November 24, 2014, 03:13:17 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 - drjlo

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 44
286
Is EOS-M RAW still not supported by Photoshop/ACR versions earlier than PS 6.0? 
I'm still on CS5.

287
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Announced
« on: July 02, 2013, 12:53:33 PM »
With even Canon not claiming IQ/ISO RAW performance improvement over 60D, with the "breakthroughs" all seeming to benefit the movie/live-view shooters, I'm not really seeing compelling reasons for stills shooters to upgrade to 70D from previous crop bodies.  If the 70D achieved real dynamic range improvements, that may change things, but if so, one would think Canon should be advertising that in a big way..

288
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D Images Surface Early
« on: July 01, 2013, 10:57:35 PM »
I'm hoping the (presumably) improved sensor makes it into the next EOS-M body, which is really the size I need in addition to my full frame body.

289
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 35mm film body
« on: June 30, 2013, 01:10:32 PM »
The only ones commanding real prices these days is EOS 1V, which means great film bodies like EOS 3 and EOS Elan 7N are real bargains.  I have/had all of the above, and EOS 3 would be really all one needs.  Try to find one with the battery grip for that cool look and faster AF speed. 

290
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 Lenstip review
« on: June 29, 2013, 02:56:42 PM »
It looks to have pretty good sharpness even wide open, which is nice.  On the other hand, it seems to have quite bad flare control, one of the worse ones I've seen..

http://www.lenstip.com/374.9-Lens_review-Sigma_A_18-35_mm_f_1.8_DC_HSM__Ghosting_and_flares.html

291
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Spec List
« on: June 27, 2013, 03:03:17 PM »
Got my fingers crossed regarding the new sensor's performance/DR.

If only Canon would give you AFMA on the 70D  :'(

292

I used to have a main body - 7d-and a backup - t2i.
 I actually would like to purchase a 5d3 but i am building my portrait studio and the money is just not there

I feel your pain.  I have had a t2i for a long time and also have 5D III.  Looking around for a reasonable crop body today, it's amazing to me the non-improvement Canon has achieved since t2i. 

Unless you have lots of investment in Canon lenses (I unfortunately do), Nikon D7100 really looks good; however, if unable to switch, then you'd be happy to know CR has justed posted specs on the new Canon 70D with a NEW 20.2 MP sensor  8)   Let's just hope it's a good one.

http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/06/canon-eos-70d-spec-list/

293
Landscape / Re: friendly reminder!!! Supermoon tomorrow!!!
« on: June 27, 2013, 12:51:55 AM »
What I could manage with 70-200 and 2x TC..


SuperMoonEF2 by drjlo1, on Flickr

294
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II Mentioned [CR1]
« on: June 24, 2013, 05:23:49 PM »

AF is another story. I'm on my 3rd copy of this lens. The first two were erratic and inconsistent, so I returned them (which was a shame, because it's such an incredible lens).


That's the kind of thing I just don't have the time or patience to deal with.

Something has also been bothering me the more Sigma 35 photo's I look on various forums.  Those photos certainly seem very sharp, but at the same time they tend to look a bit "muted," not as 3-D and popping off the page as 35L photo's.  Not sure if this is contrast and/or color-rendering difference; it could even be the fact Canon 35L was/is a more expensive lens, likely being used more by professionals, presumably with more experience/skill.

295
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samsung Galaxy S4 Zoom
« on: June 22, 2013, 10:18:51 PM »
I think that the S4 Zoom is a game changer and the end of the entry level compact cameras.
:-\

I guess it could have been stunning if it had a micro 4/3 sized sensor at least.  Heck, even if it had a Canon S100 type of 1/1.7" sensor, it would have been much more exciting.  Oh, well, I guess I will get one anyway since anything would be better than my Samsung Nexus phone camera.

296
@drjilo: you did great! Thank you. I dare to do everything, as I pushed tri-X film to at least ISO 1600 or 3200 back in the day which looked kinda like the 5D3's ISO 51k today  ;D I know about the downsides of DPP in PP. Looking forward to LR some time later this year. What are your highest ISOs you take pictures at? Kind regards from Switzerland. Peter

I'm still kind of old school when it comes to iso and try to keep it below 6400 whenever possible.  I stick to ISO 100 for studio shooting with controlled lighting. 

297
Lenses / Re: EF 100mm f2,8 L IS Macro... is IS worth it?
« on: June 21, 2013, 12:44:30 PM »
At macro distances, the movement is primarily forward and back - IS doesn't help in that case. Faster shutter speed [even with higher ISO] or flash is a better answer.

Really?  At macro distances and hand-held,  if I turn off IS and look throught the VF, I see all kinds of shifting including horizontala and rotational, not just back and forth.  IS certainly is not AS useful at macro distances but is still useful for me for hand-held macro shots, making the difference between getting the shot or not on my 100L..

298
When I had the 16-35 II, I never dared put it through iso 102,4K, but I find DPP's noise reduction is not as good as a good dedicated program like Noisware, which I used to redo the image below with just a subtle additional noise reduction while trying to preserve detail.  Obviously, working with original RAW would have been better..  Hope you don't mind.


isotestNW by drjlo1, on Flickr

299
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: June 20, 2013, 09:26:04 PM »
I can see room for all three -- the 16-50 f/4, 16-35 III, and 14-24

16-50 range appeals to me as better full frame walkaround range than 24-70; but I am afraid increasing the range will likely compromise distortion figures and corner sharpness compared to wide angles with less range, etc 14-22, 16-35.  16-35 II is already not all that great in corners wide open at 35 mm end. 

If Canon manages to pull off a 16-50 with good sharpness across the ranges, especially with a good 50 mm portrait end, I will likely buy that over 14-24..

300
Testing this 24-70 II some more, I am somewhat dismayed by what I find at close distance, wide open, at wide 24mm end.  Compared to where live view focusing stops, even after AFMA, the phase detect AF is hit-and-miss, even on tripod.  Often the initial half-press of shutter will be quite a bit off, then a repeat half-press or two will get it to where live view stops.  Where it stops also seems to differ based on whether I'm focuing from infinity or MFD side as well as distance from object.  At other times, it focuses right at first half-press.  This doesn't seem to happen at the 70mm end.  Phase detect couldn't be this bad relative to live view in general, could it?  Guess will see what Canon service will say/do. 

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 44