September 03, 2014, 04:35:57 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 - Bob Howland

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 17
151
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Panning with 5D3
« on: October 11, 2012, 10:09:40 PM »
No, you do not need an image stabilized lens to pan. Subject blur is caused by panning at a different speed ("angular velocity") than your subject was moving when you pressed the shutter. If the background blur for those shots was what you wanted, then my only suggestion is to practice...a lot.

Panning race cars is one of those times when a 6-8 FPS frame rate is useful. It won't make your car any less blurry, but it will allow you to get shots of the car approaching, broadside and moving away, all in the same sequence. I greatly prefer the broadside view. One thing that I have found helpful is to position your body so that you are most comfortable at the end of your shot sequence, then twist your body, with your feet fixed, to where you will begin the sequence. Otherwise, there is a tendency to slow down as you shoot your sequence.

As for shutter speeds, when i try to pan race cars going well over 100 MPH, I use a shutter speed of 1/60 to 1/250 second, with 1/125 being the most common. Even then, only 5-10% of my shots are acceptable.

Hope that helps

152
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Future of APS-C
« on: October 09, 2012, 04:18:20 PM »
The only reasonable APS-C advantage is the price.

Which is a very large advantage. At the risk of repeating myself: "A crop camera is the best/only way of optimizing the following combination of attributes (1) lower price, (2) higher frame rate and (3) smaller pixels (i.e., lots of "pixels per feather"). I currently own a 5D3 and 7D both of which were purchased in the last 6 months. (They replaced a 5D and 40D.) The 7D is used almost exclusively outdoors in comparatively good light with longer lenses  to photograph things that move rapidly and unexpectedly. The 5D3 is used for everything else."

Notice the word "optimizing"



153
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Upgrade or Add
« on: October 09, 2012, 12:59:31 PM »
The 24-105mmL is not particularly suited to a APS-C body, but is great on full frame.  For walk around use, you will need to carry a wide angle lens as well as the 24-105.
I'd wait and purchase the 24-105 as part of a FF kit.

+1

A 24-70/105 on an APS-C body just isn't wide enough for a lot of interior shots. When I put a 24-70 on a  7D, I'm almost always also using a 17-35 on a 5D3, although I have also used a 7D/24-70 and 5D3/100-400 combination. In case you couldn't tell, I'm a big proponent of having both an APS-C and a FF camera.

154
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Future of APS-C
« on: October 09, 2012, 07:25:58 AM »
With the canon 6d / nikon d600 being in the $2,000 ballpark, can we expect the entire aps-c size sensors to slowly disappear as the whole idea was to make a DSLR cost effective ?

Not until FF DSLRs are in the $800-1000 range. $2000 is still an lot for most people to pay for a camera. I do expect mirrorless cameras to take over the APS-C market within the next 5 to 10 years, Canon's pitiful EOS-M offering notwithstanding.

Ultimately, what matters is the cost to manufacture and the cost to sell, at least in a marketplace where there are lots of buyers, which there are, and lots of sellers, which there aren't.

155
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Rumors Surface [CR1]
« on: October 08, 2012, 04:27:53 PM »
The performance of the new sensor:  that is the key to whether or not I'll be  interested.   

+1000

The only thing that would make the 7DII interesting for me would be a low-noise sensor.

+1001

156
Lenses / Re: If you could only have 2 lenses for a wedding...
« on: October 04, 2012, 08:54:24 PM »
24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8

You stated that you last used a 17-50 f/2.8 and wished it was faster. That means you were using a crop body. The 5D3 yields amazingly good images at ISO 12800, so f/2.8 zooms will probably suffice this time.

157
EOS Bodies / Re: POLL: How much $$$ will the high-mp eos cost?
« on: October 04, 2012, 11:29:17 AM »

afterall it will be the DSLR with the most megapixels

At least until Sony scales up their 24MP APS-C sensor to 54MP FF, and Nikon puts it into a D800-class body and sells it for $4000.

158
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: APS-C vs megapixels for zoom
« on: October 01, 2012, 10:35:39 AM »
I thought about using a 5D3 that way. As it turned out at ISOs of 800 and below, my old 40D looked better than the 5D3 image cropped to APS-C size. The same is true comparing cropped 5D3 to 7D, although the 7D improvement over the 40D has been something of a disappointment.

159
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Manual Mode T2i with auto ISO
« on: October 01, 2012, 10:23:51 AM »
I use that mode often but i would use it more if the 7D and 5D3 would let me specify what to do with aperture and shutter speed when the ISO limits are reached. Currently, the cameras just overexpose or underexpose. I've never used the comparable feature in a Nikon camera but I understand that Nikon's implementation is more sophisticated, even in their consumer DSLRs.

160
"Estimate"? How about "make a wild guess" or "What I would do if I was head of Canon marketing"? Anyway, I guessed 5D3 body below $5000, simply because the Nikon D800 and D800 exist and the Sony 24Mpixel APS-C sensor can be scaled up to 60MP FF. I don't think Canon would introduce a high megapixel camera more expensive than the combined price of a D800 body and Nikon 24-70 and 70-200 lenses. But then, I'm often wrong about such things.

Update (correction): "...scaled up to 54MP FF."

161
EOS Bodies / Re: POLL: How much $$$ will the high-mp eos cost?
« on: September 26, 2012, 08:27:04 AM »
I don't see $9000+ option. :D

If Canon uses the 1Dx body, $9000+ is a real possibility. Look at what they did with the 1Dc. Of course, then potential buyers will be able to buy a D800 body plus Nikon 24-70 and 70-200 lenses instead and still have money left over.

My guess is that Canon isn't that stupid and will use a 5D3 body with two Digic 5+ processors, for a cost of $4500-5000. However, I think 3FPS would be quite adequate. I've never understood the obsession with high pixel count and high frame rate. When I do landscape photography, my frame rate is measured in tens of seconds or even minutes. And most studio strobes can't recycle faster than 2 or 3 FPS (although the real limit is how fast electricity can be sucked out of the wall).

162
EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk [CR1]
« on: September 25, 2012, 04:58:56 PM »
It'll be interesting to see if Canon sets the price so high that potential customers can purchase a D800 and Nikon 24-70 and 70-200 lenses, and still have money left over.

163
Lenses / Re: New Lenses in January [CR1]
« on: September 25, 2012, 04:53:45 PM »
now what do you think "affordable" means?

Wild guess: about the same price as the 300 f/2.8, since the front element is almost the same diameter. On the other hand, the 300 f/2.8 with a 1.4x TC makes a very nice 420 f/4.

164
EOS Bodies / Re: New Canon EOS-M
« on: September 19, 2012, 07:36:54 AM »
Did the Canon reps happen to mention how fast Canon was going to expand the next M camera line? Once Canon gets the focusing speed issues resolved and we all become accustomed to using an EVF, the 7D2 might actually be an M camera.

165
Lenses / Re: Were EF-S lenses a bad idea?
« on: September 18, 2012, 02:56:57 PM »
But the real reason EFS lenses was so brilliant was necessity.  It served the consumer of APS-C sensors.  In the EF family, what lens would be your general purpose zoom?  The EF 24-105 L or the 28-135?  Not wide enough.  The EF 16-35 II?  Expensive and not long enough.  EFS lenses have and will continue to serve their purpose very well. 

Necessity?? We'll have to agree to disagree about that. Considering what Nikon, Tamron, Tokina and Sigma all did, I don't see EF-S as being necessary at all.

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 17