I picked up a 50 f/1.4 for $369. The color rendition outdoors shooting ISO 50-200 is just magical.
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.
Sigma IQ is going to be less than the 40 or 50 Canon lenses in all likelihood.
Maybe, but it would still make sense for a crop sensor if one is trying to mimic the 50mm FOV. The Canon 40 and 50 might be too long for the OP on his 1000D. What is the best that Canon has around 30mm that is as fast and as affordable?
Thhe 1DX has so many advantages in terms of ergonomy and reliability i decided amlong time ago i won't use anything else than the 1 series.
So who's the winner? I'm interested in a camera for street portrait photography. What would be the best thing to use to get great skin tones in Canon lineup? Does the 1Ds Mk III remain the best thing for this?
The 1Ds3 is superior ISO 50-200. Above 200 the 5D3 is better.
So I went to DXO to check the difference between 5D III and 1Ds III (yes, I heard lot of negative stuff about this web-site) and here what I saw in the results for low ISO measurements:
Dynamic Range: 5D Mark III loses (~2% difference at ISO 100)
SNR: 5D Mark III wins (~3.6% difference at ISO 100)
Tonal Range: 5D Mark III wins (~0.3% difference at ISO 100)
Color Sensitivity: 5D Mark III loses (~0.4% difference at ISO 100)
Looking at those numbers I don't clearly understand why 1Ds Mark III is so superior. Does it handles uncontrolled light better? Or is it about self-convincing? (i.e. a camera that costs 8 grand makes better images as a matter of fact).
Or am I missing something?
Up to iso200
- total lack of noise
- strong colours
- no banding in the shadows
I had the 24-70. I wasn't crazy about it so i sold it. Too much distortion, vignetting, and not quite sharp enough. Oh, and 2.8 is too slow for me. I love my 1.4 lenses!
I won't use my 1D X at weddings believe it or not; I'll be taking my two 5D Mark III's because it can perform at a high enough ISO for me and has more resolution.
So it's only because of resolution? Do you crop much?In fact, I don't know how they could have possibly upgraded the 5D Mark II any more than they did. I wish it had the color rendition of the 1Ds III at low ISO value. Maybe I'm just wishing there were a 1Ds Mark IV
Any chance 1Dx has similar color rendition to 1Ds III?
I am just wondering how many people out there can afford and are willing to spend 6800 on a camera? I am not asking if they are using it for a certain purpose just how man people actually purchase 1 Series bodies. I considered getting one before but the longer I wait the more I think that the 5D Mark III might be for me.
Hello everyone - To get right to the point....
Auto focus points - Is it me or does it seem that canon has jumped on the bandwagon with an overwhelming amount of auto focus points?
Honestly, when i'm photographing anything from Seniors to Weddings...engagements...the whole sha-bang, I can't stand using just the center point as many photographers do, but rather I am constantly dialing between all points re-positioning my camera to get the shot.
(a quick note before low-light photographers jump in on the conversation...When I photograph in low-light situations, the primes come out and I use the AF on the back of the camera (center focus) and hold my focal length in order to focus and re-position)
So, here's my beef...what good is it to have 61 auto focus points when you shoot like me...and use them all the time. Would I have to dial all through them just to get the focus area and then miss the shot? Is this a gimmick? Similarly to the Megapixel wars? Just to entice those on the fence?
Before landscapers join in, too... most successful landscape photographers are usually shooting in manual, so please don't bother commenting on how they use all their AF points...because that's BS.
So, let me recap - landscape photogs shoot in manual or set a "Range" to focus on...low light can focus using the center focus and recompose their shot...weddings photogs either use a focus/Recompose or selective AF points...
Is the 61 AF points really just for those who were suckered into purchasing an expensive camera and can only set it to Automatic?
One last thing....Please don't mistake my humorous demeanor for the need to respond with erroneous and illegitimate information...I am honestly curious how other photographers feel about useless AF Points.
My Mark II 1Ds is ten years Old I Will be on a whole new planet With iso From hell !!!!!!!
For those of you who have purchased a 1D X, I'm curious as to why? What makes it worth it to you?
For me it was a combination of mild disappointment with the 5D3 spec and the desire (and ability) to have the best I could.
Don't get me wrong, I think the 5D3 is an exceptional machine, but I wanted a bit more from a 5D2 upgrade and the 1Dx fits the bill. It is a no-compromise system with a pro build, the absolute best AF system available and the best ISO performance as well.
I was saving for the 5D3 and had a bit of a windfall that allowed me to reach a bit higher. I considered the 5D3 when introduced, but it wasn't enough to sway me.