January 28, 2015, 07:29:08 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 - AprilForever

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 51
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 11-24 f/2.8L Coming [CR1]
« on: August 07, 2014, 05:52:03 PM »

This is totally up to eleven!!!

I'm pretty sure this might happen, I hope!!!

Photography Technique / Re: How to get eyes tack sharp?
« on: August 02, 2014, 02:42:05 PM »
Bird Photography is my main area: post some pictures, and the settings also, and I will likely be able to tell you what went wrong.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L USM For Sale
« on: July 02, 2014, 11:25:46 AM »
I'm quite content using the 600mm II + 2x III.  Sure it is f/8, but I bet the image quality is better than the bare 1200mm.

I'd guess you're right. The 600 II is a very capable lens, and IS, even when tripod mounted is very useful with lenses this long.

What we need is Bryan over at TDP to get a 1200/5.6 in for review, then we can all learn from his test chart shots :)

He already did. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-1200mm-f-5.6-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

APS-H would be interesting, yet it would surely cost more, and seriously not be a 7D... If they will make the 7D mk II a  pro style body, I will surely get  one anyway, though I may need to mine for gold or sell a car or something...

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D mark 2 crop vs full frame
« on: June 27, 2014, 08:15:24 PM »
I don't get why internet experts think that the 7D mk II needs to be FF. It is preposterous, as FF and crop are two totally different tools, and crop is a better tool for nearly everything.

The 7D mk II will be a APS-C camera, the FF 7D 2, if you will is called the 1DX.

Sorry, but I completely disagree with the highlighted bit. Crop and FF both have their place, and there is no way crop is a better tool for "nearly everything". For that matter, it's debatable whether crop is better for even a slim majority of things. FF does better in almost every circumstance. It is larger, so gathers more total light. Usually has bigger pixels. Usually has more pixels. Allows thinner DOF with lenses of any given aperture. Allows for truly ultra wide field of view, much wider than anything available on APS-C (i.e. 8mm fisheye is only a true 180 degrees on FF...on APS-C, that true fisheye view is...cropped!), allows you to get closer with any lens when filling the frame (ideal for portraiture and macro photography, especially macro w/ extension), etc. etc.

The one primary case where crop is better is when you need reach and spatial resolution. Crop "gets you closer" when using longer lenses. That will remain true so long as crop sensors have smaller pixels than FF sensors. Someday, however, it is entirely possible that a larger sensor will come along with pixels just as small as crop, with just as high a frame rate. When that happens, the one true advantage of crop will evaporate, and there will be no reason to use it. The FF image would simply need to be...cropped.

Agreed.  IMO, the main thing at which a crop sensor is better is being in a more affordable camera body.

Aye. There is that too! That is probably the single most important factor for crop...reach would be secondary, although still very important. (Heh, I rarely take cost into account...only time I really have is the 1D X...so I usually don't care about cost.)

and portability.... I must confess to being tempted by the M for portability.....

I think that would be  mirrorless vs. DSLR argument. My 7D is roughly the same size as my 5D III. Slightly thinner, slightly taller. Overall they weigh about the same, feel about the same, work mostly the same, the major differences are the AF system, frame rate, and frame size. I wouldn't say the 7D is more portable than the 5D III, though.

The lenses are more portable... Or, could be, if canon would actually make anything beyond 18-xmm zooms... Mirrorless is seriously catching up here...

And as far an  7D lacking IQ, the answer is exposure to the right.  With good exposure practices, the 7D performs quite well at 3200... At 6400, things get sketchy, b ut are rescuable with care. Compared to the 5D MK III the 7D will surely look bad, but it is merely showing its age.

And, I love 7D color! I almost never change it, and I always use AWB. I may occassionally tweak shadow color, or selectively saturate a color, but overall, it does great!

EOS Bodies / Re: What do you hope-for MOST from Canon in 2014
« on: June 27, 2014, 08:08:09 PM »
What I want most is to take better pictures....but canon can't deliver that for me.  Or could they......

I guess I'm in the minority here.  I'm happy with what I have.

A. This is a gear site., hence, it discusses gear.

B. Birdsasart-blog.com or bythom.com sign up for a instructional tour. They will make you better.

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D mark 2 crop vs full frame
« on: June 27, 2014, 10:38:48 AM »
I don't get why internet experts think that the 7D mk II needs to be FF. It is preposterous, as FF and crop are two totally different tools, and crop is a better tool for nearly everything.

The 7D mk II will be a APS-C camera, the FF 7D 2, if you will is called the 1DX.

I agree that any 7D Mark II will be APS-C but to say that crop is better for nearly everything is wrong.  It's not better for low-light and it's only good for reach and putting pixels on subject, when you are reach limited.

I hear a lot about how a FF/crop combo is the best for sports such as a 5D3/7D combo.  While I agree it's convenient and useful, and ignoring price obviously, it would still be better to have a pair of 1Dx's with sufficient reach lenses.  The 1Dx with the longer lens to make up for the 7D's crop factor will produce better IQ, at ALL ISO's.  This is exactly why I ditched both of my 7D and 1D4 cameras in favor of a longer lens and another 1Dx.  Again though, photography was helping fund a lot of that and had I been on my own, NO WAY I could have afforded that.  So I agree with jrista and neuro regarding the cost factor regarding crop cameras.  It really was the price difference between a 7D and 1D4 back in 2010 (even though technically the 1D4 is a "crop" camera).   

With that being said, I really hope the 7D replacement is revolutionary and I think it will sell well and make a lot of people happy.  I may consider it as a "3rd" camera if the specs are right and I have the funding.

It's a cost factor, it's a weight factor, it's a mobility factor... These together display the impressive usefulness of APS-C... Hence, why the mirrorless crowd is cheering on their cameras, and saying things like "I'm so glad I ditched my full frame cameras". I've read that in several blogs. Full frame is too heavy. Larger cameras have their place, but it's a dwindling niche, if the camera companies will release full pro quality crop cameras. They have been holding out, because they want to push everyone to upgrade to full frame when they are done with their rebels, it seems.

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D mark 2 crop vs full frame
« on: June 26, 2014, 11:44:18 PM »
I don't get why internet experts think that the 7D mk II needs to be FF. It is preposterous, as FF and crop are two totally different tools, and crop is a better tool for nearly everything.

The 7D mk II will be a APS-C camera, the FF 7D 2, if you will is called the 1DX.

EOS Bodies / Re: What do you hope-for MOST from Canon in 2014
« on: June 25, 2014, 03:32:55 PM »
7D Mk II.

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D mark 2 crop vs full frame
« on: June 25, 2014, 03:32:20 PM »
So many reasons it needs to be a crop sensor...

The Best Photogenic Stuff in Colorado (I have never lived there, but visited several times, and studied it much)

Hikes - Sky Pond, Glacier Gorge, Emerald and Dream Lakes, Chasm Lake, climb Long's Peak if you can, Wild Basin area hikes... For drive up, Trail ridge Road, Spragues Lake, Bear Lake, Moraine Meadow, Beaver Meadows...
Red Rock and GOTG are pretty similar and rather touristy, but quite beautiful
Rocky Mountain Arsenal has a lot of diverse animals...

West Colorado:
Maroon Bells, Crystal Mill, The Dallas Divide (overlooking Mount Sneffels), The Chicago Basin, Pierre Lakes

Great Sand Dunes National Park, Como Lake, Mount Blanca

Google Colorado landscape and wildlife pictures, find ones you like, find out where they were taken, and:

CAREFULLY determine what time of day to be there. Chasm, for example, will be great at sunrise, but pointless at sunset (unless overcast). Also, nearly every afternoon, there will be a thunderstorm.

Visit 14ers.com for more information, also, be careful of high altitude issues.

Lenses / Re: Making a perfectly sharp lens corner to corner idea
« on: December 31, 2013, 02:52:42 PM »
One other related thought I've had - what if they made Metabones Speed Boosters for the EF mount - i.e. Hasselblad, Leaf, etc. to EF.  If it works as well as the EF to m4/3, that would be pretty nuts.

Here's to that!!! Excellent point!!!

Canon General / Re: Types of Photographers (Seinfeld Edition)
« on: December 28, 2013, 09:38:05 PM »
I am of Slavic descent (Russian in particular), so the Latvian one intrigued me...

AFAIK, I wouldn't really call Latvia Slavic per se at all and the Latvian language speakers were not really of Slavic descent. I know many in the U.S. seem to think of Latvia as some sort of Eastern European and Russian land, but that's basically a total misconception simply because the U.S.S.R. was occupying the country recently and the whole Eastern Block/Western Block thing. Latvia is Western/Northern European and more tied to Germany/Sweden/Norway, if anything, and really not so much Eastern European and it really had nothing to do with Russia whatsoever. The culture and vibe really was not Russian at all, but much more like Northern Europe or Germany. The alphabet is a modified western (modern Latin) one, not Cyrillic. The language retains more archaic forms than most other Indo-European ones still around.

I mean the U.S.S.R. took control of Latvia for a few decades post WWII since they wanted the nice sea port on the Baltic and all but that was basically the Russian connection, that the lands got taken over and occupied by force for a few decades (1940-1941 and 1945-1991), although the population is about 30% of Slavic decent currently now.

(and getting back to the Seinfeld episode, the whole big thing with the Latvian Orthodox church was 100% totally made up and somewhat ridiculous (granted most things on Seinfeld are ridiculous), yes the Slavic countries were almost all Orthodox or Catholic, but Latvia is not and it's mostly Lutheran and I hate to say it but basically not a single Latvian thing in the episode is even remotely Latvianish at all)

Latvians here substitute for generic Slav. Do not hate! :) Remember, from the Russian standpoint, all East Europe is Slavic!! (Or should be...)

Also, the 7D is a far more Russian style camera of use. Imagine, Hitler's troops, if cameras were guns (as the Youtube videos seem to show sometimes). They would be using 1DX's and even medium format SLR's. Stalin's men would have had to have slugged it with 7D's, a mixed hand full of Rebels, and sigma and Tamron lenses.

Canon General / Re: Types of Photographers (Seinfeld Edition)
« on: December 27, 2013, 09:08:58 PM »
I am of Slavic descent (Russian in particular), so the Latvian one intrigued me...

1. I love my 7D's. Far too much (all of you have heard this too often!)

2. I LOVE the look of the 7D auto-white balance!!! I never take it off auto, and only occasionally tweak in post.

3. I did start an application for a CPS account, but stopped short, fearing Canon would find out I am not a full time paid shooter (We fear the KGB, and know it knows so much.)

4. I am infamous for writing on my hands, and also an important lecture on a small scrap of paper from the backing of a sticker.

5. I have no 70D, but wouldn't anyway because I hate video. I have a 5D mk II, because my wife loves the look of it's files. It does great permanently mated to my 24-105, and shoots only landscapes, because, it is useless for any other application.

6. I shoot an old Takumar on occasion, because I cannot find a battery for my Rebel G. I really SOOO tried to buy velvia once, but it was not in stock. Now, I would still get it, if I looked online, I believe they are making it again, but, unlike my artistic Latvian cousins, I am cheap.

7. Velvia really is the most seductive of the film stocks.

8. I am amazed and in awe of how well this fits me!!!

EOS Bodies / Re: A 2014 Roadmap Part 1: The 7D Mark II is Coming [CR2]
« on: December 20, 2013, 11:08:36 AM »
This is good news – hints of ‘great news’ in the future. Another CR2… that I hope will become CR3… and then… reality- a 7DmkII.

My most desired camera item at the moment is a EF Canon 50mm f/1.4 – f/2 USM (IS).  As there was a CR2 about that recently, I’m hoping it will come out in 2014.   :)

And then… this – a replacement for my beloved 7D.  (Not that mine is broken, in fact I continue to remain impressed at how capable a camera it is). But a 7DmkII would be my next most desire camera gear to consider (when/if I need a replacement).

Improved IQ (less noise, bit more DR) at any ISO level would be my main request for improvements… mind you, I’m not a pixel peeper, and I’m happy with how my 7D does, it really is a great camera that I’ve loved since I bought it 4 years ago. I’ve taken thousands and thousands of photos with it, and it rarely disappoints.   8)

Other features to be:
- DPAF – perhaps even a noted improvement over the 70D’s revolutionary technology
- spot & partial metering tied to active AF point

Looking forward to what will appear in 2014.  In the meantime, I’ll be taking lots of photos with my 7D and existing lenses.  ;)

Price will be (puts a pinky to the corner of his mouth) one MILLION dollars. muh ha ha ha

This is a great one-line quote – that caused me a laugh this morning (here in Australia time)! Thanks, dstppy!!!  ;D

Best wishes and a great pre-Christmas weekend to all.


INDEED!!! Finally some good news!!!

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 51