March 04, 2015, 10:05:40 PM

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 - swrightgfx

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8
Lenses / Re: macro lens filters
« on: July 23, 2012, 10:17:42 PM »
Well, I use UV filters on all my lenses for protection.  But the filter is most useful on my MP-E 65mm, where the working distance is so minuscule that I'm often shoving the front of the lens right against what I'm trying to shoot (e.g. an insect on a plant).
Insect juices do wonders for flare reduction. :P

Not a huge difference, though real world frames seem to say otherwise in some reviews. The main difference I can see here is the moire, where the D800 fails miserably. Personally, losing that bit of sharpness for less moire probably cancels out the difference. That and I don't have to invest in new lenses.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« on: July 23, 2012, 08:18:25 AM »
if i really wanted a compact and solid powerful camera.
i would go to OM-D from olympus. Not for an old sensor wrapped in new shell.

Most power comes here from the lens selection, which BTW makes it no pocketable anymore. :)

Let me re-quote myself:

If they were to front up with a decent, discreet EVF and a small triplet like the Perar below, I'd actually, surprising to myself, consider this.

If we had a couple of really simple lens designs, even if only manual focus, I think this could still be considered pocketable. The OM-D body is much larger (if it was full-frame, I'd forgive them).

I personally don't mind carrying around large cameras, as I still use medium format film, but it would be a handy addition if everything was "right."

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M size
« on: July 23, 2012, 08:05:34 AM »
If this isn't coming out until October anyway and there's no hint at a G12 successor I guess if I am going to get something slightly better than my G11 it will have to be the G12 at least that's half the price of the EOS-M.
G1X? I'd say the price will come down a fair bit with this latest release...

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« on: July 23, 2012, 07:27:51 AM »

Um, if they were to release an EVF, I'm not sure a pop-up in that position would work. They could have a side-mounted one, though. Preferably one that swivels so that you can bounce it or some white card or a reflector at close range.

Personally, I'd go for Pixel King. They generally offer the same support but not at ridiculous prices. After all, none of them are built to take much of a beating...

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« on: July 23, 2012, 12:17:10 AM »
I guess I'll jump into the waters in this thread. Is this camera for people who want--but can't afford--a pricey rangefinder, a la Leica?
I'd say no, as it neither has a rangefinder or the looks. If a pro version of this had a rangefinder, however, I'd be right on it, as I like focussing in that way moreso than with a reflex mirror.

EOS Bodies / Re: Hands-on Video of the Canon EOS M (Italy)
« on: July 22, 2012, 11:58:24 PM »
The camera size (body only) is not too bad. But with that lens and flash system, how is that smaller and more convenient than the 650D?

I wouldn't necessarily draw a comparison simply between size and convenience. You lose a lot of convenience with the lack of a mirror. They are different devices for different purposes, aimed at different people. I think with some pancakes, an EVF and collapsible zoom akin to the Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 (27mm long when retracted) this would be a compact kit.

I personally wouldn't buy one (and definitely not as a primary shooter), as I'd rather lug around the 5DIII and get 95% of the shots worth keeping having the IQ and FoV I'd want. But, I can certainly see a market and a place for this type of camera. The proof is in the pudding, as I see plenty of people wielding comparable offerings from Sony, Olympus and Panasonic and probably moreso than I do SLRs. It provides a way for people to be introduced to photography and the basics of theory, without getting too bogged down in function and IQ-obsession. The more cameras the better, as far as I am concerned. I don't have to buy all of them. That is, unless the market returned to film, which would leave me constantly buying sensors. :P

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« on: July 22, 2012, 01:32:58 PM »
If they were to front up with a decent, discreet EVF and a small triplet like the Perar below, I'd actually, surprising to myself, consider this.

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: 40 Shorty Test Shots
« on: June 29, 2012, 05:02:49 AM »
Selfportrait handheld, natural light through window behind me.
Iso 400, f2.8

I like the pancake!!! :)

Not sure what that looks like pre-sharpening and 100% crop, but looks to be nice sharpness wide-open. It is fantastic that this lens has such a short minimum focus distance to allow for you to get shots you often can't without a tripod, like self portraits.

Lenses / Re: Where is the Lens EF40mm F2.8 STM made in?
« on: June 22, 2012, 03:03:05 AM »
I really don't get this xenophobia towards products made "off-shore." If everyone felt that way about products made in the USA (not all are quality, by the way), the USA wouldn't be the superpower it is... er... was, a few years ago.

Malaysia, China et al. have been producing electrical components for years, including some that are used, I imagine, in L lenses.

Manufacturing in the "developed" world has had its day; now it is time for others to experience the boom. I only wish it was an optical business owned and run by Malaysians making this lens instead of Canon. That would be fantastic for that country and for their people and you know what? The lens would probably be even cheaper, while the people in the factory still earned as much as they do under the red and white flag.

I don't see why you would want to screw on a hood for the pancake..then it would make it not a pancake :)
I have the hood from my old 50 f1.8 and yes it works on the 40mm as well…no issues using it whatsoever..not even with a filter+hood combo..
But then, after i did that, it made the lans as big as any other normal lens..which defeated the purpose of wanting it because it was thin...

I agree. Use a hand!

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: 40 Shorty Test Shots
« on: June 22, 2012, 02:50:30 AM »
I would like it to be a little faster but 2.8 does the trick most of the time.

I too thought this, when it was announced, but with the close focus of 30cm, it renders quite nicely, I think.

I'll be buying one at that price!

When it comes to wedding, you often only have one chance to get "that shot." I have found the 50L a little too unreliable in this regard and the 85L (yes, I am aware this kens is not the topic of discussion) way too slow.

The 35L is actually very quick. I find they lock focus beautifully and the resultant image, especially if you are shooting at wide apertures, tends to be more pleasing than the 50L.

There is, as others have mentioned, the issue of 35L being a little wide (though taking into account the central angle of view of the human eye, the average equivalent focal length equates to not much more, at 43mm). In which case, I'd settle for the 50 1.4. Weddings aren't the most brutal of locations - you are more likely to get a bit of cake on your camera than an incoming blizzard storm front or flying gravel from motorcyclists, so the 50 1.4 can hold up in the majority of cases. Yes the USM has a habit of dying, but you will likely have other lenses with you - if you are really concerned and set on the 50mm focal length as an essential, pick up a 50 1.8 II as backup.

I'd suggest buying all five lenses mentioned. Just to account for that rare Antarctic wedding come car rally.

Lenses / Re: Finding a used 35mm f/1.4L
« on: June 20, 2012, 08:26:12 AM »
I have two 35 1.4Ls and may be selling one of them soon. Virtually mint condition, aside from scratched hood and some microscopic (and I mean tiny) marks to the body. Optics perfect. Send me a PM for a price.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8