Messages

151

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Great review for D800 vs. 5D3 and DxO

« on: May 10, 2012, 12:16:43 PM »

I'm not a huge fan of the re sizing for comparison either. It makes it easier to compare but it creates a false impression. In daily use, the D800 will be used at 36MP so it needs to be tested at 36MP. If we only care how it performs at 22MP, then Nikon should have thrown in the 24MP sensor which would have made it faster with smaller  file sizes (which I wish they did btw). I want to know at what ISO my 36MP image falls apart so I know what to shoot at. Why the hell would I care when a 24MP image falls apart when i'm shooting at 36. Why would I want to know how the dodge viper would run with a v6. I'm sure it would give better fuel economy and a more relaxed ride, but I bought it with a v10, i'm using it with a v10, so I want to know how it handles with a v10.

152

Lenses / Re: Why buy Canon when third party are this good?

« on: May 08, 2012, 10:47:18 AM »

The main reason I want this lens is for f/2.8 with stabilization. I WISH Canon had something like this. Either I loose the 2.8 or I loose the IS with a Canon product. If Tamron can do this with the IQ of the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 at a price that is $300 cheaper, it is tough to say no. I'm looking for a lens that stays on my camera 80% of the time. My 70-200 f/2.8 IS II is the best lens I own but it is really heavy, large, and too long for indoors. But I love shooting at 2.8 and the IS is great to have for stills and just about mandatory for handheld video. I'm sure most of us wouldn't even be talking about this lens if Canon offered one. Even if it was $2000

153

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review

« on: May 01, 2012, 01:30:24 PM »

More samples here
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1108651
Looks like it's sharp, very effective VC, good AF, decent bokeh, hefty vignetting.

Thanks for the site. Looks good but yeah, that vignetting is massive. This looks like a great lens on a cropped body and a good lens for the FF users. Of course, since Canon won't make a similar lens with IS, it looks like the choice is between vignetting and IS. I think I would prefer IS since lighroom traditionally does a decent job getting rid of vignetting

154

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review

« on: May 01, 2012, 09:25:12 AM »

I have been torn between the Canon 24-70 & 24-105 IS. Which do I need more, the IS or f/2.8? Since I have never had a bride complain about the sharpness of the 24-70mm f/2.8 (which I rent for now), I really don't see the need to get version II at this point. I would much prefer to see stabilization and was hoping to see this on the new 24-70 which is why I was waiting to purchase it. Now I am leaning towards the Tamron

155

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Lightroom 4 and 5D Mark III

« on: April 27, 2012, 09:25:37 AM »

Since RC2 is out, I think it will be about 2-3 weeks.

156

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark III doesn't live up to expectations in real world shooting...

« on: April 27, 2012, 09:24:39 AM »

The digic V has been around for almost a year I think and the 61 point auto focus system used in the M3 was introduced 6 months ago on the 1Dx. I doubt this has been a rushed camera. The build quality is tremendous and everything has been improved from the M2. There is not 1 feature that has not been improved upon on the M3. Unlike the D800 which while offering awesome resolution and DR is much slower and did not heavily improve high ISO performance (though the performance is stunning for a 36MP camera). If you want to compare something with the mark IV, compare the 1DX which has a separate processor JUST to run the AF system. I'm sure the AF on that camera will be unquestionably instant. The 5D mark 3 is using the 1 Digic 5 to power 22mp @6fps plus the AF & metering. That is A LOT and still it manages to perform well with a monstrous AF system, tons of pixels, and lightning quick 6fps shooting. For anyone coming from the lame 9pt Mark II focus system with 1 cross type sensor, the Mark III is out of this world. The Mark II was praised for its image quality more than any other comparable camera and I think that is why Canon focused on other areas more than resolution and dynamic range. But seriously, what would Canon have changed if they had an extra 6 months? The Digiv V was already developed and the AF is already top of the line. Most people (especially Nikon shooters) criticized the 5D mII for its high MP count.

157

Lenses / Re: Pre-Order on the new Tamron 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD?

« on: April 27, 2012, 09:02:08 AM »

I'd wait for reviews on 3rd party lenses. I'm hoping that this is an awesome lens though because a 24-70mm F/2.8 with stabilization has been my dream for a while. I could get rid of a couple lenses if this Tamron brings decent quality.

158

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: BG-E11 Delayed

« on: April 26, 2012, 09:29:27 AM »

Wow Canon, I was hoping to jump up from my 7D in time for wedding season but without a grip, limited raw support, and a handful of minor but well documented issues, I think i'll be shooting with the 7D for a couple more months at least. I'm so glad now that I did not preorder.

159

Lenses / Re: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Available for Preorder

« on: April 25, 2012, 11:58:17 AM »

I was hoping for more info on how autofocus worked. That is my biggest reason for avoiding 3rd party lenses. I figured it would be sharp at f/4 which is the largest aperture canon offers on a stabilized lens so if it was usable at f/2.8, that in and of itself would be big. I really wish Canon offered this lens but now that the vII of the 24-70 is out without IS and with a crazy price tag, I feel like it will never happen. I am also curious if it can use the 5 center dual hair autofocus sensors on the Canon 5D mark III. The canon 24-70 version 1 only can use the center but the version 2 can use all 5. The 24-105 f/4 IS can't use any of them.

160

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Advice: On buying 5D3.

« on: April 25, 2012, 11:44:38 AM »

Keep in mind Fred Miranda is shooting landscapes and does not care much for autofocus, burst speed, silent shooting, high ISO abilities, and video. These are the main areas that Canon updated better than the D800 and over the Mark II it offers better build quality and dual memory slots as well. These are also features that would be of HIGH importance if you were going into wedding/event photography. Even if the DxO report wasn't flawed, it is mostly testing Dynamic Range and with some caveats so I wouldn't worry about the score. The D800 is a great camera in and of itself but the slower shooting and large files will not work well for a wedding/event photographers' workflow. I highly doubt any bride will be pixel peeping at her skin flaws either to see the D800s greatest advantage.

The fact is that the Mark III is a great camera and will be the flagship event camera for the next 3-4 years. So even if it doesn't meet some crazy expectations, it is what it is and its better than the mark II in every way. I'd definitely purchase though I am waiting a little bit longer for the issues to be resolved, accessories to be released, and Lightroom/photoshop to be officially updated with full support. I'm dreaming for a price drop but I doubt that dream will come true.

161

EOS Bodies / Re: Next Canon step in the matter of their sensors

« on: April 24, 2012, 03:30:07 PM »

You are assuming that the 5D mark III has a crappy sensor. Other than the DxO test, I have not seen a single report complaining about the sensor. Most reviews have highly praised the mark III in every way. Though I do think that the MIII was more about perfecting the sum of the parts than working on a specific area. Same with the 1DX which uses even a smaller 18MP and not offering a larger MP body. The Mark III is a clear improvement in every area, including the sensor. And if you believed that DxO was the benchmark for sensor technology, you would sell your D4 for a D7000.

162

Lenses / Re: 24-105mm f/4 L IS on a crop camera

« on: April 23, 2012, 02:24:15 PM »

I use it on a 60D. It is definitely a great lens but I would make sure you have a 50mm f/1.4 first. The 24-105 is great but at f/4 it is a bit slow. The 50mm f/1.4 is a great lens to go with this because it is so small it can basically fit in your pocket and if you are in low light to blur the background more, it works way better than the 24-105. The 50mm at f/2.8 is also sharper than the 24-105 at f/4! I love having the range and the IS of the 24-105, and with the 50mm in my pocket as well, I am ready for every situation.

163

Lenses / Re: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Available for Preorder

« on: April 23, 2012, 02:18:44 PM »

A video of the lens just popped up on you tube but it is not in English. The photos look good though. The AF for video did not seem great but it was definitely better than without anything.

Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD A007 (탐론 24-70 VC 손떨방)	Small | Large

164

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D3 one shot AF

« on: April 23, 2012, 02:15:33 PM »

You can adjust the accuracy of the focus system in the settings. You can adjust "first shot priority" and "second shot priority" to if you would like the camera to take the photo after focusing or to double check to ensure perfect focus before taking the shot. That may fix your issue but I do not have the mark III yet unfortunately

165

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Which lenses with the 5D mk3?

« on: April 20, 2012, 02:20:17 PM »

That is the reason why I ended up getting a 35L.  IS may help you hold the camera steadier, but it doesn't help much if the kids are moving.  Having a lens that is 2 stops faster gives much better odds at nonblurry shots, when you can shoot at 1/60-1/30.

IS can also help your autofocus in continuous shooting and can help you compose better on fast moving subjects. Also, 2 stops faster may mean only 6 inches or less of depth of field with kids. I had to re-adjust my shooting when I had a baby. Typically I could shoot a head shot at f/2.8 with the whole head in focus...on a kid they are so small that a head shot at f/2.8 barely picks up both eyes. You may need those extra 2 stops to get everything in focus. I love having the faster lenses though when I am further away from my subjects but generally, anything larger than f/2.8 for anything other than far away shots with a wide angle is about as open as I can shoot unless I only want an eye in focus.  Everything has a trade off