has a hard time focusing in aiservo mode. Also further subjects are not that sharp. The 1.4 aperature is nice and the colors are good but am unsure if I should go with one of the canon offerings. I use it for indoor candids of the kids and a walkabout lens since a 50mm is a little tight and the 40mm only does 2.8. Should I go thru the trouble of sending it in to sigma for a look or is the Canon better in the L or IS version. I have used mostly f2.8 and higher to 5.6. This is only being used on a canon 5d mark iii. I only have 9 days to get it returned. Is this the norm for a 35mm or should I stick with OEM even though it costs more and is much older?

200
Lenses / Re: Want to expand my gear?
« on: March 30, 2013, 03:37:55 PM »
here is my thought:

70-300l for more reach:  imo, i would not choose this one... for more reach, i would wait to get 7d mark ii or 70d so that i would add another body to my list and it will be obviously more reach than what you have planned when pairing with 70-200mm.  someone here might claim that 5d mark iii is better at high ISO... sure, but keep in mind that lens is f/4-5.6.... at most two stops and think about it, you can shoot at f/2.8 with focal length of 320mm instead of f/5.6 at 300mm

This applies only if you're making big prints (larger than 16x24"), submitting for publication, or have some other need for high MP, the cropped 5DIII image will have equivalent IQ to the APS-C image (and better IQ at higher ISO).  The 'reach' of APS-C is often an illusion.

Plus, the OP's talking about lightening his load - does carrying two bodies make sense?

The part about the primes that kills me is to keep two people in focus I end up having to stop it down so wondering what other benefits the primes will have besides subject isolation options and compositional thinking vs  zoom.

With the MkII zooms that you have, when stopped down to f/2.8 or narrower, the primes' advantages are negated, except sometimes size/weight (e.g., 135L vs. 70-200 II).

Then picking up a 270ex for a lighter travel flash.
You can't bounce this so I'd avoid it; direct flash is horrible.

Might want to check your facts before making an assertion like that...



I was thinking the same thing about the 270 while weak it is a good travel flash.

201
Lenses / Re: Want to expand my gear?
« on: March 30, 2013, 07:55:04 AM »
here is my thought:

70-300l for more reach:  imo, i would not choose this one... for more reach, i would wait to get 7d mark ii or 70d so that i would add another body to my list and it will be obviously more reach than what you have planned when pairing with 70-200mm.  someone here might claim that 5d mark iii is better at high ISO... sure, but keep in mind that lens is f/4-5.6.... at most two stops and think about it, you can shoot at f/2.8 with focal length of 320mm instead of f/5.6 at 300mm

2 more 600exrt for flash photography:  sure
100mm 2.8 lens portraits and macro:  i just got it  :)
16-35 2.8 for landscape:  got it last year but also thinking about and waiting for 14-24mm

Thats a good point about the body. But the 7d ii will probably be expensive.

202
Lenses / Re: Want to expand my gear?
« on: March 30, 2013, 12:11:55 AM »
I thank everyone so far. I know that it was a all over the place question. I just am torn with which way to go. I think I will first evaluate the whole lighting setup as an option. If that does not fit for now then I can consider the 2xIII ex for my lens or a 50mm 1.4, 85 1.8 and 100mm 2.8l combo for portraits. Just need to figure out which one I want to start with for now then move to. I have a trip to Disney coming up so I was considering the 70-300mm for travel since that is my most immediate need vs. carrying the 2.8 zoom. Then picking up a 270ex for a lighter travel flash. This way I can lighten my load for that trip. If there are any suggestions for that immediate need please let me know. I definitely will be getting a tripod. The part about the primes that kills me is to keep two people in focus I end up having to stop it down so wondering what other benefits the primes will have besides subject isolation options and compositional thinking vs  zoom.

203
Lenses / Re: Want to expand my gear?
« on: March 29, 2013, 10:26:37 PM »
Indoors mostly but a group of 3-4 people.

Then you're set with the 24-70/2.8 II.  More Speedlites aren't the best answer, either.  Good lighting for a small group means big modifiers, so I'd start looking at monolights (the PCB Einstein is excellent, and cheaper than a 600EX-RT).

The 70-300L is a great travel telezoom, but IMO still not really long enough for wildlife.

Can you give me an example of a lighting setup so i could look into costs please?

204
Lenses / Re: Want to expand my gear?
« on: March 29, 2013, 09:27:22 PM »
Better portraits
Wildlife
Landscape
Macro in order of importance

Better portraits = 85L, Sigma 85/1.4, or 135L
Wildlife = 2xIII for your 70-200 II
Landscape = a good tripod
Macro = 100L IS

For 'better portraits' though, do you mean outdoors, indoors, or studio?  Fast primes are wonderful for blurring a busy background outdoors or in the house.  But another option would be a backdrop setup, monolights (or more Speedlites), and softboxes.

Also, you mention school functions eventually, the 135L is great there.

Indoors mostly but a group of 3-4 people. Also I was considering the 70-300l since with the extender the weight is a lot for travel. Would love a light setup but would need something that could go up and down.

205
Lenses / Re: Want to expand my gear?
« on: March 29, 2013, 08:28:16 PM »
Do you have a good tripod? If not then I would make that my next purchase.

Most of the alternatives you list are for completely different types of photography. I think that before I decided on the lens I would decide on what kind of photography I want to branch out into first.  Macro? Landscape? Better portraits? Wildlife?

Better portraits
Wildlife
Landscape
Macro in order of importance


206
Lenses / Want to expand my gear?
« on: March 29, 2013, 08:16:02 PM »
I have a 5d3
24-70 ii
70-200 2.8ii
Sigma 35mm 1.4
600exrt

Take family portraits, vacation photos and eventially school functions.

Not sure where to invest next.
70-300l for more reach
2more 600exrt for flash photography
100mm 2.8 lens portraits and macro
16-35 2.8 for landscape

I know thats a lot of choices but just want to keep expnading and not sure which is the best for vacations and portraits
Considering what i have. I am staring to get into wildlife.

207
Has this query been posed yet... "Do you still love your wife?" I think that would sway my suggestion.

Of course not sure how thats relevant?

208
Thanks everyone. Lots of good advice. Yeah she already ok'd the sony nex 6 and it has an evf so we could keep that but then if I went that route I would consider the nex 3nl since its half the price with all the same stuff she uses. Just not sure if squeezing in the eos would be better for the fact that hopefully i can get her a 17-50 2.8 someday and it would be a better combo. Never been a fan of the 4/3's cameras. She looked at the rx100 and hated the flash placement. I want the eos m but everyone seems to not be satisfied with the af speed and grabbing you kids you need all the speed you can get.

That 17-55 2.8 is a wonderful piece of kit.  It's unparalleled in Canon's full-frame line.  The 40STM is a great lens too, but I found it too wide as an everyday walk around piece on my crop 7D, and I still find myself wanting to switch to the 35mm quite a bit, even on the FF 6D.

Have you played with Olympus' m4/3s?  They are another astonishing camera, with IQ that is lens limited, not sensor limited when compared with the T1i-T4i.  This may change if the SL1 or T5i have new sensors though.  They are also a very ergonomic series, specifically the OM-D.

In the end though, with what you mention in your later posts, specifically shooting kids, and likely some day in the future, kids sports, I would probably go SLR for the AF and long lens advantages.

Exactly. I thought eventually she could carry the 18-55, 55-250 combo and be set if she was at some indoor sports. I know these cameras are not meant for high iso but it has to be better than ps and m4/3's. but i could always get that when the time comes. They are going to be 6 this year so I guess we have sometime.

209
Thanks everyone. Lots of good advice. Yeah she already ok'd the sony nex 6 and it has an evf so we could keep that but then if I went that route I would consider the nex 3nl since its half the price with all the same stuff she uses. Just not sure if squeezing in the eos would be better for the fact that hopefully i can get her a 17-50 2.8 someday and it would be a better combo. Never been a fan of the 4/3's cameras. She looked at the rx100 and hated the flash placement. I want the eos m but everyone seems to not be satisfied with the af speed and grabbing you kids you need all the speed you can get.

210
I am torn between keeping my sony nex 6 for the wife or getting her the new sl1 with a 40mm pancake. She just uses auto and wants to shove it in her purse just on occasional outings where lugging my 5d would be overkill. I think the sl1 is more versatile since all my lenses will serve a dual purpose and she like my 60d when I had it. She is just not the type to want larger heavy gear but I thought with either I could start to teach her how to use the pasm modes to control her photo's at times. Does anyone have an opinion? I just dont want to get her the eos if everyone thinks that its much larger and bulkier. I have noone else to ask.

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 32