October 23, 2014, 08:44:02 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 - KitsVancouver

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
31
EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 24, 2013, 08:21:03 PM »
Canon has officially, publicly announced the technology: August 31st, 2010 ...
...ANY given company has its Business Plan ahead for 1,2,3,5, 10 & 20 years. Each one in its own pace and milestones. Each subject to some extend to modification. What I mean is that we might be seeing technology developed as early as 2006.
My problem with this general line of reasoning is that it assumes that Canon (or any other company) purposely withholds a new technology in order to boost profits.

Whether you believe it or not, it happens.  We saw a very recent real-life example in the world of video processors.  NVIDIA announced their 780 ti video card just days after AMD announced their new R290X.  It's widely known in the semi-conductor and PC world that NVIDIA was holding back releasing the full power of an existing chip design based on what the competition was. 

32
Lenses / Re: Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 Mark I vs Mark II
« on: October 31, 2013, 01:56:13 PM »
Thank you for all the feedback so far. Keep in mind I am shooting with a Canon 5D Mark I. Just from reading the comments I gather the main difference in real world situations is sharpness and bokeh, realistically how big is the difference in sharpness?

Also is there a difference in the IS?

I think these opinions always boil down to whether an image is pixel-peeped or not.  I had the Mk I for years before upgrading to the Mk II.  When the Mk I was around, many people said how awesome it was and that Canon couldn't improve on it.  I never believed that because I bought two copies and even compared the one I chose to a friend's copy.  None were sharp at the 100% level.  I've got a fair amount of glass and of all the lenses I have used, the 70-200 Mk I was probably the second softest lens (at 100% at 2.8 or wide open) I've used a lot.  The 16-35 wide open is pretty crappy too (at 100%).  The other lens I'm not crazy about is the 24-105.  I do use that lens a lot because it has IS and is great for taking snapshots of the young kids.  When I want an image with high IQ, I will use something else.  The new 70-200 Mk II, is not as sharp as my copy of the 85L, but it's close enough for me that I would use it for important photos. 

Now if you are not the kind of person who views images at 100%, then you likely won't notice a difference in sharpness between the Mk I and the Mk II.  If you edit at 100% or you do pixel peep (which I proudly admit to), then you will notice what I would call, a HUGE difference when shooting at 2.8. 

Anyone who says there isn't a sharpness difference at 2.8, is not viewing at 100%.  I can almost guarantee it. 

I would even go so far as suggesting you save for the Mk II if you can't afford it now. 

The locking lens hood is a huge improvement for me too.  For some reason, my hoods often rotate out of lock for me so much that I have to keep checking it.  I even used gaffers tape to tape down the hood of my 24-105 hood.  You don't have that problem with the 70-200 Mk II. 

33
Lenses / Re: Advice on dream African photo safari
« on: October 11, 2013, 04:51:34 PM »
I have only had the 200-400 for a few weeks and have had very limited use, but my initial impressions are that 400mm is the least you should have.  If I was going to Africa, I think I would consider getting a 600mm.  Are you able to bring more than one super telephoto? 

34
Lenses / Re: Just got my first white lens!
« on: October 07, 2013, 05:26:14 PM »
IMO, people skimp too much on lighting and support.  I had three 580ex flashes and replaced them with 600exrt flashes.  I like them so much that I bought 2 more. I understand a skilled strobist can do amazing things with one light but having a second is even better. I would go for the flash if I was you. The 70-200 is heavy but nothing like a super telephoto lens that might need balance to "move" the center of gravity for a gimbal head.

You can easily hand hold a 70-200 so you can just adjust where you hold the lens if you are concerned about forward-backward balance.

35
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Availability
« on: September 24, 2013, 10:38:59 PM »
I am in Canada and received mine a couple of weeks ago.

36
Lenses / Re: Canon 200-400 and Adorama
« on: September 12, 2013, 02:30:25 AM »
Glad to hear that Adorama came through for you.    It is a great lens -enjoy it

My last few purchase have been through Adorama because their customer service has been pretty good.  The other big NYC retailer has, in my experience, been a lot more "too bad, so sad" with me. 

2% more might not sound that much but for such a large purchase that, for me, would be a bit of an emotional purchase, it is the difference between feeling really good every time the lens is used vs. a reminder once in a while about the missed out money. 

Good job, Helen. 

37
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon Cinema Prime Lens Kit in Stock at B&H Photo
« on: January 22, 2013, 01:00:48 PM »
I've never understood these "cinema" lenses.  They're used for a pixel count far below that of still photography and don't have to AF, so why are they so absurdly expensive?  And why do they exist at all?

Good question.  I actually took a peek at the lenses to see if I could buy the 50mm for use with an EF mount.  Then I saw the "Not returnable" disclaimer.  That's a pretty big risk to take if you don't like the product and are buying it sight unseen. 

38
Canon General / Re: Canon Experience Stores Coming Soon [CR3]
« on: January 12, 2013, 01:58:43 AM »
4 pages is to many to read.....

but seriously CANADA?   I mean I love visiting but you can't tell me that Chicago New York or London UK wouldn't be a better launching point

There are some cities in Canada where there are huge numbers of wealthy people.  Vancouver has some of the most expensive real estate in the World.  Calgary, although not the biggest city in Canada, has loads of oil money.  My guess Calgary is a test store as the costs and risks of failure of opening a store in a city like New York would be quite high. 

39
Lenses / Re: Soon to be Launched EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« on: January 03, 2013, 01:00:38 PM »
Is it me or the lens does not look that huge? I would be delighted if it is not huge.

It looks "small" to me as well.  You can find some comparison photos online that show it beside the 400 2.8 and 600 4.0.  The front element diameter makes it look a bit "wimpy" to me. 

http://images.wantmi.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Canon_super_tele_comparison.jpg

40
Canon General / Re: Record Spending Into Camera Gear - HIGHEST
« on: December 13, 2012, 01:35:13 AM »
Well, here goes:

2011:  Bought 400 f/2.8L I IS, 300 f/2.8L I IS, 70-200 f/2.8L II IS, and 200 f/2L IS
2012:  Bought 5D Mark III and a pair of 1D X's

This doesn't reflect selling things that I did, but you can do the math quickly on purchases :).

However, I do make money from photography.

I'm  curious if you will "replace" the 300 and 400 with the 200-400 when it comes out. 

41
Lighting / Re: Help with choosing a soft box
« on: December 07, 2012, 10:20:57 AM »
Considering you're going to be going through the hassle of setting up softboxes on stands, I would strongly recommend that you should go with a studio flash setup instead of a hotshoe flash. You'll get a hell of a lot more bang for your buck.

Hotshoe flashes are great for what they're designed to do, which is to be something that you can mount on top of the camera. But you pay a premium for that type of miniaturization, in terms of both performance and price.

A Paul C. Buff Alien Bees B800 costs about as much as that 430 EX II, and it puts out so much more light that it's not even funny. The Buff Einstein flash, their flagship model, is cheaper than the 580 EX II and is ludicrously far superior in every way except that you can't stick it on top of your camera.

Don't fret too much if you're going to be shooting at locations without power. There are battery packs for most studio flashes. Buff sells the Vagabond which is good for hundreds, if not thousands, of pops with the type of setup you're describing on a single charge.

I'll also note that softboxes only work their magic when they're so close to the subject that you're having trouble figuring out how to shoot around them. It's a geometry thing...a 2' softbox is going to have to be no more than 2' away from the subject to be truly effective, preferably less, and it's not going to light up more than the person's face. a 2' softbox at the photographer's position of a 10' working distance isn't going to be significantly different from on-camera flash. A 5' softbox 5' away from the subject is going to be as effective as a 2' softbox 2' away, but it'll light up the whole person...and you can put that 5' softbox 3' away and get some amazing soft and even light wrapping all the way 'round your subject.

Even better?

Buff sells parabolic reflectors...basically high-tech umbrellas. And they go from 4' across to over 7' across, and they make diffusers for them that make the light very similar to a softbox....

Cheers,

b&
Excellent information from you and the poster below.  These forums are so valuable when there is experienced feedback such as above.

I own 5 600EX-RTs and was planning on using 2/3 bundled into a 4 foot softbox.  From the research I've done, I've realized that the flashes won't likely put out enough power for the softbox. 

I'm wondering if anyone has had experience using the Einstein with Speedlights.  I'm thinking I will either need to use a PC sync cord for the Einstein and RF wireless for the Speedlights.  I'd love a shoot-through wireless solution which I can mount on my camera which controls the Einstein and then have the 600EX or ST-E3 mounted on top.   Has anyone attempted that? 

42
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Black Friday at Adorama
« on: November 19, 2012, 07:14:05 PM »
I just looked at a few items and they were all regular prices (the same as the last several weeks with the rebates). 

43
EOS Bodies / Re: Are there 39mp & 50mp+ Test Bodies in the Wild? [CR1]
« on: October 23, 2012, 03:05:15 AM »
As always we have descended into "I-need-120MP-on-a tiny area-cuz-I-can-argue-it-will-work".

Prior to the 1DX and 5D-III release, the same crowd (you know who you are, you have spent hours typing pages on here selling the same old 3 day old fish) screamed for 40+ MP and were bitterly disappointed when Canon went the low MP route for both bodies.

Its not about what you "want"...its about what they can sell in a profitable way in a competitive market.
Most pros own a 1DX... not 7D... so much for the high MP whining. Every flagship that Nikon and Canon have released so far have been lower MP while they release high MP APC and consumer grade bodies for the "My-MP-is-Bigger-than-your-MP" crowd.

I guess learning comes a tad slow... but there is no harm in asking....please continue :)

Wasn't the 1Ds Mark III the flagship?  Didn't it have higher MP than the rest of the cameras at the time?

44
Lenses / Re: A New EF 800 f/5.6L IS II? [CR2]
« on: October 22, 2012, 01:24:19 PM »
I'm surprised they would replace the 200mm f/2 so quickly.  I thought it was only a few years old. 

45
So...what people are saying is there may be some manufacturing variations that result in some lenses being slightly less awesome than another one? On a brand new lens with brand new elements. So maybe it's a good thing I can't afford this now, by the time I buy one they likely will have worked out any minor manufacturing issues.

I guess that's why some people are upset.  This lens is supposed to be a production ready model.  It's not supposed to be in field testing, beta testing or any other kind of testing for that matter.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6