Messages

1

PowerShot / Re: Down to the RX100 or G15...

« on: May 28, 2013, 09:31:27 AM »

I own an RX100.  It's the best P&S I've ever used.  The files are gorgeous, even at higher ISO.  The lens is very nice, especially on the wide end. And the camera is amazingly tiny - an important consideration if you want a truly pocketable camera you'll take everywhere.  Also love the interface.  Downsides include a lens on the slow side, a lens not as good at the long end and a lens that doesn't have a great zoom range.  All-in-all tho, man, a great P&S.

Here's a youtube vid on the G1x and RX100 size difference if interested:

Canon G1X vs. Sony RX100 size comparison (The video's owner prevents external embedding)

Cheers!

2

Lens Gallery / Re: Helios 44-2 58mm f/2.0 M42

« on: April 12, 2013, 01:41:39 AM »

Thanks for this thread!  I keep thinking about buying this lens and keep postponing the purchase.  Examples like this are good incentive to just push the buy button.

Cheers!

3

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Buying Used Equipment on LensRentals.com

« on: November 20, 2012, 11:26:32 PM »

Ok, so does anyone have any experience with getting used equipment from them.  I hesitate because rented stuff (e.g., cars) are usually not treated all that well, so what you usually get is some very beat up equipment that won't last as long.  I was hoping to get some feedback from the community as to whether this is an acceptable way of getting good equipment a little cheaper.

I've purchased a used Canon 24 TSE MK II from them.  The price was very fair, the lens was in better shape than I had expected and they promptly and patiently answered all the questions I had prior to purchase.  Highly recommended.

Good luck!

4

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Considering switching to Nikon

« on: October 24, 2012, 12:14:20 PM »

...As for the argument (made above someplace) that nobody prints more the 7 (or whatever) stops of DR, tell me which file will make a better print: 1) one with very clean, detailed, noise and band free shadows and correctly exposed highlights or 2) one with muddy, noisey/pixilated and banded shadows and correctly exposed highlights? ...

Neither - because of the highlighted part of your post above.

Storm, meet teacup.

PS do you really own a D800e, 5D2 and 5D3? Impressive.... I think.

"Neither" is the wrong answer at least for the prints I make but I guess we'll just disagree about that.

And yes, I do own a D800e, 5D2 and 5D3.  Do you own a D800/e?  If not, I suggest you rent or borrow one, use it for a while, shoot a bunch of DR and detail challenging scenes at ISOs 100 & 200 side-by-side with a 5D2 or 5D3 or 7D or 6D or 1Dx.  You'll be impressed with the D800/E's sensor....I think.

Cheers.

5

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Considering switching to Nikon

« on: October 23, 2012, 11:02:25 PM »

To be honest, I've tought about switching to Nikon too. It almost drives me insane that it seems like Canon isn't doing anything about their (heavily) inferior sensors. With every release of a new DSLR you see Canon getting beated to death by Nikon and Sony when it comes down to DR....

Settle down. There is no need to go insane over a minor detail. 'HEAVILY inferior'?? Sorry mate, it seems you've bought the hype.

Thanks. I was thinking the same thing. Personally, I think this is all as silly as saying you're going to Nikon because they make their cameras blacker on the outside than Canon. I believe well over 99% of people using DSLR cameras today don't get anywhere near needing the theoretical DR that gets debated around here as if it were the damn holy grail!

Here's the thing:  at ISOs 100-200 the sensor on the D800e is clearly, demonstratively superior in both DR and detail.  These are not minor details.  In a high DR scene there are times when I can capture the DR one on frame with the D800 that'd take 2 frames with my 5D2 or 5D3.  That is not a minor consideration for some of us and could be considered a huge advantage (but I guess that's up to the photographer to decide).  Regarding DR being a holy grail, well, at the point we are now with DSLR FF sensors in the 24-36 MP range already bumping up against reasonable diffraction (and processing) limits and with very, very good high ISO capabilities, AFAIC DR is now the holy grail (to be honest, it's been my holy grail since the 5D2 didn't much improve on the 5Dc & the 5D3 didn't improve at all on the 5D2, hence my foray into Nikon-Land).  As for the argument (made above someplace) that nobody prints more the 7 (or whatever) stops of DR, tell me which file will make a better print: 1) one with very clean, detailed, noise and band free shadows and correctly exposed highlights or 2) one with muddy, noisey/pixilated and banded shadows and correctly exposed highlights? (caveat - that's a harsh description of under exposed Canon shadows but it is a situation that could occur in the same scene shot by the D800 and 5D3).

Now, at ISOs higher than the base 100-200 of the D800, the DR advantage is gradually lost until the 5D3 trumps the D800 (my experience seems to reflect the DXO Mark sensor test scores in this regard).  So, if shooting at high ISO is a priority then sure, the 5D3 may be the better sensor to use.  But don't discount the DR advantages of the D800 at low ISOs  - they're real.  And the detail advantages are real pretty much through out the ISO range when using non-diffraction limited apertures.

And before anyone dismisses me as a Nikon fanboy, I've owned the following Canon DSLRs: 10D, 5Dc, 1D2n, 7D & currently own a 5D2, 5D3 and IR converted T3i.  And altho I own a D800e, I don't really see myself as a Nikon shooter and sincerely hope Canon gets its act together and develops new sensor tech to compete with the new generation of Sony/Nikon sensors so that I can go back to being a one brand shooter.

Cheers.

6

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Considering switching to Nikon

« on: October 23, 2012, 01:33:49 PM »

Yeah I read that the AF-S 85mm F/1.8G is brilliant. The new EF 24mm F/2.8 IS USM and EF 28mm F/2.8 IS USM lenses also seem to be really good optically (and IS on a wide angle prime for the 1st time?), but sadly enough they are way overpriced.

I absolutely adore my 85G. It was my second lens after shooting with just the 50/1.4G for about 3 months. It performs just about as well as the 85/1.4G and is in fact sharper wide open than that one is at f/1.8, while being much lighter and easier to handle (yay for well-made plastic lenses).

Nikon's new 28/1.8G is very appealing as an alternative to the new Canon IS primes, but I think I'd rather wait for a cheaper 35 since I'd rather replace my 50 with a new walkaround prime rather than have one normal and one wider than normal but not ultrawide prime.

I've been waiting for the 70-200/4 since I bought into the system. My older brother has had a 7D since the day his preorder was delivered and his 70-200/4 IS is his most-used lens. I've always been jealous but now I'll be able to have one of my own, and with a next-gen VR system to boot

I use both the 85 f/.8 and 28 f/1.8 on the D800e.  I agree that the 85 does indeed rock.  I'm on the fence about my copy of the 28 however.  It's very nice stopped down but wide open. it really suffers from fringing - disappointingly so.  I know to expect some fringing on fast, wide open wide primes but the 28 (my copy anyway) seems pretty poor in this respect.

Cheers!

7

Lenses / Re: Lens suggestions for 3 weeks trip to Egypt and Jordan

« on: October 23, 2012, 12:09:06 AM »

Is it too off base to suggest renting, borrowing or maybe even buying an M4/3s or other smallish, high quality combo that will attract less attention, be easier to carry and produce really nice images?  I'm only suggesting this because I'm struggling with much the same  issue with a non photo centric trip to Iceland/Belgium in the spring and I keep thinking I don't want to lug my 5D3 or D800 with me.  An M4/3s or similar system is an attractive travel option.

Anyway, if you're set on taking the 5D2, I'd take my 24-105 or rent a 28-300L and call it good.  It seems the 24-105 has some serious copy/expectation variation.  I love mine on the 5D2 and 5D3 but others hate it or are kinda unimpressed.  Go figure.  The 28-300L would be a do it all lens that could stay on your body and not let dust in but it's heavy and would attract attention.  That said, I'd suggest that carrying a DLSR and changing lenses would also attract attention.    I guess another thought is to take your 24 and 85 and call it a day.  That'd be a light, useful and manageable combo as well.

Good luck, be safe & have fun on your trip!

8

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Considering switching to Nikon

« on: October 19, 2012, 01:55:50 AM »

Thanks for all the information. Appreciate it.

My pleasure. 

Another observation is that for whatever reason, maybe the added DR, the D800E seems to produce nicer B&W files than the Canons (I shoot RAW/NEF, convert in ACR and use mostly Nik Silver Efex for B&W but sometimes onOne software too).  My wife can actually tell my Nikon BWs from my Canon BWs.  I've also seen this mentioned on other forums so I'm fairly sure I'm not seeing things.  Anyway, if you're in to B&W it's something to check if you rent one.

Cheers!

9

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Considering switching to Nikon

« on: October 19, 2012, 12:46:48 AM »

I currently shoot with a 5D2, 5D3 & D800E.

First & foremost, at ISO 100 & 200 the image quality of the D800E blows the Canons out of the water - plain & simple.  DR and detail are stunning.  If you shoot a lot at these low ISOs you can't get better than the D800E's sensor.  At those low ISOs, in a high DR scene, a shot that only needs one exposure with the D800 might very well need 2 with the Canon to capture clean shadows.  At ISOs 400-800 the DR and IQ are generally about equal with the exception of more details for the D800E.  At above ISO 800 the 5D3 starts to pull ahead in DR and maybe noise but I find the noise of the D800E files easier to deal with.

As for AF, I agree with others that the 5D3 has an edge. 

As for ergonomics/shooting comfort overall I prefer Canon but not by much.  The one design feature the D800E has that's inexplicably missing in the 5D series is a built-in viewfinder curtain.  What is Canon thinking?  And why neither cam has a flip out, tilting LCD screen is a real mystery.

Oh, and Canons liveview is way, way better than Nikon's.

As for build quality, the 5d3 is better.  Same too for shutter noise/feel.

As for frame rate, I kinda like the D800 option of using a 1.2 crop to get 5-6 fps (resulting in a 24MP file) but it takes practice to mentally switch from a full frame POV to a smaller crop.

As for lenses, I've seen a lot of 24-105 vs 24-120 talk in the thread with folks saying the 24-105 is a lot better.  I don't agree.  I have & love them both for their usability and IQ and find them comparable.  As for overall lens line-up, I prefer Canon for its amazing TSE lenses and L quality mid zooms like the 70-300 and 100-400 and 70-200 f/4 IS (but it looks like Nikon is about to announce its own 70-200 f/4 VR).  On the wide end, Nikon has the wildly good 14-24 and useful 16-35 f/4 VR.  I've rented a 14-24 to use on my 5D2 and wow, it's nice.  I opted for a Zeiss 21 f/2.8 for the D800E but am still considering the 14-24 or 16-35 VR since I really like AF and handheld stuff.

As others have pointed out, your choice of body has everything to do with how you shoot and what you enjoy shooting.  For ISO 100-200 use, the D800 smokes Canon for image quality and it's about equal up to ISO 800.  The 5D3 might be a slightly better general use DSLR but not by much and only if you use higher ISOs and need a little better fullframe frame rate or slightly better low light AF.

If you can, rent one and find out for yourself how it'll work for your needs.

Good luck!

Oh, and BTW, my D800E does unfortunately have the left side AF problem (still need to send it in for repair).  But on the other hand, my 5D3 exhibits wild light leak thru the viewfinder when I'm using liveview (really bad - not using the annoying/stupid external curtain isn't an option).  Sigh, nothing's perfect.

10

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 12-24 F4.5-5.6 EX DG ASP HSM II

« on: September 28, 2012, 02:23:56 PM »

  Have you considered the new Tamron 16-24 f/2.8?

I meant to reference the Tokina 16-28 f/2.8.  My bad. 

11

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 12-24 F4.5-5.6 EX DG ASP HSM II

« on: September 28, 2012, 10:08:27 AM »

  Have you considered the new Tamron 16-24 f/2.8?

I belive you thougt of Tokina 16-28. I'm just checking some reviews on youtube.
Looks nice, but 16mm... I wish it was 14mm.

If lightroom's lens correction is able to fix Sigma's distortion it would be my first pick.

The Sigma's distortion is nothing to worry too much about.  For really wide on a Canon FF, the Sigma is the way to go if you want a zoom and/or wider than 14mm (unless you want to use the Nikon 14-24 with an adapter - a terrific lens that I've rented and used on my 5D2).

Cheers!

12

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 12-24 F4.5-5.6 EX DG ASP HSM II

« on: September 27, 2012, 11:26:27 PM »

I own both the MK I & MK II version of the Sigma.  I've used the MK I version on a 5Dc and 5D2 and the MK II version on my 5D2 and 5D3.  In the same focal lengths, I also use a 24 TSE MK II, Zeiss 21 f/2.8 and 24-105 on the Canons.  I really enjoy using the Sigma for its really wide, funky perspective.  Funny, but like Pierce, I tend to use it for HDRs of structures (everything from abandoned buildings to icebergs and icefalls) and interiors.  The MK II version has more distortion than the MK I version but has much better corners.  Its center is very acceptable.  I also tend to like Sigma colors and contrast.  Since I own other 20-24mm lenses that have better IQ at those focal lengths (the 24 TSE MK II and Zeiss), the Sigma is my "wildly wide" lens and I don't really think of it as a landscape lens.  I know it's a matter of taste but I'm not a fan of a lens wider than 20mm for landscapes (things start getting awful tiny and wide at those really wide focal lengths and to keep detail I'd rather start stitching with longer focal lengths for landscapes).  So, I guess for me, the Sigma is a specialty lens.  Have you considered the new Tamron 16-24 f/2.8?

Cheers!

13

Lenses / Re: Tonika 16-28 vs Canon 17-40 or Carl Zeiss 21mm f2.8 for canon 5d3

« on: August 29, 2012, 09:25:41 PM »

I own a 5D3 and 24 TSE MK II and Nikon mount Zeiss 21 f/2.8 F2 (that I use on a D800E and the 5D3 via adapter).  The 24 TSE MK II and the Zeiss are both extraordinary lenses.  Over tho, I prefer the Canon 24 TSE MK II.  The image quality stopped down a bit is every bit as wonderful as the Zeiss (microcontrast included) plus you have the movements as a bonus.  The 24 TSE MK II is a very large reason why I'm not going all in with Nikon.  I highly recommend you consider it of the price doesn't scare you off.  Upsides to the Zeiss include wildly sharp corners and the fact it's faster than the Canon as well as a bit better wide open but really, if you don't need f/2.8 or the 21mm, there's little reason to chose the Zeiss over the Canon 24 TSE MK II.  Also, once you get used to having tilt-shift, it's hard not have it

As an aside, I have also owned the Canon 24 TSE MK I and it doesn't come close to either the MK II or Zeiss.

Good luck!

14

EOS Bodies / Re: Need help from All 5D markiii user

« on: August 05, 2012, 08:47:42 AM »

Hi, i am currently using 5d markii ... but have some intention to get the 5dm3. But i have some question would like to ask all the 5dm3 user. i know the 5dm3 has great improvement in iso performance.. However, does it only applied when shooting in JPEG ? How is the noise performance if 5dm3 shooting in RAW compared to 5dm2 shooting in RAW? This is important for me as i mostly shoot in RAW format and i found that iso performance in 5dm2 is not that great after exceed 1600. Thanks

I own both a 5D2 and 5D3 and my unscientific impressions are that the RAW ISO performance of the 5D3 is maybe 2/3 of a stop better.  Other, more scientific comparisons on the net seem to indicate maybe a 1/2 stop improvement.  I also feel that the 5D3 files seems to handle noise reduction better than 5D2 files.  Also, it's worth noting that 5D3's AF is amazing - much, much better than the 5D2 - not even in the same league and the 6 frames per second is very nice.

15

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixels Coming Soon? [CR1]

« on: August 04, 2012, 10:09:11 PM »

Ok. more megapixels. That was always going to happen.

But will the sensor be any better?
Will it still have vertical banding up the wazoo in dark areas?
Will the read noise be the same?
Will the dynamic response be about the same?

What was so good about the D800 wasn't just the increase in number of pixels but the quality of those pixels.

+1

I own a 5D2, 5D3 + D800e (and just sold a 7D).  The sensor on the D800e lives up to the hype.  It produces amazing files.  I won't be buying another Canon DSLR until they greatly improve their sensor tech.  In the meantime, I'll continue to use my 5D3 for fast action and with the amazing 24 TSE MK II but the D800e will be used for everything else (and I'll also be selling my 5D2).

Cheers!