December 19, 2014, 10:15:32 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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 44
Animal Kingdom / Re: Farne Islands, Northumberland UK
« on: September 24, 2014, 05:54:48 AM »

Ye really is a great place to see a variety of wildlife. Worth the trip :)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 7D MK2 RAW Files
« on: September 23, 2014, 11:22:23 AM »
I don't know how you get away with only shooting 800ISO with wildlife, keeping the shutter speed at 1/1000 on an overcast day requires 1250+ in my experience. If you are in a darker environment like a forrest or under cover 3200+ is where you need to be.

I would never use ISO 3200 for wildlife on a crop camera.  You might be able to get away with it for indoor sports, but it's not going to cut it for antler and fur detail in RAW. The shots I've taken at 3200 are strictly for memories (wild bobcats, grizzly bears).

ISO 800 is about the limit of my friends usage on crop as well. I do dip into ISO 1600 from time to time, but these need major work to restore fur and antler detail.

If you are routinely using ISO 3200 on a crop camera for wildlife, you need to consider moving to FF ASAP, because that's shooting a weakness.

Thats why I shoot FF… Which is why I said i don't know how people get away with only shooting ISO800.

I think the squirrel image is pretty good, it is a little muddy but with a little too much sharpening.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 7D MK2 RAW Files
« on: September 23, 2014, 06:42:51 AM »
I think half the problem here is the conversion. When the codec comes out I think the 7DMKII will give slightly bette results than the 70D. Saying that useful up to 1600 3200 at a push, pretty much the same story with all APC. 3200 and 6400 are perfectly useable on the FF cameras like the 6D and 5DMKIII.

I don't know how you get away with only shooting 800ISO with wildlife, keeping the shutter speed at 1/1000 on an overcast day requires 1250+ in my experience. If you are in a darker environment like a forrest or under cover 3200+ is where you need to be.

Therefore for a lot of wildlife photographers the 1/2 stop advantage of the 20mp sensor might be pointless.

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D2 and EF 24 - 105 F4 L IS USM
« on: September 22, 2014, 11:26:16 AM »
I have the 17-55mm and the 24-105mm and they are very close when compared on their native sensors, DOF is the same F4 on ff and 2.8 on crop is the equivalent to F4 on FF. What you need to remember is that and F4 aperture gives you a F6.3 DOF equivalent so its not exactly shallow. The F2.8 gives an F4 equivalent so is nice on crop.

I wouldn't use the 24-105mm on crop all the time but the long end is useful when needed. I took it to the Farn islands and stuck it on my 40D and my 5DMKIII with a 70-200mm and 2x extender. Because the wildlife was far away and the boat couldn't get too close the the shore it worked well, 38mm was wide enough and I could zoom to nearly 170mm without switching cameras, the 17-55mm would have been too short.

I have had issues with the 17-55mm and dust mine is full, if you buy one put a filter on straight away. The IQ is fantastic and is the best you will get on APC with FF equivalent of 24-70mm F4.

The 15-85 is also a great lens but the variable aperture is annoying and it is no sharper than the 24-105 they are about the same on a crop cameras but the 15-85mm has a better native range.

I find the 24-105mm works better on a FF camera i was pleasantly surprised with its sharpness after reading so many poor reviews and though experience the IQ is a little better than the 17-55mm but you get the extra 35mm range over the 17-55mm 24-70mm equivalent which is very useful. The 24-70mm F2.8 is nice but its heavy and the focal length is short when your used to the longer length.

Your best off sticking with native lenses for crop at the wide and mid tele range although the 16-35mm F4 IS is a nice proposition giving a 25-55mm range but that is too short for my liking. Your better off buying L lenses for the tele side like the 70-200mm give you a 110-320mm equivalent or 70-300mm is a 110-480mm.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 7D MK2 RAW Files
« on: September 22, 2014, 09:34:09 AM »
Ye sorry, that is very hard to believe. the physical size of a full frame sensor gives it at least a 2 stop advantage.

If the noise on its own is similar I bet the image is very muddy.

The results are already up

The 6D and 5DMKIII perform much better. Still impressive performance tho.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 7D MK2 RAW Files
« on: September 22, 2014, 07:54:10 AM »
Yes they do, I got a couple of sample images and couldn't process them.

Have to wait for an update.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5diii to 7dii?
« on: September 20, 2014, 06:53:20 PM »
TBH the 5DMKIII has a great AF and at 6.5fps and FF quality you can't go wrong...

The only benefit of the 7D is the speed and GPS everything else is a downgrade.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: POLL: What's more important, gps or wifi?
« on: September 19, 2014, 08:41:52 AM »
GPS is probably one of the most useful features of the new age DSLRs.

Lenses / Re: Wildlife lens setup
« on: September 19, 2014, 07:56:40 AM »
I would disagree with the use without IS. When you are shooting wildlife you are probably shooting fast enough to make IS void.

70-300mm L is a really nice lens. The 400 F5.6 is probably the best bang for buck. More important is the understanding of the animal you are shooting.

EOS Bodies / Re: A New EOS Pro Body With 46mp Next Month? [CR1]
« on: September 19, 2014, 06:00:51 AM »
I really like the Sony cameras. Not just the IQ but the form and the way they work.

I am going traveling for 5 months through South america and doing a stint in the Amazon. My Canon gear 5DMKIII 24-105mm L and 70-300mm L is perfect for the trip but weighs 3kg when you add the rest of my gear its a lot and its not exactly discrete. So I was looking at buying a smaller system, as I already have the Nex5n and really like it Sony was the obvious choice.

But try swapping out your lenses… The camera bodies are great and weigh nothing but the zeiss lenses don't come close to the canon counterparts. Especially the Zooms not so much the primes, first choice was the A7 because the 24mp is more than enough for me, but the kit lens… soft, the 24-70 F4 Zeiss, from samples I've seen shouldn't be waring that badge for £1000!! The 70-200mm F4 also not a bad lens but not stellar, also over £1000! To replace for a travel system you need £3000 and the lenses are bang middle of the road. Only benefit is the weight the whole kit, weighs in at 1.5kgs the A7 and 24-70mm weighs less than the 5DMKIII body alone then the 24-105mm is another 670g. So half the weight.

Putting a metabones adapter on for me is pointless because they aren't reliable and the AF is so slow its unusable for anything but static subjects.

Instead of focusing on a high MP camera for 9k that is in a difficult competition they should just go all out and add the very best of EOS to a FF mirrorless and steal the whole market. Stick the 6D or 5DMKIII sensor in a small body with a good EVF mid range performance and the ability to use EF lenses and it will sell like hotcakes take the whole market. Thats where the money is for Canon not in a high MP body imo. Sell it for £1500 no brainer for a lot of people.

I love my 5DMKIII for commercial work, because it works and the IQ is great but when I'm shooting for myself the weight really is a pain!!! Canon have nothing that is portable, the 100D, EOS M 700D etc nice little cameras but that sensor is just awful it was poor when it was announced 5 years ago and is currently not competitive the 20.2mp is a little better but not good, pretty much everything on the market has better IQ and noise performance. The 6D, great camera crippled by AF not much smaller than the 5DMKIII and like 150g less weight, IMO pointless swapping out a 5DMKIII for one.

You are all saying Canon aren't in the position with new sensor tech but the 18mp, 20mp and 22mp FF sensors only reside in one camera respectively, which is bad economy surely? They have milked that 18mp sensor and it was poor so why not milk the better sensors? stick them in some other cameras.

I might be in the minority, but at least then there is a little bit of evolution in the canon camp and more options for canon users that want to stay in the camp.

Lenses / Re: What do you use your wide angle lens for?
« on: September 19, 2014, 05:07:49 AM »
A lot of people use them for landscape, but since owning the 16-35MKII I tend to shoot longer. Filling the frame with as much as possible is great but it also makes things further away. I find the wider end of mid tele better as you get a little more compression so its more like what your eye sees, somewhere like 35mm.

If your careful then and don't shoot to the extreme of 16mm more like 20-24mm it can still be used quite nicely for groups of people, and 20 compared to 24mm is quite a difference, used it on occasion for event shooting.

Although I did shoot a few Panos at 16mm pretty happy with the results.

Haweswater Reservoir, Corpse Road, Cumbria by TomScottPhoto, on Flickr

16-35mm is really useful for indoor photography in tight spaces. I also find the 16-35mm useful for night sky scenes.

Lenses / Re: Full frame bargains
« on: September 19, 2014, 05:03:05 AM »
Thing is they are all old lenses and were all updated for the higher density sensors. If you have a look at the lenses available on Digital Picture they really struggle at the extremes, loads of CA and how many MP they will actually resolve is anyones guess. No point putting them on any of the high resolution FF sensors makes the benefit of having them in the first place void. The new sensors need good glass to resolve the detail.

Probably struggle on the 5Dc too. I would give them a miss, although good value for money depends which camp your in.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5diii to 7dii?
« on: September 18, 2014, 02:59:45 PM »
Overkill in what terms? 7DMKII is about the same size as the 5DMKIII and like 100g lighter they are both big cameras but the 5DMKIIIs IQ is still much better.

Basically compare the current 70D and if you could live with it then the 7DMKII improves on it in a couple of areas.

EOS Bodies / Re: A New EOS Pro Body With 46mp Next Month? [CR1]
« on: September 18, 2014, 04:14:32 AM »
I think everyone is getting carried away here.

I can't see Canon creating this camera. Even if it is a pro body the price is too high and the game has changed and Canon needs to move with it.

Why would they introduce a new sensor tech and left the 7DMKII for the next 5 years with a modified last gen sensor. Doesn't make sense to me…

Canon need to respond but the fact we've barely heard anything about this camera since the 1Ds MKIII was discontinued…

Don't get your hopes up… again.

EOS Bodies / Re: How can we improve on 5D3 to 5D4?
« on: September 16, 2014, 11:42:55 AM »
Although it is currently Canons largest MP camera I don't think it was always meant to be. The 5D has always been the event/photo journos camera aka the main commercial area of photography. Therefore I highly doubt they will add a 50+mp sensor.

Saying they should add a 50+mp sensor for the landscapers, ye fine but landscape photography is a niche, you might enjoy it but very few make money from it. Anyone who is shooting billboard size advertising etc won't even look at FF it is MF all day long.

The high MP sector was always the 1DS but canon maybe doesn't see the need for a large mp count sensor camera otherwise one would be out now, or they are really struggling with sensor tech. The two main sectors as said are event (including sport) and journo and Canon already fills these sectors with the 1DX and 5DMKIII.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 44