August 22, 2014, 11:49:23 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 - bdunbar79

Pages: 1 ... 129 130 [131] 132 133 ... 171
1951
Yes I can.  Stay tuned, it'll probably be tomorrow, but I can do that. 

1952
It may be a setting.  This happened to me with my 1Ds3.  Let me check.

1953
just toying with some ideas since the 24f1.4L II is one of canons sharpest lenses but the 35L is no slouch either
which combo is likely to deliver the best shots fairly wide open at say f1.4 to f2.8

I have all of the above you posted, and I'm fairly certain the 5Dmk3 + 35 f1.4 will give sharper images.

1954
Lighting / Re: When do you use spot metering?
« on: July 22, 2012, 02:25:52 PM »
I'd like to expand on the question:

How does one use spot metering in AI Servo mode when your focus point isn't center or linked to the meter.

I think my EOS-3 can meter at the focus point, but Canon took this feature away from most digital cameras for some reason...

You can't easily.  You have to buy a 1D or 1Ds body to do that.  Those are the only models that do active AF point spot metering.  It's quite a price premium I know, to get that feature. 

1955
Lenses / Re: Lenses that inspire you?
« on: July 22, 2012, 02:03:11 PM »
It's interesting to note this.  My 85 f/1.2L II lens inspires me the most.  The only reaosn is that I page back through photos I have taken, for some reason, the photos where I used this lens are to me, my best photos ever.  I don't know what it is about the 24-105L, it's just not as good, even though it's more convenient.  My second favorite lens is my 50 f/1.4.  I love that lens for photos where I stop down.  My favorites:

1. 85L
2. 50 f/1.4
3. 70-200 f/2.8L II IS

1956
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Lovin' my 5d Mark III
« on: July 21, 2012, 12:24:09 AM »
I have had my mark III for about two weeks now and have been shooting a lot of hummingbird and macro shots.  My previous camera was a 40d which I thought took excellent pictures.... that is until now!  While I still think it takes great pictures, the 5d is just amazing.  I was really worried about losing the crop factor for some pics, especially the birds.  However, the Mark III more than makes up for this with it's low light capability and the substantial bump in resolution.  I have been amazed at how much I can crop some of my full frame pics and they remain excellent. I am getting shots now that I never dreamed of with the 40d, and the 61 point autofocus, don't even get me started on how much I already love that!  Anyone with a crop body that has concerns about upgrading and losing the crop factor, don't worry about it if you upgrade to the Mark III.  I can't pick up my 40d anymore, it just can't compare. I was going to keep it so I would have two bodies, but I'm starting to think that it may go and I may buy another full frame, possibly a Mark II.  :) :) :) :) :) :)
I don't understand why you say center AF point only and spot meter? I use M mode for indoor sports and would use whichever AF point +8 surrounding points.

It's actually great for sports too.  You have to use center AF point, but set it to spot metering, Tv= 1/500 to 1/800, Av= 6.3, ISO = Auto.  It's pretty good in an indoor gym at those settings with decent DOF and sufficient shutter speed to stop action.  A few of my shots went to ISO 12,800 but it didn't matter because I applied NR post processing and it looked fine.

I'm talking about the metering.  It can only spot meter through the center point, not the active AF point.  Totally seperate from focusing.

1957
Lenses / Re: Keep 70-200 f4 IS or go for f2.8 IS II?
« on: July 20, 2012, 03:36:41 PM »
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/999/cat/11

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/57/cat/11

Check out SLR Gear reviews on these lenses.  Take a look at the Blur Charts that represent IQ.
Surprisingly the f4 lens has slightly better IQ, but with much less weight.  Unless you need f2.8... I wouldn't upgrade at all. 

I own the 70-200 F4is and the 300mm f2.8is.  The only lens I have ever used that even comes close to the 300... is the f4 70-200.

I may have the wrong 2.8.  The 70-200 f/2.8L IS II is sharper than the 70-200 f/4L IS.  There are other versions of the lenses and I've lost track of which ones we're doing here, but the ones I mentioned, the 2.8 is far superior.

1958
Lenses / Re: Keep 70-200 f4 IS or go for f2.8 IS II?
« on: July 20, 2012, 02:48:01 PM »
Stay with the f/4.  Nothing you wrote indicated that you would need the f/2.8.  The f/4 performs about the same as the f/2.8.  If you shot indoors or in low light and needed the extra stop, then it would be a good reason.  Another reason would be for portraiture if you're interested in shallower DOF.  If those reasons do not apply to you, save the grand and your arm.

+1

1959
BTW why are we comparing prices of a just released 5DIII with a 4 year old MKII?  $3500 for the MKIII and $2800 for the MKII, so you don't feel what the MKIII offers now over the MKII isn't worth $700?

You would be right if the MKIII had the best sensor available (just like 5DMKII when introduced)
In addition the price of 5DMKIII will have to follow the same falling pattern if we are to compare them...

Except of course the 1DS3 sensor was well ahead of the 5DII - so perhaps the 1DX will be better than the 5DIII

Brian, I agree with you.  Adding:  The 5D3 can take shots the 1Ds3 cannot take, but the 1Ds3 cannot take shots the 5D3 can't take.  Overall it's a more powerful tool, sans the metering capabilities.  The 1Ds3 I agree is well ahead of the 5D2 in most cases.

For high IQ, ie iso200 or less, the 1DS3 is hands down better than the 5D2.

Also the AF on the 1DS3 is far superior (and the metering) plus of course the 5fps is better than 4fps

The 5D2 only wins on iso over 800

Brian, I'm talking 5D3, not 5D2.  Of course the 1Ds3 is better than the 5D2 in all aspects I think. 

To answer the thread's question:  No.  I already have too many cameras   :P

1960
Why are we on 3 pages of comparing the 5D3 and 5D2 again?  Wasn't this thread about $2,000 for a new cam with 5D3 sensor?  ::)

Because we can.

1961
BTW why are we comparing prices of a just released 5DIII with a 4 year old MKII?  $3500 for the MKIII and $2800 for the MKII, so you don't feel what the MKIII offers now over the MKII isn't worth $700?

You would be right if the MKIII had the best sensor available (just like 5DMKII when introduced)
In addition the price of 5DMKIII will have to follow the same falling pattern if we are to compare them...

Except of course the 1DS3 sensor was well ahead of the 5DII - so perhaps the 1DX will be better than the 5DIII

Brian, I agree with you.  Adding:  The 5D3 can take shots the 1Ds3 cannot take, but the 1Ds3 cannot take shots the 5D3 can't take.  Overall it's a more powerful tool, sans the metering capabilities.  The 1Ds3 I agree is well ahead of the 5D2 in most cases. 

1962
What kind of sensor do we want in the 5DIII, the 1DX's?  If so buy the 1DX.
Maybe someone does not want the weight, size and 12-14 fps of 1DX but wants a normal size FF camera with the best sensor Canon has to offer.

Maybe so but there's so much griping about the 5DIII.  There are many different combinations to be had, you can't please everyone.  My point was that how much more does a person expect from a $3500 camera compared to a $7000 one?
Maybe the question can be rephrased:
How much more should we expect from the $3500 5DIII compared to the $2000-2200 5DII?

I believe a lot more (5DII had the best sensor available by the time it was introduced)

It has a lot more.  Have you ever used one as main camera and 5D II as backup?  It has a lot more.  The sensor is irrelevant.  The processor is better, the features are more useful and numerous.  Go shoot sports for a job and not have access to auto ISO in manual mode.  It can be done, but you'll get better, more consistent exposures if you can run ISO in auto mode while controlling DOF and shutter speed.  Only the 1D4 and 1DX can you also do EC on top of that.  There is little comparison between the two cameras unless you are doing portrait and landscape only.  Even then, you cannot do HDR and ME in-camera, which is actually very useful for night photography. 

The downfall here of course is that you cannot do spot-metering with active AF point during sports.  But the 5D II can't do any of the things I listed.  They're not equal.

1963
Lenses / Re: Which to keep? EF 70-300 IS USM or 70-200 4L IS USM
« on: July 20, 2012, 12:10:00 PM »
Haha!

1964
Lenses / Re: Which to keep? EF 70-300 IS USM or 70-200 4L IS USM
« on: July 20, 2012, 11:24:01 AM »
I'm surprised there haven't been posts saying to buy the 200 f/2L or 300 f/2.8L. 

Anyways, if I were to keep one of your current lenses, it'd be the L glass, 70-200 f/4L.

If you are willing to sell, I would do that and get the 70-300L. 

Those would be my two options.

1965
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: B&H Begins Shipping the Canon EOS-1D X
« on: July 20, 2012, 10:12:16 AM »
It's here! UPS delivered at 8.30AM! Only 12 hours ago, it was in B&H's warehouse in NY.
Amazing service...

Can you let us know any improvements in your studio work?  Thanks.

Pages: 1 ... 129 130 [131] 132 133 ... 171