Messages

496

EOS Bodies / Re: any flaws in the canon 60d?

« on: December 19, 2011, 04:40:33 AM »

Get a used 7D! You will love it!

497

Lenses / Re: Buying lenses, do you listen to your heart or your head?

« on: December 19, 2011, 04:38:40 AM »

Exclusively my heart.

I hated the 18-55, and as such, could never abide anything with a similar focal length. I will never get a 17-50 2.8, no matter how good they may be...

I love the focal length 300. I have a 300 F4, and a 300 2.8. I got the 300 F4 over the 100-400 largely because I prefer 300.

I love the 50mm focal length (which seems to contradict the above...). My 50 1.4 is bea up, but hopefully I can get a new one at some point...

498

United States / Re: Prime lenses you currently own or on your wishlist.

« on: December 18, 2011, 03:00:54 AM »

I have:

24 2.8
30 1.4 (Sigma)
50 1.4
50 1.4 (Super Takumar)
180 3.5 Macro (Sigma)
300 F4
300 F2.8

I want:
600 f4
85 f1.4 (Sigma)
8mm f2.8 (still needs to be invented)
200 f2

I also own a 135 4.7 Raptar, and a 90 6.8, but they aren't hugely mountable on the eos system...

499

Site Information / Re: Applaud or smite?

« on: December 16, 2011, 02:14:24 PM »

I got a lot of smites from the 5D mk III thread... it seems people get smitten sometimes for disagreeing...

500

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D2, 5D3 and Megapixel Insights

« on: December 14, 2011, 12:40:59 PM »

I am eagerly awaiting 7D mk II, but I won't likely be pre-ordering... Not unless it has something extra good going for it... Prolly, given my current finances, I'll need to wait until 2013 to get it anyway...

My guess is that the 7D mk II will be announced in September... when it will actually be available is anyone's guess...

501

Lenses / Re: Which telephoto lens has the fastest AF

« on: December 13, 2011, 06:29:33 PM »

My 300 2.8 is MUCH faster than my 70-200 2.8... which is MUCH faster than my 70-300 IS (non L) was... which was MUCH faster than my 75-300 was... which was MUCH faster than my my Quantaray 70-300...

502

EOS Bodies / Re: Can a 7D do Landscapes?

« on: December 13, 2011, 09:49:04 AM »

All my landscapes are 7D!!!

503

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D + 10-22mm or 5D III + 16-35mm L II?

« on: December 12, 2011, 01:39:52 PM »

Keep the 7D and get a Tokina 11-16. Unless you wish to drop a lot on lenses, this will be a much cheaper route...

504

Lenses / Re: Canon vintage primes

« on: December 12, 2011, 01:38:15 PM »

M42 mount lenses work great with the adapters, which are quite cheap. There are a TON of cheap m42 lenses on ebay, though most of them are only about f2.8... and rarely wider than 28mm... except the occasional takumars, which seem to usually go for about 100-150ish...

505

EOS Bodies / Re: The rift between the vocal "ISOers" and the "MPers"...

« on: December 12, 2011, 01:33:45 PM »

I'm one of those "MPers", that said I would be satisfied nif the 5dmkIII was 25MP. Although it'd be better to combine the two - high MP and high, clean ISO without losing image quality. But hey, we can't have it both ways (maybe in the next 10-15 years we can). Just my 2 cents

I believe it would be EASY to have both 25mp and clean ISO. Noise is a combination of factors...some we cannot control, some we can control to a degree, and some we have a lot of control over. The noise floor of recent Sony sensors is around 12% that of Canon sensors prior to the 1DX. Mainstream Canon sensors have a funky way of boosting ISO, and in many cases they perform analog gain amplification when electronic read noise is quite high, amplifying all that noise right along with the rest of the image. Reordering circuits, cooling circuits down, etc. can all have a positive impact on noise levels, even at higher resolutions than we have today. I believe the technology already exists in the 1DX sensor, so a lower-FPS, low-ISO sensor that doesn't need ISO52100 should be able to see considerable gains in ISO levels up to ISO6400 or so.

I'm hoping for ISO 51,200 on my 7D mkII! With 24MP. And I am sure it will work great and look great; moreover, I am certain that people will continue to complain about the noise levels in the blue skies at ISO 400...

506

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]

« on: December 12, 2011, 12:12:04 PM »

It just seems to me that everyone is missing the point altogether. Please be realistic about what the 5D is actually meant to do. And the market it is intended to address.

The purpose of the 5D Mrk III is not:
-   to be a great professional landscape camera
-   to be a studio camera
-   to make large prints similar to 4” x 5” + film
-   making a majority of photos over 16” x 20”

The market for a 5D Mrk III is for:
-   photo-journalist type work
-   wedding/event photographers
-   walk around FF camera
-   indie videographers
-   making most photos less than 16” x 20”

Please… Temper your criticism of this cameras proposed feature set. Landscapers.. come on? A real “pro” landscape photographer would be using either 4” x 5” or 8” x 10” film, unless of course they really wanted to splurge and get a $12k+ Hasselblad cam system. Ok so you’re thinking maybe they get a pentax, its more affordable, yea $9,995 is really affordable. Im sure pentax is having a hard to meeting the demand for this camera!

SO again, before we criticize, let’s remember the purpose of the 5D, and know that if canon was going to make a medium format digital system (which is what everyone complaining about lack of MP is really saying it should be... for under $3k) it wouldn’t be coming with the 5D mrk III and it most likely would be a new product altogether. Funny how rumors of a medium format camera quickly followed the rumors that the 5D Mrk III wouldn’t see a MP increase this time around!

I'm sorry, but I entirely disagree here. The simple fact is that a SIGNIFICANT portion of 5D Mark II owners use it for landscape photography. I've spent years on DeviantArt.com, and more recently 1x.com and 500px.com. The sheer volume of landscape photographers who primarily or exclusively use the 5D II is astonishing! Thats not to say that its not ALSO used for studio & wedding work (I personally know people who use this camera for both purposes), and obviously its become particularly popular for cinematography. I also know (or know of) quite a few photographers who use the 5D II to support prints of huge photos in multi-foot dimensions, both landscapes and studio work.

While the 5D line certainly does not service all types of photography (its lackluster AF certainly limits it), it is one of the most popular Canon DSLR's in existence, and has a very broad range of uses. Canon can either maintain its customer base, and release a 5D III that supports everyone who already uses the 5D II (and possibly then some), or they can gimp it, narrow its range of use, and piss off an ungodly number of customers who DO use the 5D II today for your entire list of "is not" uses.

Seems to me likewise that LOTS of people use the 5D mk II as a landscape camera... Certainly, 20x16 is a better landscape format, but seriously, how many use it?

The 7D is even a great landscape camera! I've done a few large prints with it, and they really do look great!

507

EOS Bodies / Re: The rift between the vocal "ISOers" and the "MPers"...

« on: December 12, 2011, 12:09:14 PM »

I'm an ISO'er.
50% of what I do is shooting Rock bands. The headline acts are always well illuminated and never an issue, but the guys who come on first sometimes get nothing more than 1 red and 1 green 100W "floodlight", and an occasional other 100W light rotating through colours .
To be able to capture them with minimal blur and noise would make them, and me, very happy
The other 50% is Birds in Flight. Again, shooting between April and September is no problem, but for the winter....Unless it's one of those rare bright blue days, or it's snowed, I leave my camera at home

What's wrong with shooting birds when its overcast? Some of my best pictures are taken in the winter on an overcast day...

508

EOS Bodies / Re: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder?

« on: December 11, 2011, 02:12:13 AM »

The ultimate thing we should ask, is noise always a bad thing?

What is wrong with a grainy photo? EVERYTHING shot back in the old days was grainy when enlarged much (except maybe the 16x20's...) Watch an old 30's movie. Find some old WWII footage or pictures. Is grain always bad?

What is wrong with embracing the grain as an artistic expression?

509

EOS Bodies / Re: Interview with Canon "EOS-1D X" high-end strategy

« on: December 11, 2011, 02:08:29 AM »

So what if you use a 1D4 and a 100-400mm? If what I'm reading is true, it won't focus with a 1.4 extender, right? I don't want to give up my flexibility.

Correct. The current 1-series bodies will AF (center point only) with an f/8 combo like f/5.6 + 1.4x or f/4 + 2x. The 1D X will not, it requires f/5.6 for any AF point to function.

For you, at least, there's a viable solution (optically, although not necessarily financially) - the 500mm f/4L IS II + 1.4x III will AF on the 1D X and compensate for the loss of the 1.3x crop factor.  That scenario might even be part of the reason they dropped f/8 support (not that I'm cynical or anything).  But the folks who really get screwed are those who depend on combos where there will be no option going forward (500/4 or 600/4 + 2x, 800/5.6 + 1.4x).

Think they might release a 1DmkV-like thingie with f8 autofocus ever?

510

EOS Bodies / Re: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder?

« on: December 09, 2011, 03:54:24 PM »

Those who hate the 7D noise need to grab a roll of Kodak Gold 100 (the cheap kind you can get for like 5 bucks in a drug store) and shoot it, then compare noise levels...