Messages

271

Lenses / Re: Rockwell on the 24-70v2, "holy cow, it's awesome."

« on: September 21, 2012, 10:39:41 AM »

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/24-70mm-ii.htm

you realize Ken WANTS you to buy it so he collects is paycheck? why in the world would you believe a word this guys says.

I really wonder what the average age of people here is.

"Ken is agnostic!"

Of course he is. He doesn't care if you buy Canon or Nikon, he just wants his slice of the cake. Probably he gets paid in %, so the more expensive the product you buy is, the more he gets. That's probably the reason of him totally bashing the way-too-cheap D800.

272

EOS Bodies / Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon

« on: September 21, 2012, 10:32:35 AM »

The grass is NOT greener on the other side.
It may look like it from a distance, but when you get there, you can often find it is only painted on.

Friends of mine with D800's complain bitterly about their greenish coloured screens, the poor auto focussing, especially when you pick a point on ther left side as well as other problems.
I have a 5D3 (as well as a 60D with around 150,000 shutter actuations), and I've never had a problem with them at all. In fact, I am still amazed at what a great all-around camera the 5D3 is.
It really isn't lacking anything.

While the spec sheets and DXO tests may say otherwise, in side to side testing, you'd be very hard pressed to see any differences between the D800 and 5D3.
I shoot everthing from weddings, to parties, carpets, products,interiors, portraits, landscapes - you name it, and the 5D3 always does a great job.
I initially went with the Canon system, because of the their lenses and their lower costs compared to Nikons.
The quality is maybe slightly better with Canon, but as most of us spend more on lenses than we do on bodies, the variety, quality and cost of the lenses is what really swayed me to go Canon, and why I stay with Canon.

The D800 - as 99% of products - had some problems on release that were fixed later. Early users are often beta-testers.

This thing of D7000 and D800 having a poor AF is a legend. It's just less noob-friendly or noob-proof than most Canon models, but they work great.

No one says the 5D3 is not a capable camera, but the D600 looks pretty much like 90% of it for 60% of the price. If you shoot low-iso you even have some serious advantage.

And Canon lenser are not always better and always cheaper, by the way. When Nikon is not good in some segment, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, etc come in to help you.

I switched to Nikon on release of the D800 and haven't looked back. People make a bigger deal than it actually is. If even I have to switch to sony or canon, I will.

this isn't marriage. they are just tools. get over it.

Wise words.

273

Lenses / Re: Lensrentals.com - great blog entry - statistcs on repairs, failures and support

« on: September 21, 2012, 08:25:10 AM »

Don't know in US, but here in EU Tamron offers an amazing 7-years warranty.

274

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: sony and hasselblad

« on: September 21, 2012, 08:17:51 AM »

I think the main reason is that Nikon invaded their market with the D800/E, and Canon and Sony itself will do the same sooner rather than later.

Their market is a niche, few users who buy very expensive gear. If tech colossus like the above mentioned start providing cheap alternatives, it's game over for them.

They are trying to pay them back with their own coin - enter the prosumer market.The main problem is that they have zero expertise in the smaller-sensor consumer and prosumer wolrd.  Probably they think they can have a Leica-sort of following, but right now it's almost obvious that they're only rebranding Sony tech.  And Sony itself is probably only interested in acquiring the aura of respect around the Hasselblad name, which is the only one thing they lack in the photography market after they acquired Zeiss.

275

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D600 hands on preview from LL

« on: September 21, 2012, 07:27:41 AM »

good luck with your 70D. be prepared for a dissapointment.

This is why I said maybe, and only if clearly better than Nikon's offer

Actually I could even do with a used D7000.

276

Lenses / Re: Lensrentals.com - great blog entry - statistcs on repairs, failures and support

« on: September 21, 2012, 05:58:20 AM »

Very interesting.

Seems that 3rd party like Sigma and Tamron - often bashed on this forum - actually offer the best service.

A second interesting observation is that more expensive lenses not always are better built. I'm talking in particular about Sony, Canon and Nikon professional f/2.8 zooms.

277

EOS Bodies / Re: Who really is the target demographic for the 6D?

« on: September 21, 2012, 05:04:33 AM »

 
i shoot 90% in the ISO 100-800 range.

Same here.

Looks like all of sudden people only shoot basket players playing in candle light and with a f/5.6 non-IS lens.

278

EOS Bodies / Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon

« on: September 21, 2012, 04:51:41 AM »

You're currently shooting with a T1i and you're torn between the IQ of a FF Canon vs Nikon body? Poor DR? You sound like an engineer, not a photographer.

If you think Canon has better glass, then that's a much better basis for you to make your decision. But seriously buddy, stop reading the body specs and just go out and shoot photos. There's no IQ or DR category in photo competitions.

yeah a lot of people forget that, the main thing in how to do great photography is you! not the camera!

Although the camera is not the most important aspect in photography, you still want the best camera for your budget. Depending how much you're invested in canon lenses and how much you can sell it for, upgrading to a Nikon FF instead of a Canon FF might give you better value.

+1

I love when people posting in a gear-oriented forum and having themselves several thousands grands of gear pieces come out saying "Nah, it's not about the gear, it's about skill". It's hypocrite to no end. Especially because I often read that this is a Canon enthusiasts forum, so apparently I have to assume that skill comes in kit with Canon gear only.

I would kindly invite those people to act on their principles, sell all their expensive gear and buy a 1100D kit and a fifty nifty. Then you can come and show us "pixel-peepers" and "spec-readers" (who care about value for money of the products we buy) that our worries have nothing to do with IQ and how miserable photographers we are.

279

EOS Bodies / Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon

« on: September 21, 2012, 04:03:07 AM »

i agree with above about the Sigma 70-200 OS, it's fantastic, and I feel that the bokeh is a lot smoother and "dreamier" then the Canon version. Though, not as sharp at 200mm, but considering I got the lens under 1K I'm very happy.

But, also with the author here, I'm still on a T1i too, and I might just get a 5Dmk2 for cheap as the 6D, though not THAT bad, doesn't look like a camera I'd shell out 2K+for and get effective use for the next 4 years or so. It has more limitations than advantages, with the only real advantage being price.... which isn't even great for what it is so let's move on.

Switching systems no matter how much equipment or experience is just unwise, not just financially, but when you jump once, then if ever the previous system provided something you'd like then you're blaming yourself for not sticking with them, and might heavily consider switching back. The grass is always greener... even though right now it may really be green, a drought could harm Nokin land soon and the game could change all over.
Though, even if great things come to those that wait, if there's a feature/piece of equipment you need that just isn't available then of course, those events/sports/weddings/stories aren't going to wait, so switch over like all those guys did with the D3. But switching systems over an "entry level"offering doesn't seem like a good decision at all,
unless the goal later is to move up and collect lenses in the meanwhile with an affordable body...

I agree with you in general terms, but there are some peculiar things to consider in this situation:

1) D600 and D800 are so well specced to be quite a good investment for the future too, especially if you're a low-iso shooter.
2) They are cheaper, which makes up for the losses of switching system. And if you upgrade from a crop, you lose your crop lenses all the same, which makes it hardly different.
3) Sigma and Tamron provide very good glass, which makes users less dependent on Canon and Nikon lenses.
4) The D600, though being entry level, is very well specced. The typical user gets 90% of a 5D3 for 60% of the price.

In this peculiar situation switching systems is particularly soft.

280

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D600 already shipping - 5 days after announcement

« on: September 21, 2012, 03:52:46 AM »

Nikon really wants to make the D600 a better deal. And they're succeeding brilliantly.

281

EOS Bodies / Re: At what price point will you consider buying the Canon 6D?

« on: September 21, 2012, 03:36:56 AM »

D600's price in EU went down already by 10-20%. Looks like Nikon wants to eat as much of the market as they can.

And honestly, the more the D600's price goes down, the less the 6D looks like a nice alternative.

282

EOS Bodies / Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon

« on: September 21, 2012, 02:47:50 AM »

You're currently shooting with a T1i and you're torn between the IQ of a FF Canon vs Nikon body? Poor DR? You sound like an engineer, not a photographer.

If you think Canon has better glass, then that's a much better basis for you to make your decision. But seriously buddy, stop reading the body specs and just go out and shoot photos. There's no IQ or DR category in photo competitions.

I think you may have missed the point of my post.  I was reacting to all the other threads about how Canon sucks because Nikon is trouncing them on dxomark scores and that no one is going to buy a 6D because the D600 is so much better and that Canon should fire everyone involved in developing a product as lame as the 6D.  I thought it might be interesting to give a perspective on why someone might actually choose to buy a 6D over a D600.

I have about 50,000 exposures on my T1i so I do get out and shoot occasionally.  But I think I'm at the point where I'd enjoy having a nicer body, and it might even improve some of the images I get.  Obviously if I'm going to drop $2K on a new body, I'd prefer to get the camera that suits me better.

However, if you go back and reread my original post, you'll realize that my whole point was that I'm not going to decide based on Nikon having higher DR or less low-ISO noise or whatever.  Any FF body is so much better than what I have now that I'm going to worry about Canon's "horrible banding" and "low resolution" or whatever else the people on this forum say right before they throw all their Canon gear in the garbage and buy a D800.

The only thing I was trying to say is that the 6D overall seems a better fit than the D600 for someone like me, who likes to walk around and take pictures of people and places and *not* spend my time pixel peeping at test patterns.

Please read again your first post.

You're not choosing the 6D over the D600, you are choosing the entire Canon package over Nikon's, and you're doing this basing mostly on one single lens: the 70-200 f/4 IS. Buying the 6D is consequence, not a choice.

That is a disputable choice, but still a choice, so if you're happy with that the go down that way. Honestly though, given your last paragraph, I really wonder why you *must* have that lens and nothing else.

283

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D600 already shipping - 5 days after announcement

« on: September 21, 2012, 02:38:16 AM »

Price in Europe dropped of 10% already: 2100 to 1900€.

Even 20% in UK: 1950 to 1615 GBP.

284

EOS Bodies / Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon

« on: September 21, 2012, 02:29:15 AM »

There's been a lot of talk lately about how the 5Dm3 is overpriced, has poor DR, etc and how the 6D is overpriced and under-spec'ed.  And the Nikon D800 and D600 look like pretty sweet cameras.

I would seem like an ideal candidate to jump to Nikon: I'm currently shooting a T1i that was my first DSLR when I got it 3+ years ago.  I've shot quite a bit and learned a lot, and I feel like I'd get a lot out of a new body.  But I'm not particularly tied to the Canon system for FF -- my only EF lens is the 50/1.8, and I have one 430 flash.  I have a couple of EF-S lenses I'd have to replace if I got a FF body, no matter whether I went Canon or Nikon.

The D600 looks pretty nice, and I could probably talk myself into a D800 for $3K more easily than a 5Dm3 for $500 more.  But I'm probably going to stick with Canon -- my next camera is probably a 6D.

Why?  The lenses.  First of all, the 6D kit with the 24-105 f/4 looks like a good deal, and the 24-105 seems like an ideal lens for walking around with a FF body.  As far as I know, Nikon has no lens that really competes with the 24-105.  The other main lens that I see myself getting is the 70-200 f/4 IS, which is great for someone only semi-serious like me to walk around with -- I've rented both the 70-200 f/4 and f/2.8, and paying half as much for a lens that is half the weight seems like a great deal to me (and coming from the crop body I shoot now, f/4 on FF would be pretty fast).  Again, Nikon has nothing to match this lens -- they only have the f/2.8 version.

Even having access to the crazy stuff that I might only rent once a year like the Canon 8-15 fisheye or the 17mm TS-E matters to me.

So perhaps the D600 has better IQ, but I'm sure that (especially compared to what I shoot now) in absolute terms, the Canon 6D has excellent IQ too, and as others have said before, the Canon *system* is still enough ahead of Nikon that the Nikon bodies as not enough to entice me to switch.

Not to crush your bubble, but Nikon 24-120mm f/4 and Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 are good alternatives.

Nikon has no 70-200 f/4 IS, agreed, but both Sigma and (within the year) Tamron have 70-200 f/2.8 IS for the same price. We can't say anything about the Tammy yet, but the Sigma is a very, very good lense. Heavier though, you have a point there.

Samyang and Sigma produce good fisheye lenses, and soon enough there will be a Samyang 24mm TS-E.

Canon's supremacy in lenses nowadays is pretty much limited to the telezoom segment. If most of your pictures are over 200mm then you are right, staying with Canon is the best choice. Otherwise Nikon and 3rd-party offer an amazing selection of glass.

285

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D600 hands on preview from LL

« on: September 20, 2012, 07:26:24 PM »

I agree with LL, to a certain extent at least. I still think that lower-specced cameras should be decently priced below their betters.

Anyway, since 99% of my pictures are taken between ISO 100 and 400, we all know what's the best choice for me. Going FF means selling my crop lenses in any case, so I feel free to choose without many regrets.

I'm lookinf forward to the 70D/7D2, maybe they will convince me to be a Canon user again. Well, assuming Nikon doesn't provide mind-blowing D7100/D400.