August 21, 2014, 06:21:40 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 - dlleno

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 40
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D in October? [CR1]
« on: August 13, 2012, 03:10:00 PM »
Sorry to break it to you, guys, but the 6D rumor is just wishful thinking  :P.

Canon has both the high and low ends covered with new models: new 1DX, new 5DIII, new Rebel, new EOS-M system.
Together with a discounted 5DII, a discounted 7D, and a discounted 60D, they are all set for the holiday shopping season this year.

The 70D will be the next camera from Canon - likely in Jan/Feb next year.

"set for the high and low ends" -- agreed, except that there is no pro crop body (time will tell if this is deliberate or not).  That aside, canon is still quite weak in two areas it seems to me. 

1.  The 60D may be discounted but it takes only a slighly clever customer to figure out how old it is.

2. In the advanced crop body space there is nothing, save the 7D which is (slightly) older than the discontinued 1D4.  The 7D firmware udpate may be an attempt to squeeze one more drop out of this platform but imho all this does is make existing 7D owners happier  and does little to make it attractive for holiday shoppers who know how old it is. 

I want to know what Canon expects 1DX and 5D3 owners to puchase as a second body. right now there are no attractive options -- for new purchases I mean.  If they don't want to loose holiday revenue they will have to either deliver or  entice people to wait until after christmas to buy.  and it better be something more attractive than a T4i in a 7D body.

It will be interesting to see if and when Canon makes a move in these areas.

Lenses / Re: How do you pack your lens hoods when traveling?
« on: August 10, 2012, 04:56:18 PM »
when I load for easiest access,   The 17-55 has the hood on correctly and with lens cap off,  either separately or attached to the camera.  When I load for transit, the hood is reversed and lens cap is on. 

70-200 is bagged with hood reversed with lens cap on (cause there isn't room to install the hood normally) either separately or attached to camera.

 the 10-22 hood is too big to be stored on the lens, and rides in a separate compartment

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D in October? [CR1]
« on: August 10, 2012, 12:53:21 AM »
We make the mistake of looking for a one-camera solution to our needs. Canon wants to sell us all at least two bodies.

Now that's hitting the nail on the head.  Got my 7D, waiting to see which way to go for FF.

nice.  what attracts me to the 5D3 is the fps and AF system, as the FF solution.  But if your FF needs do not include action, then 6D. 

I'm one of those who sees value in the high-speed burst, no matter what body you are using - so a 4fps FF isn't attractive to me.

what is the 2nd body Canon wants to sell to 1DX and 5D3 owners?    A high performance crop body comes to mind, but it would have to produce convincingly better IQ in distance-constrained situations compared to just cropping the FF image in post to achieve equivalent FOV, a scenario where the 7D just barely edges out the 5D3.

Lenses / Re: Lens Filters etc.
« on: August 09, 2012, 07:06:36 PM »
couple of thoughts on filters

1.  I'm currently in the "naked" camp.  I used to put the best B&W UV filters on my lenses, especially on those non-Ls that are not sealed.  Then I realized that in 30 years not one mishap was avoided with that practice.  Recently I did an experiment showing an increase in flare due to the addition of the filter (on my 17-55, which is flare-prone to begin with).  So  took the UV off and shoot "naked" now whenever possible.  now the only filter on my 17-55 is a slim B&W circular polarizer, of course only when needed.  my lenses all have hoods -- even my 10-22.  that provides the protection I personally need. 

I've got a couple of primo B&W UV filters 72mm that I don't use anymore and would be willing to sell :-)

2.  yes, you can make minor PP corrections to darken the sky, with all the hazards thereunto appertaining, but what you cannot do in post is remove reflections from water or other reflecting surfaces like airplanes, windows etc.  here the polarizer is just fantastic - remember that reflected light is polarized light.   So you're at the beach for example -- you can remove that reflection coming off of the water and get nice "depth".   

here's a couple of examples.  in the first, my objective was to capture the boy's reflection, so polarizer is off.  in the second, polarizer is on because I wanted to capture the depth of color in the incoming surf.  the dark sky was a bonus but not my primary objective.  Even the color of the underlying sand is evident, something that would be impossible without the polarizer.   FYI that one is at 17mm (1.6x) just a few inches from the incoming wave.  I had to act fast :-)

Here are some of mine. the first is an 10mm  UWA shot, using a hand rail for support.  8/10ths of a sec, Canon 10-22mm at f/4.5 (no IS),

The second is handheld 1/6th second at 50mm with the 17-55 IS at f/2.8,

The third is handheld 1/15th second with the 17-55 at f/2.8 and 55mm (equivalent to 88mm in a FF).  IS is your friend

all 40D at ISO 1600.  no time to set up anything or influence any lighting -- just grabbed the shot while the guide was giving her speech

some nice work there, to be sure.  most of us don't have time to attach lights to baloons or even take multiple exposures to stitch together, which of course requires a tripod and a certain absense of other people kicking it  ;D .  on most any guided tour, unless it is specifically for photography in which case there may be special rules or exceptions, you have to be quick, anticipate a shot by looking ahead,  take many of them, use wide and UWA, IS whenever possible, high ISOs, capture the lighting that is present at the time, and expect few keepers.  monopod is going with me next time, even if it just stays clipped to my belt, but based on my last experience I could have used it very effectively. I took my flash in, but only for that one shot, anticipated near the end of the tour when I wanted to show family members near the exit. 

the only other thing I haven't seen mentioned is that multiple burst is your freind, not for stopping the actions of others, but for stopping yours lol :D

lol yea.  I went through a number of cpu cycles before arriving at the 3551.  I didn't want to regret my purchase ever.  and I do mean ever :D    There were things I just was not willing to compromize, such as setup speed, durabiilty, weight, and LENGTH.  so many 'pods are too short for tall dudes to use correctly and in all anticipated scenarios.  for example, shooting up at birds.  and resting the leg behind yours to obtain additional stability, not just straight vertical in front of you. The gizto is just the way to go!

The RRS required firing some some neurons to.  for $100 the kirk version of the manfroto is ok, but I sent mine back without even opening the package.  too wimpy.  the RRS was like wow finally someone knows what a stable head means.  and the "02" version allows you to switch the orientation of the head itself.  anyway sorry for the thread drift - I just like my gitzo :D

I wish I had brought a mono into wind cave.  gitzo 3551 for example, on a belt clip, can be set up in seconds, and it can be protected by you making it less susceptable to someone kicking it.  I'm not a fan of ballheads on a mono, but find great happiness with the RRS MH-02 on the gitzo.  personal preference of course.

I recently encountered similar experiences in one of the ND caves (Wind). Fortunately in my case, low-level incandescent lighting was provided along the way because I was on a guided tour; I brought my flash in but never used it -- it just wouldn't have captured what I saw,  and since I was on a tour I didn't have time to set up anything usefully creative anyway.  I had to shoot quick, look for opportunities to rest the camera on something like a handrail, utilize wide apertures, IS, and got few keepers. 

I had a lowepro sling so I could change lenses without taking the backpack off, and utilized the IS WA most of the time (17-55). I got my 70-200 f/2.8 out just because I wanted to, and got a couple of surprisingly acceptable close-in shots of some features by resting the camera against a handrail.  next time I'll bring a monopod.  In my case, a tripod wouldn't have been practical;  no time or space for set-up.

if you are not on a guided tour, and you really do have the time and space to bring in lighting and tripod, all the better!  its just that a single, straight-on flash won't capture what you really see.  without installed "tourist lighting" already in place, and with the time to be creative with a tripod, I think I would be tempted to experiment with "painting" light manually with shutter open -- assuming you have the time of course, and freedom to move about the cave.  For example: open shutter, paint light, then move to another location -- paint more light, lather rinse repeat, then close shutter.  remote shutter release would be useful.    Another alternative, if you really have the time and freedom to be creative, is to place some flash slaves strategically around various places.

Lenses / Re: Keep 70-200 f4 IS or go for f2.8 IS II?
« on: July 23, 2012, 07:41:50 PM »
I find the weight of the f/2.8 II to be an advantage, but that could be just me.  Nice work neuroanatomist I happen to appreciate and greatly respect blurred waterfalls :D especially handheld ones -- this takes more than a casual attention to technique, IS notwithstanding.  I do suspect when you factor in the advantage of a FF and the shorter focal length, your conditions are similar to 1/15th at 200mm on a 1.6x crop body.

Lenses / Re: Keep 70-200 f4 IS or go for f2.8 IS II?
« on: July 23, 2012, 07:14:59 PM »
with 1.4x attached, the f/2.8 II is sharper. whether or not that difference is noticable or important is up to you

with 1.4x attached, the f/2.8 will likey focus faster, although I haven't heard any complaints about the f/4 AF at f/5.6 with TC.  I get amazing fast AF on mine, but again whether or not any difference is noticable or important, is up to you. 

without TC, the f/2.8 II should have an AF advantage, but I've never heard of the f/4 coming up short of anyone's expectations and since I've never shot with the f/4 I can't confirm it. 

I CAN confirm IS on the f/2.8 II is simply outstanding.  1/15th second handheld at 200mm is not unreasonable.  seriously. 

EOS Bodies / Re: disruptive technology and the 5D3
« on: July 20, 2012, 07:02:03 PM »
well I said that the D800 disrupted the market; that was just my observation from reading. I wasn't claiming that the D800 sensor technology was itself disruptive --     I don't own a D800.  What you are revealing here from your own original work is that the D800 sensor has its strengths but its not as disruptive as people think it is.  nice work I'm glad there are people like you revealing real data and not following the hype. 

But my post was not about comparing cameras (esp not Nikon vs Canon.  gasp) it was about Canon's direction and technology strategy with respect to sensors.  It might be best to  leave the D800 out of the picture and take the-digital-picture comment at face value - -that (in his opinion) the 5D3 sensor was not "disruptive". 

Similarly, I wasn't comparing anything to the 1Dx, except to muse a bit about the technology generation that Canon utilizes, noting that for any given generation Canon seems to
1. push the pixel density as far as possible on crop sensors
2. push the pixel density a little on the "lesser" FF sensors
3.  bring down the pixel density to the lowest levels on the flagship bodies to optimize IQ,

I'm just observing that a newer or higher IQ technology cycle might be present or be introduced into the crop sensors, or even the higher pixel count FF sensors before appearing in the flagship body, where the pixel density is lowered to optimize several things including IQ.  I'm not saying "same sensor" here I'm saying "same technology  cycle.  1DX sensor appears to be in the same technology life cycle as the 5D3.

I'm also testing my hypothesis that mature sensor technologies appear in the flagship bodies, and that technologies are tested/proven out in the bodies of lower order.   As for "disruptive" sensor technology -- if Canon had something, they could give it market exposure before refreshing the 1D bodies with it. 

Lenses / Re: Keep 70-200 f4 IS or go for f2.8 IS II?
« on: July 20, 2012, 06:29:39 PM »
one has to decide if wider apertures are a must, and when they are a "must"  the additional weight just doesn't matter.  Sure the f/2.8 is heavier but for me I wouldn't be without it.  There are two use cases that are important to me:

1.  The f/4 aperture will produce on the order of 50% wider DOF than f/2.8, at least on a 1.6x crop camera, and produces better background blurr.   I find that in actual practice I use f/2.8 quite a bit just for that reason, not to mention the extra stop of light.

2.  the f/2.8 takes a 1.4x TC well, and the resultant 280mm f/4 is quite good. 

EOS Bodies / disruptive technology and the 5D3
« on: July 20, 2012, 05:54:04 PM »
Those following the Canon sensor technology, esp. the market disruption caused by the D800, will find this comment from rather interesting:

Canon didn’t release any disruptive technology in this case.
   ..... (of the 5D3)

which raises the question:  to stay competitive, does Canon need to turn heads and release disruptive sensor technology - something that drops jaws?  the t4i sensor isn't disruptive and neither is the 5D3

Even the 1DX sensor does not strike me as disruptive, from the comments and reviews anyway.  the camera appears to be a highly optimized implementation of incremental changes to a mature technology, very well executed, the best Canon has ever offered and capable of outstanding performance,  to be sure,  but not disruptive in the case of the sensor itself.  is the 1DX sensor disruptive?  1DX owners please tell us.

 the problem for Canon (well for anyone looking to Canon for "disruptive" sensor technology") is that having just asserted the flagship $6K body would they then, early in the 1DX life, introduce a FF body containing a disruptively better sensor with better DR and/or RAW noise performance ? Time will tell if Canon takes any cues from Nikon in that regard.

 One approach would be to introduce a disruptive capability set in a crop sensor.  Its hard for me to imagine an entry level FF or even a 5D4, eclipsing the 1DX in IQ -- even if it had inferior feature set.  Perhaps, however Canon could introduce a disruptively better crop sensor.  With the IQ potential masked by the high pixel density, I wonder if the next generation of higher-end crop bodies might begin to approach 5D2 IQ levels, perhaps. 

Lenses / Re: Recommendations for vacation lenses and gear
« on: July 18, 2012, 08:28:47 AM »
After reading this I can honestly say I would never go on vacation with the OP.  I understand and sympathize with his wife.  My simple rule of thumb, if the camera takes up more space than a extra pair of shoes it's too much.  The reasoning here is no one should go on a vacation that requires more than one extra pair of shoes, otherwise it's not really a vacation.  All that is needed for a family vacation is one camera and one lens.  It definitely does not require multiple posts/threads on an internet forum.  It shouldn't be this hard.  My $0.02: there is so much to do and see in Southern California you shouldn't waste it setting f stops and shutter speeds.

That's why I posted on this thread. I have never been to CA and have never traveled with ff yet. Otherwise I would have went with my old 60d and 15-85 and have been good but I have this gear and want to have the great shots it takes of memories that are worth it rather than kids hanging around the couch or the cats. That's also why we bought a little Sony nex to be lightweight some days. So I should comeback with crappy shots with a power shot ? Am I supposed to put those on my walls?

I hope that we keep to answering your questions and refrain from pontificating or trying to manage your vacation for you.  You have goals --  and there are a great many of us interested in helping you fulfil them.  I can fit more than a pair of extra shoes in my camera bag, for example -- my wife and I are still together, and we love the photos I get.  my feedback is that I applaud you for planing ahead and there's no reason why you can't expose some of your thinking here to benefit from the experience of others.   

I travel with a 17-55, a 28-135,  and a 70-200.  Every vacation day has its goals, both personally and photographically and I bring that portion of my equipment that suits the needs of the day while balancing the security risk of leaving a lens in the hotel safe, for example,  if I don't want to carry it with me that day.

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 40