April 20, 2014, 03:14:13 AM

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 2 [3] 4 5 ... 162
31
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Thinking of swapping a 5d3 for a 1D4.....
« on: December 12, 2013, 09:39:45 AM »
I misinterpreted the question.  The 1D4 is NOT a step up above the 5D3.  The 5D3 I think overall, in more general situations, will give superior IQ.  If you put a 5D3 on a 400 f/2.8L II IS lens and then the 1D4 on the same lens, the 5D3 would have better IQ, especially if you are 1.3x closer to your subject.

the 5d is not 1.3x closer to the subject it s that much further away

Uhhhhhhhh.  That's what I said.

32
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Thinking of swapping a 5d3 for a 1D4.....
« on: December 11, 2013, 08:58:33 PM »
I misinterpreted the question.  The 1D4 is NOT a step up above the 5D3.  The 5D3 I think overall, in more general situations, will give superior IQ.  If you put a 5D3 on a 400 f/2.8L II IS lens and then the 1D4 on the same lens, the 5D3 would have better IQ, especially if you are 1.3x closer to your subject.

33
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Thinking of swapping a 5d3 for a 1D4.....
« on: December 10, 2013, 07:58:36 PM »
Unfortunately the 7D2 will not likely perform well at high ISO...

I had the 1D4 and 5D3 both.  I could use images from the 1D4 easily as high as ISO 6400.  The 1D4's color accuracy was much better than the 5D3.  The 5D3 loves reds and pinks.  I thought the 1D4 was more accurate and the RAW files I thought could be dealt with much better than the 5D3.  One thing not mentioned here is the 1/300s flash sync speed on the 1D4 vs. 1/250s for the 5D3. 

On the other hand, the resolution difference is actually noticeable in RAW files.  I preferred my 5D3 over the 1D4 in most general situations, but then I sold them both to get another 1Dx.  Because the 1Dx spanked both of them :)

34
Lenses / Re: Canon 24-105 vs canon 24-70 ii
« on: December 08, 2013, 04:52:34 PM »
It's noticeably better, much better, at all the apertures I used, in sharpness, clarity, color rendition, contrast, etc.  I promptly sold my 24L, 24-105L, 35L, and 50L when I got it, because it produces images that were much better than those lenses could produce, f/2.8 and narrower.  It's such an amazing lens, and it really does have the "Wow" factor for me.  Try it out and you'll see exactly what I mean.

35
Lenses / Re: Do You Take Better Pics with Primes?
« on: December 08, 2013, 09:36:35 AM »
The L primes will give better IQ  than most all zooms. (keep in mind resolution isn't the only thing that contributes to IQ)
Even the 24-70mm II will only match or slightly beat the L primes in resolution. It is still behind in other areas.

But that is not the difference you are feeling with your shots.
To use an painting comparison the primes give you a larger pallet and higher quality brushes to work with.
You not only have the improved IQ of the prime but the prime is able to use wider apertures.
The same is true of using a FF over a Crop camera. The FF will give you more creative potential.

So for me yes the Primes "take better pics" because I utilize the extra tools they provide.

I'll name a few of the (good) 'prime' advantages aside from resolution: Color rendition, contrast, flare resistance, less distortion, possibly better bokeh etc. Primes also handle differently, generally they're lighter and easier to handle (no zooming) so less to distract from photography.

Well of course though, the 24-70L II handles those better than the primes in that range, including the 35L and 50L, at f/2.8.  So the 24-70L II is an exception.  It's better.  The only disadvantage is that it can't go wider.  I sold my 35L and 50L once I got the 24-70L II, because the IQ, including everything, was better and yes I noticed it in my photos. 

36
This is a NL rumor. Highly unreliable.

Exactly.  I direct everyone's attention back to when they said the 1Ds Mark IV would be coming very soon.  And it never came, and it's never coming. 

37
Canon General / Re: Random (but Legal) Use of your Photos
« on: November 25, 2013, 12:50:50 PM »
Nothing like what you are doing, I won no contests or anything, but when I shoot for a Big Ten school, 1.  there's not photo credit on their site and 2.  they get distributed everywhere, including the Big Ten website, etc. and no credit caption.  The only credit captions they do are from USATSI or the AP.  It's ok though, you get paid, so in the end you're just doing your job. 

38
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Anyone Mind Another 70D vs 6D Question?
« on: November 22, 2013, 10:29:16 AM »
Cory,

You won't be disappointed.  I shoot collegiate sports and let me tell you, FF is where it is!  I used to use the crop 1D Mark IV and moving to the 1Dx FF blew my 1D4 out of the water, especially in indoor sports.

For you, especially if you are doing indoor volleyball, the extra ISO performance of the 6D will make night and day difference.  You can actually shoot at ISO 6400 and not lose a lot of sharpness, like you would with an APS-C sensor camera.  You'll notice a big difference in facial sharpness I've found.  Keep it at f/2.8, 1/500s, and let the ISO go above 3200, even up to 6400 if you need.  You can do that with a 6D.  If you need to use the center point, do it and then just crop later.  It will still be drastically higher in IQ than with your current camera.  I do not think though, that the point above center (or any in the vertical strip) are bad at all. 

Good luck and keep us updated!

39
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« on: November 16, 2013, 09:14:59 PM »
I'm a sports shooter and I still hesitate to lose the f/2.8 aperture for 1.  light and 2.  subject isolation.  But I'd really love to own the lens anyways... ;D

40
EOS Bodies / Re: New high resolution camera
« on: November 16, 2013, 09:11:32 PM »
What I think will happen in 2014...

Q1: Pre-release 7D-II bodies in action at Winter Olympics in Russia
Q2: 7D-II official launch (coincides with FIFA world cup in Brazil)
Q3/4: High megapixel, 1-series body officially announced.
(launch only Q2/Q3-2015)

These are just my speculations. I do not have any inside info or contacts.

People that earn their livings and gamble their reputations and careers shooting the Olympics and World Cup won't be shooting with a 7D Mk anything. The 1DX and D4 rule and will until a 1DX MkII and D5 come out, I wouldn't be surprised if there are a few pre production versions of them there though.

I agree with that.  The 7D Mk II release will have nothing to do with the Olympics or World Cup, because the photogs that shoot those events won't have one anyways; they'll have the 1Dx or D4.

41
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: November 16, 2013, 07:25:09 PM »
Big Ten Men's Soccer tournament Friday:

42
Canon General / Re: Comet ISON = ISOFF?
« on: November 15, 2013, 11:50:23 AM »
I think the hardest part for me is getting up that early in the morning....

That's easy.  Just sit up all night drinkin' Natty Lite and never go to bed.

43
Lenses / Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« on: November 14, 2013, 02:43:35 PM »
In your case you might want to look at the 24-70 f/4 IS.  It has the sharpness of the 24-70 II, with better IS than the 24-105.  But, it is overpriced at the moment for sure as its now a 5diii kit lens.  Probably will be in the $1000 range in 3-6 months.


The 24-70 f/4 IS, is not as sharp as the 24-70 f/2.8 II.  Similar sharpness to the 24-105L according to the TDP comparisons (link below).  The 24-70 f/4 is sharper with less distortion at 24mm and 70mm, but the 24-105 is better at 35mm and 50mm.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=823&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=0&LensComp=355&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

I believe some other CR members have had better luck with their copies of the 24-70 f/4.0 however.

The 24-70 f/4 IS does have the advantage of being somewhat smaller than the 24-105 and has near macro capability, but until its street price comes down considerably, I can't see it being worth the money compared with the 24-105L.  If the prices does drop to $1K, it would probably be a decent value.


I dunno, I've been looking at a lot of real-world A/B comparisons of photos and while the 24-105 is just as sharp in the center, it seems to be less sharp in the corners with increased CA.  Just what I have observed.  And technically the IS is inferior to the IS in the 24-70 f/4...

I think the extra range of the 24-105 is pretty cool to have though, especially if you have an a crop in addition to your FF.  Ideally, if you were to have two it might be neat to have a 24-70 f/2.8 II and a 24-105 IS.  But if you just picked one and wanted the best IQ in the smallest package, I'd say to go for the 24-70 f/4 IS.


The lens performance of the 24-70 f/2.8L II lens whips the living crap out of the 24-105L.  If you've ever shot with both you'd see what we all mean.  I quickly sold my 24-105L after buying the new 24-70 and haven't looked back.  There's nothing like "under the basket" shots for basketball than with the 24-70 f/2.8L II lens!  :)

44
I owned the 1Ds3 and 5D3 both, and let me tell you, the 1Ds3 produced stunning images:  at ISO 800 and lower. 

The 5D3 is a much, much more versatile camera.  It can also shoot sports very well and much higher ISO's.  The 1Ds3 is a studio camera.  The 5D3 is an "everything" camera.

45
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: November 09, 2013, 04:56:06 PM »
Anthony Taylor scoring.  1Dx/300 f/2.8L I IS:

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 162