February 27, 2015, 01:30:28 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 - tomscott

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 45
166
EOS Bodies / Re: Which is better for high ISO, 6D or 5D Mk III?
« on: July 08, 2014, 05:15:19 AM »
The difference between the files are so minimal that I would call it a dead heat with the 6d just ever so slight advantage but would you notice in the real world.. don't think so.

The fact is you can get cracking results out of both cameras up to 6400ISO where i feel commercially you can push to. 12800 and 25600 can be used but only when needs must and you wouldn't get the shot otherwise.

Heres a few images shot at 12800 on the 5DMKIII and the 100mm L as a test to see what it could do!

BMW F30 3 Series interior, iDrive screen by TomScottPhoto, on Flickr

BMW F30 3 Series interior, multifunction steering wheel by TomScottPhoto, on Flickr

BMW F30 3 Series interior, centre console climate control by TomScottPhoto, on Flickr

BMW F30 3 Series interior, light console by TomScottPhoto, on Flickr

The main positive about the 6D is the centre point is rated to -3ev whereas the 5DMKIII is -2EV.

But at the same time if your shooting in low light with large aperture glass you will be centring your image to keep focus, focus recompose with anything under F4 on a full frame camera and missing focus is very easy to do.

On the 5DMKIII you have 5 -2ev points which makes creative composition easier.


168
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How disappointed will you be if . . .?
« on: July 07, 2014, 11:06:18 AM »
I think it would be disappointing because even if it is a dual digic 5 they have been out on the market for 2+ years with the 1DX. Have the other 'bells and whistles' really needed the time in R&D as the 7D has been sitting on the shelf for so long. If this is so it will be like the 60D announcement just a load of recycled parts again that will have people not very happy.

Im positive that we will see some nice new technology in digic 6, if not digit 6 then digic 6+ or dual digic 6 as digit 6 already exists lower down in the range.

169
Lenses / Re: I'm looking at rentig/buying a new lens for weddings
« on: July 07, 2014, 10:42:41 AM »
Why not buy a 24-70mm F2.8 MKI its cheap (£6-800) and a staple in any wedding photographers kit and means you can be a lot more flexible.

Primes are great but I would recommend the 35mm F1.4 L or 2.8 IS 35mm over the 24mm as it is a nicer focal length.

Either way a 24-70mm F2.8 and a 70-200mm F2.8 will give you good light gathering potential with a great focal length to play with. Including all the classic portrait focal lengths 35, 50 and 85mm all at F2.8. F2.8 is easier to nail the focus too, add a 580EX and your golden, basically my set up.

If primes are your appeal then 35mm, 50mm and 85mm. 

I also use the 100mm as a macro/portrait lens.

What camera do you use? If its full frame then I wouldn't worry about dim areas 6400ISO is perfectly useable from 5DMKII upward.

If crop a whole different kettle of fish. Crop factor and DOF become more apparent and with nay of canons crop cameras I wouldnt shoot past 1600ISO especially in low light, with available light its not too bad.

Its very rare I go wider than 24mm as you get more distortion but it is useful when your in a tight corner or you want to emphasise an environment.

173
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: July 03, 2014, 02:50:01 PM »
Juvenile Green Heron at sunrise.  5Diii, 400 DO, ISO 400, "M" setting, f10 @ 1/640

Wow thats a lovely shot! What do you think of the 400 DO?

174
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: July 03, 2014, 11:52:18 AM »
Thanks :)

175
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: July 03, 2014, 08:51:57 AM »
Eider Duck chick, Sehouses Harbour, Farne Islands by TomScottPhoto, on Flickr

Common Eider duck chick, Seahouses, Farne Islands

177
100-400mm is pretty good in the centre which is where you want it to be sharp for birding and wildlife.

Only issue is a new one may be on the horizon for sept, but probably at least twice the price.

100-400mm equals the 400 F5.6 in the centre

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=113&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=7&API=0&LensComp=278&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

178
The tamron seems like a good option brilliant range and reviews look promising, but haven't heard brilliant things about the AF? Especially the digital picture review. seems Its a good option up to 500mm 600 looks a bit soft. Pretty much equals or beats any zoom canon offers up to 400mm and beats them all from 500-600mm as there is no zoom with that range.

What about weather sealing? I would worry about where I would use it, usually in fairly harsh environments dusty and wet live in Cumbria so it rains 90% of the time.

179
Weight, sharpness and IS

2550g, Closest Focusing Distance: 2.5m / 8.2 ft. 3 stop IS, Length x Diameter: 252 x 128mm

VS

2350g, Closest Focusing Distance: 1.9m / 6.5ft, 4 stop IS, Length x Diameter: 248 x 128 mm   

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=739&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=249&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Not a huge difference. MFD is helpful tho.

180
Weight is a big issue too.

400mm F2.8 MKII is 3850g
200-400mm F4 1.4 is 3620g

300mm F2.8 MKII is 2350g

1500g less than the 400mm and 1270g less than the 200-400mm

Add a 5DMKIII 860g
or a 1DX 1530g

teleconverters
2x MKIII 325g
1.4x MKIII 225g

The 300mm in this respect wins big with weight and size, and doesn't suffer too badly in IQ, but AF is reduced.

Tough one. The 200-400mm is the all in one field lens, it near enough matches the 400mm F2.8 II at F4.

The dark horse is still the 400mm F5.6

Its only 1250g and out-resolves the 300mm F2.8 at 420mm at 5.6, almost matches the 400mm F2.8 MKII at 5.6.

It is also £4000 cheaper than the 300mm and £5,500 cheaper than the 400mm. Thats pretty much a no brainier for most. Only problem is putting tele converters on it makes it a 560mm F8 or 800mm F11.

Saying that the 400mm F5.6 with 1.4 MKIII converter outperforms the 400mm F2.8 IS MKII at 560 at F8 in the corners and is only very very slightly softer in the centre. Almost indistinguishable.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=278&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=1&LensComp=741&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=4

But it will still focus like an F4 lens rather than the speed of F8.

A 400mm F5.6 IS would be a beast, even better the lens I crave 400mm F4 IS NON DO.

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 45