September 23, 2014, 12:50:52 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 - RLPhoto

Pages: 1 ... 164 165 [166] 167 168 ... 231
2476
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Who upgraded from 5d mk2 to mk3 ?
« on: September 25, 2012, 10:31:30 AM »
Hey...

Long time lurker,first time poster.

Have had d60, 10d ,1dmk2, 5d , 5d mk2

Gear is 35L , 85Lii, 100macro, 17-40L , 70-200mk2, and just this week a 24-70L mk2
And 600ex plus stert3, 2x550ex

Anyway,to the point- I've been sitting on the fence about jumping to mk3....
Have mk3 owners here generally upgraded from a mk2 or something older?
Since I now have mk2 of 24-70 and 70-200 plus new flash I'm thinking the mk3 would compliment my gear very well

I shoot mostly family stuff with a little concert photography as a sideline

I went from FF cameras like this

Yashica MAT-124G ----- Olympus OM-1 ------ Minolta Maxxum AF -------- 5Dc -------- 5D3

Never cared for the 5D MK2 series.  :P

The 5D3's AF is fantastic.

2477
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 3D at 46.1mp Next Month? [CR1]
« on: September 25, 2012, 10:26:11 AM »
Please be sub-4000$.   :-\

lol.  Yeah, let's call it the 5.1D then.  With Canon's pricing strategy, $4,500 is almost a guarantee.  6D -> 5Dm3 -> 3D -> 1DX.  $4,500 fits in there nicely.

Does Canon even make a lens that can resolve 46MP?

Yep, The 100L & 135L are beast. Perhaps the New 24-70 II?

2478
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 3D at 46.1mp Next Month? [CR1]
« on: September 25, 2012, 10:23:20 AM »

2479
Lenses / Re: Lens Filters -- preference?
« on: September 25, 2012, 10:16:45 AM »
B&W MRC UV filters are on all my L Primes. Fantastic IQ.

2480
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 3D at 46.1mp Next Month? [CR1]
« on: September 25, 2012, 10:16:00 AM »
Please be sub-4000$.   :-\

2481
EOS Bodies / Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« on: September 25, 2012, 09:58:09 AM »
It's funny because it took Nikon 20 years to Finally put out decent primes.
What a fanboi~~
LOL

Thats a pity as I assumed that you would have the mental capacity to do the research by youself but since that is beyond your grasp, I stand behind my statement.

The Nikon 28 1.8G, 50mm 1.4G, and 85mm 1.8G are good lenses, But they are 20 years late to the party.
While IQ is important, its not as important as getting the shot in the first place. Canon has had these very useful features while nikon was still fiddling with screws in there bodies.

1. Full Time manual Over-ride - Also Not having to fiddle with AF-MF switch and leave my hands clear of the focus wheel.
2. Silent & Fast USM Focusing
3. Complete compatability with all EOS bodies, Even Rebels AF with all lenses. Not just the ones with screws. ::)
4. Pricing

Canon 28mm 1.8 - released with all these features in 1995 - Nikons 1.8G was released in 2012
Canon 50mm 1.4 - released with all these features in 1993 - Nikons 1.4G was released in 2008
Canon 85mm 1.8 - released with all these features in 1992 - Nikons 1.8G was released in 2012
Canon 100mm F/2 - Released with all these features in 1992 - Nikon has not matched.

Nikon didn't have a fast 28mm period in the budget range until now and its only marginally better than the canon.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=253&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=802&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Nikon's 50mm 1.4G barely surpasses the canon 1.4 in IQ, and that lens is from the 90's.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=115&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=636&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Nikons 85mm 1.8G is the same story, Infact it has more CA's than the old canon.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=106&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=791&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Canon's 100mm F/2 is still better than any nikon budget tele-prime.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=118&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=791&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

If you look at the nikon AF-D series which competed against canons prime's up until the recent nikon primes, they're just horrid little lenses.

As for fanboyism, I'm anything but that. I agreed that Nikon's current bodies are better but they're prime lens selection isn't even fully caught up to canon yet. I even held a poll showing that alot of users agree with this.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=9212.msg165848#msg165848

If nikon has better primes, I wouldn't be shooting canon.  ::)



2482
EOS Bodies / Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« on: September 24, 2012, 09:10:03 PM »
I would just lol at your d600 body and no lenses while i Cruse about with a solid body and a set of solid primes that I've used firsthand. It's funny because it took Nikon 20 years to Finally put out decent primes.

Don't be so naive in believing bodies are more important that a set of good lenses.  ::)

What?? Jesus, it's like you're reading something else entirely and just responding with whatever springs to mind. When did I say I wanted to pick a body and no lenses? The only time I've heard of people shooting with their lens caps on was on this very forum during the 5D3 light leak debacle. The ENTIRE point that I'm trying to get across is that Nikon has a fantastic range of well-priced NEW primes that put great results within reach of someone who isn't willing to spend $2k per lens, unlike Canon's decrepit offerings in this segment. Thanks for the entertainment though; it was nice to hear that you can't come up with a single relevant point in your favor  ::)

If anyone else would like to put this train back on its tracks and have a civil discussion, I'd love to offer a perspective from the "dark side"  :)

Entry level FF nikon options only include d600 & 700. Which both are around 1500-2000$. With that same cash i could buy an entire canon FF kit for that price. I mean afterall, it wasnt me who mentioned entry level FF value.  ::)


2483
EOS Bodies / Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« on: September 24, 2012, 08:09:04 PM »
Thats funny you mentioned entry level FF users, as i can get a 28 1.8, 50mm 1.4, 100 f/2 & a 5Dc for close to the price you'll be paying for just the D600. ::)

Nice try comparing an ancient, used camera to a brand new one.

You could also get a used d700 and get 51-point, highly capable AF and a bulletproof body for around $1500 nowadays... The 5Dc is a venerable camera for sure and produces stunning files in the right conditions but it's definitely not enough to be a versatile camera in this day and age. Some of us like using points other than the center, etc. Even the D600, despite being too plastic for my tastes, has that sexy sony sensor goodness everyone around here is going gaga over.

Also the canon 28/1.8 is not very good, the 50/1.4 is very fragile (AF motor issues, anyone?) and loses lots of contrast at/near wide open, and the 100/2 is ancient (straight aperture blades, busy bokeh, etc).

If you want to compare to those lenses, then look at Nikon's AF-D line, which is still widely available new for the same or lower prices than the canon equivalents you mentioned. The D lenses were made around the same time as Canon's current midrange primes and are very similar; it's just that Canon has not updated theirs yet and Nikon has since replaced many of them with new G lenses, which is my entire point as to why Nikon's lineup is great for me.

I would just lol at your d600 body and no lenses while i Cruse about with a solid body and a set of solid primes that I've used firsthand. It's funny because it took Nikon 20 years to Finally put out decent primes.

Don't be so naive in believing bodies are more important that a set of good lenses.  ::)

2484
EOS Bodies / Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« on: September 24, 2012, 06:41:36 PM »
Lol @ nikons prime selection. Its has nothing on canon, And that's the reason Im still here. 8)

nobody is talking about L primes here, or 1.4G lenses for that matter. When Canon refreshes their entire lineup of sub-$1k primes then I'll look at them again, but until then I'm quite happy with the results I'm getting from Nikon's new G primes. Being able to have a 28/1.8, 50/1.4, and 85/1.8 for the price of one L prime is perfect for me as a hobbyist who dislikes zooms.

If I made money from my work, I'm sure I would think like you, but not everyone is in a position to spend $1500-2000 per prime. Until I strike it rich, I'd rather have a few very very good lenses than one superlative one.

As it stands, Nikon's lens lineup is better suited to the "entry-level" full frame hobbyist, which is what I am and what a lot of my fellow posters are, as well. More power to you for being able to afford your L glass, though! Maybe in another lifetime for me.

Thats funny you mentioned entry level FF users, as i can get a 28 1.8, 50mm 1.4, 100 f/2 & a 5Dc for close to the price you'll be paying for just the D600. ::)

2485
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Blown-out Highligts in Stage Lighting
« on: September 24, 2012, 04:49:06 PM »
Underexpose and try to recover whats left. ;D

2486
Landscape / Re: Can I save this shot in PP?
« on: September 24, 2012, 04:44:42 PM »
Hi,
driving along early one morning and saw this shot, lots of low mist in the fields. I was hurried as where I parked was not ideal. Anyway I took some bracketed shots, from -2, -1.5, -1, -0.5 and +/-0. But, at F9.5, the sun is blown out in all five shots. I guess using F22 would have helped me.
The -2 shot has loads of noise due to most of it being very under exposed.
I thought about taking the darker parts from one of the better exposed versions to improve it. Anyone got any other ideas how to go about repairing this shot?

What about when shooting? I was using spot and trying to get the mist correct, which seems to have happened OK. I guess a grad ND would probably have helped too.

Cheers Brian

Maybe, But it looks grim.

2487
EOS Bodies / Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« on: September 24, 2012, 04:41:17 PM »
I'm a former 5d2 owner, and these comments/arguments crack me the hell up. I love this site, but there are TOO MANY FOLKS on here compared to NikonRumors. You know why? Canon loyalists are too frustrated fighting amongst themselves.

For the record, I own the D800 and have none of the left AF/greenish-LCD problems that are overblown. It's FAR from perfect, as well, and frankly I really miss the sheer simplicity of the 5d2. That said, Nikon's UWA lenses are far better and that was my reason for switching. I tried out the D600 at Best Buy today for a long, long time. It's a extremely good DSLR. I wish I'd waited on it and saved myself about $850. Is it 90% of 5d3? I don't even know what in the holy hell that means. It is PHENOMENAL for $2,099!!!! That, my friends, is a fact.

Now let's move on to lenses: We can say the new 24-70/2.8 II is $400-500 more expensive than Nikon's equivalent. But it's also a better lens. So people, to be honest we have to play fair. The 24-120/4.0 VR is every but as good as the 24-105, only...well....it's a better, newer lens. That's why it's higher. Because it covers more range and screw Ken Rockwell. I know that's where most of you people get your info. The reason the following lens from Nikon are MORE EXPENSIVE is because they are NEWER AND BETTER GLASS than Canon's equivalent:

Nikon 50/1.4g or 50/1.8g (VERY GOOD BTW)
85/1.8g (very good BTW)
28/1.8g (very good BTW)
24/1.4g (amazing BTW)
16-35/4.0vr (amazing BTW)

--Nikon will make a 70-200/4.0VR eventually, just like Canon will make a very good UWA eventually. I had the 17-40L, and while good....it was soft in the corners and had other issues. It's funny how no one mentions the very solid Nikon 28-300VR that sells for about $800-900 used. What does Canon's cost???

Be real and enjoy what you own. Don't let these childish squabbles get in the way of enjoying your camera.


+100000 right here!

I went from a 450D to a D700 because of Nikon's fantastic midrange prime selection. I currently have a 50/1.4G and 85/1.8G and they're both tremendous lenses. Canon's competitors in this area are outdated and, while cheaper, are not serious lenses for someone investing in full frame. With Nikon I can have a full range of modern, fantastic primes that perform well above their price for the cost of one L lens, and that was worth switching for me.

That said, it doesn't really matter what you shoot! DR this, handling that, blah blah blah. Both sides have things that the other doesn't, and both make cameras whose capabilities vastly outmatch the photography chops of the average forum poster.

For me, the areas in which Nikon excels (normal primes, UWA) are more interesting than Canon's specialties, and I found the D700 to be sufficiently better/more robust than a 5D2 for my money when I was comparing brands. Having handled a D600 this weekend, I'm very glad I jumped on a new D700 at $2200, as the D600 feels VERY plasticky. It would be great for someone coming from a Rebel-type camera, but I can't imagine holding a camera like that again after putting almost 15k shots on my tank-like D700 in these past 6 months.

Lol @ nikons prime selection. Its has nothing on canon, And that's the reason Im still here. 8)

2488
Landscape / Re: Best lens for landscapes for a trip to the mountains?
« on: September 24, 2012, 02:45:51 PM »
I am planning on going around Switzerland for a week to travel through the alps and photograph scenery and landscapes. I also want to rent a lens that would be best for landscape photography. I have a 60D with an 18-55mm, a 28mm 2.8, a 50mm 1.8 and a 70-200 f/4 L. Here are the lenses I am considering to rent:

Canon 10-22mm (I had a Tamron 10-24 when I used to shoot Nikon and absolutely loved the wide angle)

Canon 17-40mm L (I don't know if this is wide enough but I'm considering buying this lens in a few months to replace my 18-55)

Canon 16-35mm L (Not sure if its worth spending extra to get this one, especially if I'm shooting landscape where I'll be using narrow apertures)

Canon 24-105 L (Would this be a decent idea as a general purpose zoom or do you think I should just try to go for something more wide angle?)

Thanks for your help!

10-22mm + 50mm 1.8. Thats light, compact and EZ to lug all day.

2489
EOS Bodies / Re: 450D to 6D
« on: September 24, 2012, 02:42:31 PM »
Given the recent announcement and the affordable price of a 6D with a 24-105mm kit, I'm starting to seriously consider the full benefits of a move from using a 450D with a 15-85mm to a 6D with the 24-105, specifically in terms of shooting in low light, depth of field and so on...    Whilst I'm sure some will shout, buy a 5D III, but seriously folks, I'm not happy to invest that level of my cash into a camera, so...  Please, given my current lens line up, consideration of keeping the 450D with the 10-22, perhaps trading my 15-85 & 18-55, what can I expect and are there any pitfalls I need to think about ?

5Dc = 500$  :P No sacrifice.

2490
EOS Bodies / Re: Why are flash sync shutter speeds getting worse?
« on: September 24, 2012, 02:41:11 PM »
As a 60d shooter was looking forward to the 6d entry level ff I was hugely disappointed by just the additional 2 af points and 1/180th fash sync.   Came across this good comparison page regarding flash syncs

http://www.photographe-mariages.net/blog/20120404/vitesse-de-synchronisation-par-appareil-photo/

Why do the 60d, 50d, and 7d have a faster flash sync than the 5d mark ii and iii and the 6d?????

I'm holding off to see how the 7d mark ii shakes out now.  the 6d doesn't impress me and the 5d mark iii is too much.

no.

Pages: 1 ... 164 165 [166] 167 168 ... 231