Messages

46

EOS Bodies / Re: 6D is amazing... Review and image samples coming soon...:)

« on: January 16, 2013, 11:21:02 AM »

6D should be considered as 1point AF camera

I had issues with every other point. It really is a 1 point AF camera. If the lighting was great, lots of contrast available, with a slower moving subject, all 11 points were great. But when I dimmed the light or tried focusing on a subject with less contrast, the outer points would sometimes miss. Nothing like my 5D3.
I reviewed the 6D and outlined those issues : http://learningcameras.com/reviews/4-dslrs/91-canon-6d-review if you wanted to take a look. ISO performance was great...much better than when I tested the Nikon D600. Dynamic range was on par with other Canon cameras (nothing like the Nikons). The review has the sample images if you want to see them.

Comparison with the 5D3 video as well for those who want to see the differences. The 6D produces great images, but using it is more like using a 60D with a couple new features than anything else. You will love it if you love the 6D. If you are coming from a 5D2 or 5D3, the photos will still be great with the 6D but there is a good amount missing.

Canon 6D Vs. 5D Mark III Hands On Review	Small | Large

47

Reviews / Re: Canon 6D review and Canon 6D vs 5D mark III

« on: January 16, 2013, 10:49:01 AM »

intresting experience shared. does the 1/3 of a stop improvement in low light refer to JPEG or RAW. As the MP count of the sensor in the 6D is slightly lower, this might add to it as well.

RAW only, I did not shoot JPEG at all for any of these files. I'm sure the MP made a small difference. Most of the lower noise of the 6D however seemed to be in the shadow areas so maybe Canon is doing something a little different in the shadows. Either way it was not drastic enough to care about...you would only see the difference pixel peeping with side by side images.

48

Reviews / Re: Canon 24-70 f/4 IS Review

« on: January 16, 2013, 10:43:48 AM »

Truly amazin how many people pass comments on equipment they have never used or let alone seen.
Perhaps people want a lighter lens, want IS for a multitude of reasons, or like the smaller size...need i go on.
I use it and find the image quality to be excellent. all that matter right??
Happy shooting all.

Do you notice the lens hood loose at all? Drove me nuts but I'm not sure if I had a bad hood or something. It was enough for me to feel movement in the hood and enough for it to make noise when I moved it around. Just wondering if my lens was the only one or this is how they are made.

49

Reviews / Re: Canon 24-70 f/4 IS vs Canon 24-105 f/4 IS - Not what I expected

« on: January 15, 2013, 10:46:54 AM »

You started so many threads to redirect audience to your reviews, it is virtually spamming...not to mention repeated link posting in any thread possible. Introducing your links in a discussion is one thing…starting several NEW clutter threads in a week with the sole purpose of promoting your site is an annoyance!
Instead of cluttering the forum with the same spam threads for EACH  of your reviews, each sometimes with a several new threads...why don’t you pay CR to include a link to your site?

Sorry, I started the threads in different relevant topics. The lens is brand new so there were not ongoing discussions already thus why I started a thread. I'm not sure how posting a review of the Canon lens in a canon lens forum is spamming...I just happened to have the lens, worked really hard the last few days making a review so that others can know how this lens performed before spending $1500. I'm not some big business or anything. I'm just a gear loving photographer and thought these reviews would help someone decide.

50

Reviews / Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC vs NEW Canon 24-70 f/4L IS - Wow

« on: January 15, 2013, 08:42:15 AM »

I can't say I expected these results at all.

See the full written comparison of the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC vs NEW Canon 24-70 f/4L IS with samples
http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/104-tamron-24-70-f28-vc-vs-canon-24-70-f4l-is

Or check out the video

Canon 24-70 f/4L IS vs Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC - FIGHT!	Small | Large

51

Reviews / Canon 24-70 f/4 IS vs Canon 24-105 f/4 IS - Not what I expected

« on: January 13, 2013, 10:18:22 PM »

So, this is not what I expected at all and I actually had to do these sharpness tests 3 times to confirm the results. I'm a bit worried on the Canon 24-70 f/4 IS now. I've got a comparison coming with the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC and as of now, Canon is no longer my top choice.

Canon 24-70 f/4 IS vs Canon 24-105 f/4 IS - Fight!	Small | Large

52

EOS Bodies / Re: Are you really serious about 6D?

« on: January 11, 2013, 06:44:44 PM »

Here is a video review of the 6D...it's a bit of a mixed bag. The picture quality is on par or better than the 5D3 but everything else for the most part is limited...except for the additional wifi which I love and GPS which I could care less about. :
http://learningcameras.com/reviews/4-dslrs/91-canon-6d-review

53

Lenses / Re: Do I get 24-105

« on: January 11, 2013, 06:39:09 PM »

I've got a full review of the new Canon 24-70 f/4 IS if you are interested at: http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/99-canon-24-70-f4-is-review

It won't get you further than 70mm but it is vastly improved from the 24-105mm. I own the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC as well so i'll have a comparison review up shortly between those lenses which might help you decide. It is a tough decision for sure as the new Canon 24-70 f/2.8, Canon 24-70 f/4 IS, Canon 24-105 f/4 IS, and Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC each have their advantages.

54

Reviews / Re: Any thoughts yet on the Canon 24-70 f/4 IS

« on: January 11, 2013, 06:35:17 PM »

My thoughts are why would you buy this over the tamron?  Iq is the same, yet you get f2.8 with the tamron and also pocket $200. Unless you really (and I mean really) care about saving a few grams of weight it's a no brainier.

I've got the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC as well so i'll have a comparison review up shortly. So far, the Canon does focus faster than the Tamron, but the Tamron is still very accurate which is what matters the most. But i'll have a detailed review up shortly. You don't get the macro abilities with the Tamron either which may influence some people but for me, i'd prefer having a 2.8 lens any day to a macro. I wish Canon made a 24-70 f/2.8 IS.

55

Reviews / Re: Canon 24-70 f/4 IS Review

« on: January 11, 2013, 10:17:27 AM »

Here is the video review:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlFTbI0Dt64	Small | Large

]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlFTbI0Dt64

56

Reviews / Re: Any thoughts yet on the Canon 24-70 f/4 IS

« on: January 10, 2013, 01:30:15 PM »

Just curious, what don't you like about the 24-105? 

The new 24-70 f/4 has the advantage of a slightly smaller size/weight and 0.7mm macro capability.  The 24-105 has the advantage of extra range and cost roughly $400-500 less.  From what I've read IQ is similar.  For me I can't see any reason to switch from the 24-105 to the 24-70 f/4 since I don't do macro photography.

.
The 24-70 was definitely sharper than the 24-105mm lens. My 24-105 looks OK in the center but the corners are nasty. I just expect better from an f/4 lens. It's a new lens too, just got it several months ago as the kit lens in my 5D3, but I just don't find it particularly sharp. As a result, it is my "try to never use this" lens and while I pull it out sometimes for the flexibility, i'm always trying to find a reason to pull out a f/2.8 zoom or a prime. Even so, I don't know if I would sell a 24-105 for the new 24-70 f/4 IS unless I wanted the macro abilities. But I would consider moving to the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC. I'm doing some side by side testing now and will report the results hopefully this weekend.

57

EOS Bodies / Re: 6d vs. 5d mkiii for sports photography

« on: January 10, 2013, 11:50:37 AM »

Look for the 7D at a great price or save for the 5D3. The 6D is not ideal for sports. The AF systems will probably be your failing point plus neither camera is that fast. The center point is the only decent point on both cameras. The 7D is a great sports camera with 8fps shooting, 19pt all cross type AF, and decent low light performance. Plus, the crop factor will help you in most cases and the 7D with a 70-200 f/2.8 will be better than a 5D2 with a 1.4X extension on the 5D2 to get close to the same focal lengths. The 6D will be better in low light than the 5D2 but other than that, neither will be a camera you will enjoy in a sports environment.

Check out this comparison of the 6D vs the 5D mark III:

Canon 6D Vs. 5D Mark III Hands On Review	Small | Large

58

EOS Bodies / Re: Which is better? 5D MKII or 6D?

« on: January 10, 2013, 11:46:33 AM »

I disagree with you...6D blow away the 5D mk2 in every aspect.. don't even compare old camera with the new ones.. looks the center point AF, -3ev and high quality image in high ISO.. plus a buch of other stuff..

I agree the high ISO image quality on the 6D was amazing...even slightly better than my 5D3. The -3ev is more of a spec than anything else. In practice, the center 6D focus point, even in pitch black performed about equally to the 5D3 cross type points but the other points on the 6D failed. I will admit that the 6D is slightly better than the 5D2 in AF but only slightly. I wish the 6D was better. Of course you do get wifi & GPS and while I don't like GPS, there are some uses for Wifi.

59

EOS Bodies / Re: Which is better? 5D MKII or 6D?

« on: January 10, 2013, 11:11:18 AM »

The 6D is better in low light for sure and the images in general look slightly better. For just about everything else, the 5D mark II is better. The 6D is definitely not a 5D replacement. It is more of a 60D upgrade.
More information in this review: http://learningcameras.com/reviews/4-dslrs/91-canon-6d-review

60

Reviews / Any thoughts yet on the Canon 24-70 f/4 IS

« on: January 10, 2013, 08:07:44 AM »

Anyone have any opinions after using this lens?

A review of the Canon 24-70 f/4 IS is now up at: http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/99-canon-24-70-f4-is-review

www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlFTbI0Dt64	Small | Large

It is definitely a big improvement over the 24-105 (never loved that lens for anything except the zoom range) but that is alot to pay for an f/4 lens. This is much more expensive than even the 70-200 f/4 IS and really, the build quality of the 70-200 is WAY better.