October 23, 2014, 04:40:02 PM

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 ... 45 46 [47] 48 49
691
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs 7Dii (FF vs APS-C)
« on: November 01, 2011, 05:32:56 PM »


I agree. They do compliment each other.

I also agree about the ISO.. I'd never put the 7d above 640, yet regularly have the 5d at 1600.

Is this for RAW's or jpegs?

For sports and wildlife, I regularly use 7D ISO 500-1000. Careful noise reduction and careful sharpening can help, but frankly, mostly the images are fine without a whole lot of trouble. This is with both RAW and JPG.

Usually, I shoot RAW, bit for BIFs, sometimes JPG makes life easier... And the noise still isn't that bad!

692
United Kingdom & Ireland / Re: New forum memebr
« on: October 31, 2011, 06:06:12 PM »
Welcome!

693
EOS Bodies / Re: Rain Photos - Wet Camera Photos/Stories
« on: October 31, 2011, 01:33:18 PM »
Got my 7D soaked in a pouring storm. Did two weird things: 1. Joystick wouldn't work for a few hours. 2. The auto-exposure went completely haywire. Even with the lens cap on, it thought the pitch black should be exposed at f22 ISO 100 SS 5000. Solution? Shot manual until I got home. Final solution: hair dryer into the mouth of the lensless camera. Dried out the exposure area, God answered my prayers for it, and all was well!

Will have to see if I can find any pictures...

694
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs 7Dii (FF vs APS-C)
« on: October 31, 2011, 01:28:33 PM »
The 7D mk II! Maybe, at some point, I will borrow a friend's 5d II... and then, will hopefully not get hooked with even more gear greed...

Both the 7D II and the 5D III will be Uber. But, they will be for totally different purposes. And whiners will likely complain about the 7D image quality and noise levels. Whiners will also complain about the 5D one and how it isn't as good as the whatever and threaten to go to Nikon.

695
EOS Bodies / Re: what the 1Dx may tell us about the 5Diii
« on: October 31, 2011, 11:00:45 AM »
I'm somewhat interested in FF, for a landscape camera, but not really hugely... If I did get a 5dIII, I would be getting it for higher resolution and improved noise over my 7d. And the higher resolution part would be something I wouldn't budge on. So, a FF18mp does not interest me!

I think that the 1DX style will probable seep more into the 7D than the 5D... Probably, the 5diii will be sort-of the what the 1DIVs would have been, except without the grip. Likely, I'm guessing it will sell for a hair over 3,000...

696
United States / Canon Mirrorless... Could we see lower f-stop lenses?
« on: October 28, 2011, 02:52:55 PM »
Suppose canon went and made a mirrorless sort of camera, perhaps with a 2xish crop like most of them out there. Could we see lower f-stop lenses more widely available, especially zooms? My old c-mount 22.5-90 f1.5 as an example: could they not with the better tech of today make a similar zoom for the larger 2xish crop sensor? 16-120 f1.8, maybe? 50-200 f2?

As I am thinking about it,  a 135 f2L on a crop camera would be a wild lens!

697
Lenses / Re: Realistic wish lens
« on: October 28, 2011, 02:46:55 PM »
I have an old 22.5-90 f1.5 Bell and Howell, c-mount probably.  I'd like to see an ef-s 22.5-90 f1.5! Surely it would only cost a few thousand, right? But, what a lens for weddings and events!

698
Lenses / Re: Zeiss Distagon T* 2/25 Gets Official
« on: October 28, 2011, 11:26:26 AM »

Seems like overkill on APS-C to end up with a slow ~40mm lens.


My thoughts exactly. Sigma 30 1.4 - 1 stop faster, close in focal length. And has autofocus! is it as sharp? Assuredly not, but also whale loads cheaper (and more useable).

Maybe this is more appealing to the video crowd (I'm sure its focus should be pretty well-damped, and easier than most autofocus lenses)...

EDIT: Spelling and computation errors!

699
Lenses / Re: Zeiss Distagon T* 2/25 Gets Official
« on: October 27, 2011, 06:42:34 PM »
Alas, am not interested... is this more for full-frame users?

700
Lenses / Re: Realistic wish lens
« on: October 27, 2011, 01:20:48 AM »
For me, 20-135 f4 L IS. Just a might wider, and a mudge longer than my 24-105... f2.8 would be nice, though not throughly necessary. I wouldnay mind the weight or size (I'm big...). Though I would be satisfied with f4...

Also, Canon 100-300 f4. Sigma once made one, and it was wonderful! Maybe make that 70-300 f4... make it EF-S and we'll call it a day!

And, I'll second that 11 f2 ,,, (maybe I just shutmeself up and go pony up for the tokina 11-16 2.8...)

And, a 50-150 f2 IS...

701
Lenses / Re: The price 300mm 2.8 IS--is just greed--maybe?
« on: October 25, 2011, 08:28:52 PM »
Ahhh... the 70-300... my favourite lens before I got my 300 F4 (which was my favourite before I got my 300 2.8)! There are always a lot of 7X-300s for sale on ebay, so it would seem a lot of them have sold over the years...

702
I like megapixels. The more the merrier! But, I have reasons for liking them... Usually, my subject of choice, birds in flight, don't fill the frame, and often don't even come close to filling it...

The more the merrier! And hand me that stack of hard drives...

703
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D mrk. II
« on: October 25, 2011, 09:15:51 AM »
Am bracing for the shift. Know it is coming. Mark II will cost more. But, I'm head-over-heals with the 7D, so no longer is my will free to exercise judgment and skip an iteration....

704
Lenses / Re: The price 300mm 2.8 IS--is just greed--maybe?
« on: October 25, 2011, 09:13:13 AM »
ALL my 300 2.8 pictures are hand-held. I use my tripod for other things. But not for interrupting my speed of use with my supertelephoto lens! Yes, it hurt at first. No, I'm not going to be using a tripod... (yes, I do have a good tripod!)

But all that said, in about 10 years, I am going to drop the 7 or 8 or 9 or whatever thousand for the Mark II. I already have the Mark I, and am sure it will last that long and longer. The 300 2.8 Mark I is great, frankly, a lens beyond my comprehension for goodness!

That being said, I'm wondering what the OP's point is - perhaps, the 300 2.8 should be cheaper? And who are these mysteriously wealthy lawyers, doctors, and engineers he knows? Could he introduce them to me?  ;D Maybe they could get me a 1DX for Christmas, with a 600 f4 kit lens!  :D

Anyway, I don't mind Canon charging a hoard for gear; they have to make money too... I wish it were cheaper, but I also wish I had a free Bacon dispenser in my living room...

If the OP wants to boycott Canon, he may feel free to, though I don't think it will do much to them... As for the professional photographers, I think this forum is kind of loaded with them and their little brothers, the semi-pros (slave by day, artist by night...)... I myself being a part-time money maker, I do feel that remark to be rather inconsiderate...

705
Software & Accessories / Re: To HDR or Not To HDR
« on: October 23, 2011, 11:04:35 PM »
My HDR is a ND grad, the thing which screws on the front of a lens... Sadly, when I tried to check the local camera stores for them (Fort Lauderdale area), NONE of the attendants knew what they were...

Pages: 1 ... 45 46 [47] 48 49