October 26, 2014, 05:44:31 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 ... 39 40 [41] 42 43 ... 49
601
EOS Bodies / Re: Can a 7D do Landscapes?
« on: December 13, 2011, 09:49:04 AM »
All my landscapes are 7D!!! ;D

602
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...

603
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...

604
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...

605
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!

606
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...

607
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?

608
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?

609
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...

610
EOS Bodies / Re: Interview with Canon "EOS-1D X" high-end strategy
« on: December 09, 2011, 04:23:21 AM »
Dude... this thing is weird reading! Backstroke of the West, anyone?  ;D

The nerve of them about the f4 thing... it seems that they're telling everyone who want's 5.6 + TC1.4 (or 4 + TC2) and autofocus to jump in a lake... Arthur Morris, from all he writes on his blog, is nearly glued to his 800 5.6, and often with 1.4x TC... he won't like this change, I predict...

611
EOS Bodies / Re: 1DX has anyone seen a full rez sample photo yet?
« on: December 09, 2011, 04:17:39 AM »
You may not see a full rez sample until you have preordered two of them.  ;D And you're not allowed to show them  upon pain of death!

Actually, I likewise am interested in seeing the samples...

612
EOS Bodies / Re: Wishlist for 5D Mark III
« on: December 09, 2011, 04:14:18 AM »
this is my wishlist for 5D Mark III:

 Autofocus 19/45 cross-type AF points - AF points spread all over the frame
A more accurate spot-meter linked to AF point
Extended Dynamic Range
16-bit color
5-6 Frames per second
100% Viewfinder
User Configurable Auto-ISO
ISO 12800 usable, about 2-3 stops or cleaner than 5D Mark II
GPS
Dual axis electronic level
Bigger, Better and Brighter Screen
Dual card slots
Better weather sealing

if that came true how much would you pay for it? i think it would be around $4k and how many MP do you want it to have? :P

I'd add keep existing battery and body shape so existing L brackets work on it

I don't know, but if I were to get a FF camera, I would totally want it to... do... awesome things I don't know about, because the only FF I've ever shot it my spotmatic... Perhaps a focus assist light, like the yellow one my Sister-in-Law's D90 uses?

613
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« on: December 09, 2011, 04:08:04 AM »
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”

How do you know this?
Do you work for Canon marketing?

Maybe they were guessing? I don't own one, but the guy I work for just got one, and he is crazy about it. He is an old film guy who used a 5D mark 1 for a while, and regularly made 16x20 and larger prints with it (and they look great!).

My question would be, what camera are we to make >16x20 prints with? Should we bust out Crown Graphic 4x5's? Those old press guys really had it down for style, if nothing else, when using it!

614
I have always had a hard time figuring HDR with PS out... My pictures always look pretty bad... I tried ColorEfex, it it seemed to work a lot better...

615
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« on: December 08, 2011, 03:21:17 AM »
When is Canon going to make a 21MP (approx) camera that is JUST for still photographers and priced that way?
I am all happy for them..getting into the cine business...but what about us...the still photographers? Two completely different disciplines in my world. We need two completely different cameras. AND...the still camera should be substantially less expensive.
Does anyone agree with this...or am I just whistling Dixie?

You're whistling Dixie.

The real problem being that such a camera would now not sell well enough for Canon to make it worth their while. Reviewers would can it for not having video and just about everyone would stay away from it also because it doesn't have video and just about every other camera does.

I suspect such a camera would sell well, but to a specific crowd. There are indeed those who have little use for video who want a completely stills-optimized camera... Thom Hogan has discussed this in detail on his blog... it would not be a camera for the masses. It would be a camera for the dedicated few. Within its niche, it would sell like hotcakes.

All of which pushes the price up, not down, which is contrary to what the OP wanted.

Which the problem is that there is not cheap solution. I'd love a 7D with a built in grip, and a 600 F4 as a kit lens, for 900.00. This will never happen. Unfortunately, we get what we pay for. Either we lower price and lose features, or specialize and and gett awesomer gear for emptier wallets... Anyway I had forgotten the originaal intent of the post, along the lines of cheapness...
[/quote

Right. For a product to be cheap, it needs to be able to sell lots of units to offset the R&D plus manufacturing costs. Taking video out off a camera (or not designing it in) is not going to have a large enough negative offset to the cost to offset the smaller overall market acceptance and sales.

Quote
The best cheap fullframe is probably a used 1V... Otherwise, a person will have to shell out the bucks....

And what's the problem with that?

The best of anything is always more expensive than other offerings. Always.

Got no problem whatsoever with that! Which is why I upgraded to a 7D from the lowly XSI. I wouldn't mind shelling out further dinero for a 7DmkII with better weather sealing, and an LCD on the grip (making it almost like a 1dMKIV, except ASP-C!). Prolly I coulnay top 2500, but I have no problem whatsoever with paying extra for extra.

You get what you pay for. Life is nearly always this way. Those who want 1DX quality and performance will just have to pay 1DX price. Those who want a baby 1Dx will have to endure what a 5DII does to them, at least for the time being. And those who want a Baby 1DX made in the future had better be prepared to be missing whatever Canon Marketing dictates must go for a cheaper FF camera...

Pages: 1 ... 39 40 [41] 42 43 ... 49