November 26, 2014, 04:33:05 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 - awinphoto

Pages: 1 ... 117 118 [119] 120 121 ... 134
I thought you said you tested the 17-40 and already had the lens in question and found it superior than the 17-55 in "every way"?  F4, for most indoor environments was never claimed to be the best of both worlds... In most indoor environments, F2.8 is ONLY 1 stop more light and may not even be enough.  You can pick up cheap primes of 50mm 1.4, 35mm 1.4, etc (Even those would have incredibly shallow DOF and need a tripod to shoot with a lower F stop to get more DOF)  Low light situations is a constant battle... you can always get a faster lens but faster lenses have smaller DOF and that can hurt shots as well.  Then it's either raise ISO or get more light, hence strobes or flash... those would be more suited for indoors.  That being said, it appears that you are shooting handhold, am I correct?  For those macro shots which tend to lose light as is due to lighting environments, you almost need to use a tripod.  Using a tripod will allow you to knock down the ISO, longer more stable shots, sharper images, etc...  You can also get a ring light that goes around the lens to add more light in those macro settings.   In the forest you can get a neutral density filter, and lengthen the exposure, lower ISO and get a better shot overall.  I dont know if the grocery store will allow a tripod in their store unless you give them a few photos, but that's the route i'd go in.  Also bring a gray card with you to run a quick white balance in commercial buildings... florescent lights are nasty to work with.  In this Ultrawide area of lenses, distortion will be a fact of life, but it will just vary depending on your lens and camera.  The only way to really avoid distortion is TS lenses. 

EOS Bodies / Re: No Finalized 5D Mark III Yet [CR2]
« on: August 01, 2011, 10:18:18 AM »
I'm not really swayed by a liability argument, and I'm not swayed by a "it has to be perfect or else it can't be used' argument either.  I think Canon just wants to save money on a feature that could easily just be disabled so it is no problem for folks who won't use it.  They were apparently making big strides from the EOS 5 to the EOS 3, and with some years of development I wonder if it could have gone further (and perhaps it has, in Canon's labs).  Really, if it is a problem to use it in AI Servo, I think it would be fairly simple to allow a custom function to have it enabled or disabled in that mode.

Fair enough, but by liability, i'm getting at it could be a bad PR hence liability in regards to corporate image and so on and so forth.  It has to be nearly perfect because, lets face it, on the film cameras, the highest most pro's were willing to print on 35mm film was 8x10.  11x14 if using ISO 100 film or under because of grain and the picture really started falling apart and clients wouldn't buy it.  Pro's knew if they really wanted 11x14 or bigger, medium format was a must.  Focus on an 8x10 has to be good, but focus on a 11x14 or even 16x20 which the 5d mark II can pump out natively without interpolation (almost) ANY mistake in focus will be magnified let alone those pixel peepers who would tear apart the focusing system on the internet.  You remember all the noise when the 7D first came out with the 19pt focus system... people complaining how it wasn't as good as advertised on fast action... Those complaints quietly died away but to come out with this system which undoubtedly would be dubbed as Canon's best/fastest/most accurate/throw-in-adjective AF Ever, they would have to get it perfect on the flagships in order to keep good PR... Let anyone forget what happened to what was it, the 1d 3 focus system that was shakey and needed to be fixed post release.  That brought Canon bad PR and they dont want a repeat by hastily releasing this.

Kinda like apple who claims they wont release a product unless it's "perfect" or "done right", Canon wouldn't/shouldn't release this system until they know beyond a shadow of a doubt it is nearly perfect. 

EOS Bodies / Re: No Finalized 5D Mark III Yet [CR2]
« on: July 31, 2011, 08:00:28 PM »
Then again, where's our eye tracking?

Personally I don't see them releasing the eye control option again any time soon and I'll tell you why...

1.  The simplest reason is liability. People already are griping about the 45 pt af and more options such as eye controll can be a bigger backlash. The amount of calibration, testing... People moan that they need to do the microadjust let alone calibration... If it doesn't work perfect out of the box be prepared to read floods of forums... This af is horrible. Part b to this answer if professional photogs don't JUST look at the subject matter in the view finder, were looking at the scene, the background blur, the composition, looking for anything that would detract...  If a photog looks off subject consciously or unconsciously for a split second before clicking the shutter, you just lost your focus assuming you didn't lock ur focus. Even if it was user error, people will still slam canon and NO one will accept responsibility. In this saturation of pro photogs not seen by any other time history of Photography, it's a huge liability.

Second, with digital, with high mp, focus needs to be perfect. Any flaw will be magnified since people are pixel peeping more than ever, so unless it is perfect, forget it. Too much of a risk. At least with af points you can select 1 point and keep it on subject to eliminate equipment failure from the poss why your shot is OOF.

EOS Bodies / Re: No Finalized 5D Mark III Yet [CR2]
« on: July 29, 2011, 03:09:13 PM »
Yes, they can be used for both video and stills, but they are optimised for their main usage. A video sensor will be low res to avoid line skipping as an example ?

Video sensors are no different than stills sensors but video sensors need to support much higher read-out speeds (60-120 fps for video vs 10-12 fps for stills).
One way to cope with the data throughputs at such speeds is of course to have a lower resolution sensor or to do line skipping (or 'thinning', as I've seen it called).

This is something that technology will definitely solve in the future, though.
A hi-res sensor designed to do pixel-binning (or some other trick) instead of line skipping will avoid many of the aliasing issues that current DSLR sensors have for video.

The Reds, and the other dedicated video cameras have a video specialised sensor and I am claiming that they are more expensive due to this.

I disagree with that. 
Economies of scale surely play a role in sensor costs but the REDs are so expensive mostly for business/marketing reasons.
RED are establishing themselves as the Ferrari/Lamborghini in their market. 
So, you will never see low cost cameras from them.

Regarding economics and price, it kinda reminds me of a seminar I saw recently about professional photographers prices and perceived worth...  If 1 photographer charges more than another, all being equal, the customer will tend to think that there is a higher value or perception of the higher priced photographer.  It doesn't necessarily mean that they will chose the higher priced person or not, but the reputation or pecking order will be established accordingly... If someone undercuts on price, the customer will think it's a great price, but there has to be a REASON why they're cheaper, hence a compromise or lower quality or service.  That's kinda how camera prices work... The red may or may not cost the manufacturer the same to produce as canon does for the 1ds, however, they charge the higher price because they can... In fact, 10 years ago if Canon and Nikon wanted to put their flagships at $16000 or higher instead of 7000-8000, people wouldn't have thought anything of it and would be paying that for them.  Perhaps people wouldn't upgrade as often but you see where i'm getting that.  Heck it would make me cringe to think where then the 5d and 7d and xxd cameras would be priced then.  Maybe it would be better cause it would differentiate pros from non-pro's more and thin the heard a bit, but then other starting up photogs who are making great photos with xxd cameras or rebels wouldn't be able to get into the game as easily.   

EOS Bodies / Re: No Finalized 5D Mark III Yet [CR2]
« on: July 29, 2011, 01:31:56 PM »
...doesn't anyone's wish list include a GPS chip for geo-tagging photos or wi-fi or 3G/4G for transferring files?...

I have been waiting for a GPS for quite awhile now. Canon has included the feature in it's point and shoot line (the recent SX230), and I'd be surprised if it isn't found in the 5D mkIII or the new 1D.

To be honest as a working professional, I have never really needed to ever have GPS... I know where I shoot and dont have a need to know EXACTLY where I was... The few iphone photos I have taken have the GPS feature and Iphoto (which i use for my iphone stuff) records that data but I cant recall ever re-looking at the GPS map to find out where this or that photo was taken.  Built in wifi could be interesting if they can make it so it doesn't slow down the camera or make it hack-proof so some nerd down the corner can hack into my camera and take my photos. 

Canon General / Re: Canon CPS Repair
« on: July 29, 2011, 10:24:29 AM »
Most my conversations with Canon CPS and Canon repair facilities are via email, however, the one time when I called in (using the CPS phone number), I had problems with my 7D's multi flash function and the person on the phone got a 7D on her end, went through all the settings with me over the phone so I was seeing pretty much as she was seeing and got it working together.  Usually if i had something I wasn't sure if needed repaired or called, I would email CPS and they would advise me what was best to expedite the situation.  Overall I've been pleased but I cant speak for regular call-ins or regular mail in repairs. 

Canon General / Re: Canon CPS Repair
« on: July 28, 2011, 06:36:25 PM »
I have been pleased with my Canon CPS service and repairs whether it's the free clean and checks (Gold member) or warranty repairs.  I've never had them take more than a day from acceptance to shipping.  Kudo's on Canon for taking care of their CPS members.

Lady, one last thing to ask your school... does their rental department rent strobes or just on camera flashes?  What about C-Stands/light stands?  Sandbags?  Light modifiers?  Diffusion?  Reflectors?  It may help to know which lenses the offer so you can plan accordingly... What about studios or studio equipment such as seamless backdrops and background muslins?  Do they offer  q-flashes and Wireless transmitters and recievers?  Umbrellas and or Softboxes?  This may all seem trivial but it's nice to know so if they dont offer any of these, you know to save up for them.  You may also want to check which flashes they offer?  Do they offer monoblock strobes (wireless) or powerpack (wired).  Stuff like this, if they dont have them, they may seem like small purchases but costs as a student add up and when an assignment pops up that requires such equipment and you need to buy said equipment and you are pinching pennies to pay for food, it is better to know about this before hand. 

They said the 7D is allowed, but that we'll do so much landscape and architecture and portrait shooting that I'll be desperate for a full frame within the first year and that I should probably save up for one now. It's a very competitive school, though. Any person I've met who came out of it was phenomenal. It's a rigorous and unforgiving program and I think they're trying to deter the people who are just "trying out photography for fun" by requiring that you get top notch gear first.

Full frame is required for the 4th quarter (it's a 6 quarter program) because they start some very ultra wide angle stuff. A crop frame would not function. However, by then I would hope that I have a full frame camera.

Well Good luck with your schooling and as I mentioned in one of my first replies.. make sure your fiancee is fully on board with the costs of photography... Money and budgets could be a detriment to young marriages and it took a while to even get my wife get used to me spending thousands on camera bodies and lenses. 

Also try to get as many critiques from strangers as possible towards your portfolio.  At my school, professors (industry professionals) had no qualms on ripping you and your work to shreds if they didn't think they were up to par.  Some professors I've heard of were infamous for throwing away peoples assignments because they were displeased with the work and or passing out McDonalds applications to students.  They also would blatantly tell you if they felt you didn't belong at that school.  They basically were the Simon Cowells before Simon Cowell became popular.  Most would call them jerks or worse, they hardened us to the realities of customers expectations... Getting used to this will help you avoid the shock and awe of these critiques when you get to school. 

Dont Give Up.  I cant stress this enough.  My school during its hay-day when I was there, anyone who had high purse strings and could afford the tuition and THOUGHT they could be photographers went to my school.  It was a very expensive school and became very large quickly.  The problem was it was so tough and expensive half of incoming freshmen quit by the end of the first 2 classes and even more by the end of the first year.  By graduation of my class, probably 1/8 of the original class I started with graduated to get the full BA on time.  Others probably graduated but their graduation dates delayed for whatever reasons.  Schools like ours are meant to weed out those many hopefuls and graduating the select few.  They are good at shaking out those who cant hack it and it's easy to quit.  I went in hoping to get straight A's... that didn't happen, but I graduated, so in some perspective I feel is just fine with me. 

Someday I hope to have a 1d (or one of its future variations) as well.

It's always nice to have aspirations =)  We try not to judge when your sincere about your questions/request. 

Lenses / Re: EF16-35 a best fit lens over 24-70
« on: July 27, 2011, 06:59:12 PM »
Well shoot... what do you shoot?  (couldn't resist)... seriously, do you use the 24-70?  That's a lot of range to lose... can you get by with that 1 lens than 2 lenses?  What camera are you using?  That's something only you can answer. 

Could someone please explain to me the point of fisheye? I always thought it was a phase because I never really liked the way certain photos looked with fisheye lenses. Is there a valid use for it besides deceptive real estate advertising?

It's a niche effect lens... It's used often in skating magazines and other extreme sports where people are moving fast and may be out of frame in a split second so they use that to ensure they capture it when close up... Some people love it, some people dont.  I tried it a few times but not anything I would use professionally. 

I already own a 17-40mm. After extensive testing and comparison I found it to do significantly better than the more expensive 17-55.

Funny how I thought the same thing about the 17-40 vs 17-55 on my original tests...

Interesting - how was it significantly better?

I tried out a 17-40mm and definitely preferred the 17-55mm from an optical standpoint - especially stopped down to f/4, the 17-55mm is sharper across the frame, and the EF-S lens, surprisingly, has less barrel distortion at 17mm than the 17-40mm, despite a broader zoom range and the 'sweet spot' effect of using an EF lens on a crop body.  The only place the L lens won was less vignetting.  From a build standpoint, the L lens is definifely better, of course.

I ended up getting the 16-35mm f/2.8L II instead of the 17-40mm for use on FF (as good or better at comparable apertures), and the 17-55mm on the 7D outperforms the 16-35mm II on the same body, from my own testing.  I shoot a fair bit of wildlife with the 7D and a telezoom, and bring a standard zoom along 'just in case' - in the rain, I bring the 16-35mm II, but otherwise I grab the 17-55mm lens, and in fact, I hung onto that lens after getting the 5DII for just that reason.

It's hard to say... when I did my testings I tested it against the sigmas and tokinas (my local store didn't sell tamrons so i couldn't test their version which has gotten good reviews) as well as each other...  I dont know... I just felt when I did my unscientific tests, the 17-40 locked focus a tad faster, felt more robust (i need my gear to keep up and be ok if it has a little bang here and there)... the L had weathersealing and  IQ i felt was close but not near enough to warrant the price difference.  The 2.8 would have been nice but that wasn't a driving factor because I was ok with my cameras ISO if needed.  For what I do and how I shoot, that's how I made my choice.  BTW, the sigma and tokina lenses tested were horrid in focusing in low light.  The 17-40 I was able to focus almost in the dark without even needing the AF lamp...  I'm sure under certain conditions the 17-55 could produce sharper images but I've been pleased with my lens. 

EOS Bodies / Re: No Finalized 5D Mark III Yet [CR2]
« on: July 27, 2011, 04:43:04 PM »
How do you know that Canon does not want to do it?

Have you talked to the executives at Canon to find out?

Have you put the interview between you and them somewhere on the Internet where we can all read it?

That part's easy, even I can answer that...

gene_can_sing: "Mr. Canon exec, does Canon want to improve the video capabilities of the 5D line?"

Canon exec: "No comment."

gene_can_sing: "Will Canon address the shortcomings of the 5D Mark II in the areas of moire and rolling shutter?"

Canon exec: "No comment."

gene_can_sing: "Don't you want to keep your loyal customers by giving them what they want?"

Canon exec: "No comment."

...and so on.

Haha... it's sad but true. haha

Wow... they require a full frame camera... granted when I was at school full frame digitals were rare... the original canon 1ds was your only offering... I dont recall if the nikon d1x was full frame or not... be that as it may, the 7D will definitely get your skill level up and when your in school and ready for your second class you will be more than ready for the 5D mark III =)  As i've mentioned before in other posts, from spending almost a decade with various canon digitals (10d, 1d, 30D, 50D, etc...) this was the first camera where I actually had to learn and sharpen my game a bit to fully utilize it to it's fullest potential.  You should also be able to resell it for a good chunk when your ready or keep it as a second backup camera. 

Funny how I thought the same thing about the 17-40 vs 17-55 on my original tests... I got the 17-40 because it's forward compatibility but others swear by the 17-55 but it is a personal preference.  I'd definitely look at the 70-200 F4 IS and non IS... the non is around $700 and the IS is closer to 1200... something to consider on a budget.  Good luck and let us know how it goes.  =)

Pages: 1 ... 117 118 [119] 120 121 ... 134