July 30, 2014, 02:22:14 PM

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 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 17
91
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Dual Pixel Liveview Autofocus
« on: July 02, 2013, 07:26:59 AM »
Interesting and promising.  Still not as fast as true phase AF, I expect.

Still...I was considering the EOS M, but maybe I'll wait for the EOS M MkII with this technology...   ;)

For video, I would not want instantaneous autofocus, since that would provide no transition period. I would, however, want the autofocus to be smooth, with no hunting whatsoever, basically a superb electronic implementation of a highly-skilled focus puller (i.e., first assistant cameraman). (High slew rates provide faster response but are more prone to hunting.)

As for the M MkII, I agree completely, something to replace my G10 but with superb ISO6400 image quality and a decent EVF.

92
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 40D to 5D Classic. Good upgrade?
« on: June 27, 2013, 05:55:51 PM »
I used to use a 5D/40D pairing but replaced them last year with a 5D3/7D pairing. The 40D was used almost exclusively with my 100-400 and 300 f/2.8, which is how I use the 7D now. I have two 20X30 landscape photos made with the 5D, with lots of tree leaves but a minimum viewing distance of about 30 inches. They look fine.

Biggest complaint with the 5D is that the focusing is not very fast and the highest ISO is 3200. It is definitely not a sports camera.

93
5D3 body with a $4500 price. My problem is that I really don't need more resolution than the 5D3 already has but, then again, I'm not trying to sell 40" x 60" landscape prints as corporate decoration.

94
Lenses / Re: What is the next Canon lens you want or covet and why...
« on: June 08, 2013, 01:46:44 PM »
200-400 f/4 L IS 1.4X, to photograph outdoor sports, especially in dusty locations

95
Lenses / Re: If you could only have three lenses...
« on: June 02, 2013, 08:33:16 PM »
24-70 f/2.8 II
70-200 f/2.8 IS II
200-400 f/4 IS 1.4X

96
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II
« on: May 17, 2013, 02:23:01 PM »
Quote
We’re told a “surprise” announcement will be made by Canon in July, what that is we’re unsure. However, the source alluded to it being a camera body. I wouldn’t call the EOS 70D a “surprise”, but we’ll see. Could it be…….. something else?

Lets see...
* Canon announces RAW video in official firmware
* Canon announces 4k video in official firmware for 1DX/5DIII with some special add on device
* Canon announces a m4/3 camera plus lenses
* Canon announces a new EOS-M series camera that is radically different
* Canon announces a DSLR wither either hybrid or pure EVF
* Canon announces a DSLR that is modeled on the Ricoh GX-R with a plugable sensor/CPU module
* Canon announces a 70D with the autofocus from the 5DIII
* Canon announces a new APS-H DSLR (not likely)

... other ideas?

I like your fifth idea! How about both the 7D and 70D both being mirrorless cameras with shortened flange distances and Canon introducing a 1-1/3 stop Speed Booster-like adapter? The FF cameras could keep the standard flange distance and mirrors for photographic Neanderthals. The M-mount might have been introduced, half-heartedly, solely to allow a reduction in camera size.

97
Lenses / Re: Who has pre-ordered or will order 200-400
« on: May 14, 2013, 08:43:29 PM »
I can't decide between responses 1, 2 and 3. Response 4 is the only one that is out since I don't want a 14-24 and my 135 is just fine.

98
Lenses / Re: Would you rather buy used or refurbished?
« on: May 08, 2013, 03:48:45 PM »
I bought my EOS-3 used from Keh about 10 years ago, with excellent results. I've bought several lenses and a 7D body refurb'd from both B&H and Canon Direct, also with excellent results. I would not buy either used or refurb'd from E-Bay or Amazon, in fact, I've never bought anything from E-Bay..

99
I'm taking the perspective that you're trying to sell the house, so here goes.

1. The outdoor colors look too highly saturated for my taste, almost garish.

2. The first image shows far too much driveway.

3. The images have too much of an "extreme wide-angle lens" look to them. In the swimming pool picture, the sub-pool on the left looks severely oblong, not at all natural.

Hope that helps.

100
EOS-M / Re: Eos M my first impressions!
« on: May 01, 2013, 07:19:34 AM »
What viewfinder are you using and what do you do if you want to use fill flash and the optical viewfinder simultaneously?

101
Lenses / Re: EF 100-400 Replacement in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 01, 2013, 07:17:11 AM »
mine stucks between 300-400mm and needs some force to change the focal length. Tried to repair it, but the 300€ did not change it sufficiently.

My lens sticks too, at the other end, and Canon USA hasn't been able to fix it. After not using the lens for a week, initially zooming the lens from minimum can take considerable force.

102
EOS Bodies / Re: The Future of EOS M [CR1]
« on: April 30, 2013, 12:20:28 PM »
The future of EOS M ... none.

In my opinion Canon should (a) chuck the EF-M system, (b) join the m4/3 consortium, and (c) make a functional EF-to-m43 translation adapter.

Huh?? Doing that makes no sense at all. It would put them at the mercy of Olympus and Panasonic, mostly Olympus. Canon would still have to introduce lenses, although maybe (repeat: maybe!!) not as many as with the EF-M system. Canon 4/3 camera owners might buy other manufacturers' lenses instead and Canon would have to guarantee that Canon bodies work with their lenses and their bodies work with Canon lenses. What a mess!

Better for Canon to introduce (1) better EF-M bodies, (2) some very small native lenses, perhaps eight total, and (3) an extremely high quality EF-to-EF-M Metabones Speed Booster-type adapter, except with a 1-1/3 stop improvement.

I own a G10. I want one part of the EF-M system to evolve into something the same size (or slightly larger) but with much better high ISO image quality.

103
Lenses / Re: EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Available Mid 2014?
« on: April 23, 2013, 02:46:00 PM »
Perhaps Sigma will be out with their new 120-300mm f/2.8 OS Sport lens before long and throw in a 2x converter with it. 

I personally got tired of waiting and got the 300mm f/2.8L IS II: cheaper and works a charm with both v3 teleconverters.

I have a 300 f/2.8 IS and both V2 converters and the image quality is outstanding. But that's with a 300 prime, one of the sharpest lens that Canon makes. The issue I have is that I often shoot in dusty environments and dislike taking the lens off to change/add/remove TC's.

I'd rather have a 200-500 f/4 and a 1.4X TC than a 120-300 f/2.8 and a 2X TC. I think the image quality and focusing speed would both be much better.

104
Lenses / Re: EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Available Mid 2014?
« on: April 23, 2013, 02:37:50 PM »
great idea for a lens. too expensive for me.

But Sigma will probably have one out and available for $3500 before this hits the street.

+1 - EXACTLY what I was thinking.

I've been sending Sigma annual e-mails for several years, asking them to make a 200-500 f/4, basically a big brother to their 120-300 f/2.8. It might weigh a bit more than the 200-400 but would almost certainly be cheaper.

105
EOS Bodies / Re: Expect a REALLY Big announcement on Monday
« on: March 31, 2013, 10:20:51 AM »
I ignore rumors appearing between 31 March and 2 April.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 17