Messages

211

Canon General / Re: 5D Mark III

« on: April 17, 2013, 04:14:00 PM »

In the past, the 5D series has been upgraded every three or more years.  Canon invests a huge amount of money in the upgrades, and wants to have some real improvements before releasing a new model.
 
The Rebel line is upgraded yearly with minor changes, because the general buyer wants the latest model, and often does not really know what the difference in models may be.
 
That said, there may very well be a new higher mp body with something like a 5DX designation, but there are no reliable rumors, and it won't happen this year.

I agree Mt. Spokane.  And there is something really tingilly about the sound 5Dx... Mmmm...

There are rumours that when the 7D2 gets announced in the fall (Christmas in stores?) it will have a new and updated sensor technology. If that is true, you can expect updates of the FF bodies as well, but you would be looking at announcements in early 2014 and in stores the summer of 2014 AT THE EARLIEST!

Realistically you should not expect any FF updates until late 2014 or later. That's a long time to wait for a best case scenario for a possibly rumored camera. The only reason I would wait is if I already had a camera that met my needs, otherwise, how can you go wrong with a 5D3?

212

Lenses / Re: Speedy Manual Focusing?

« on: April 17, 2013, 09:11:09 AM »

How were photographers able to manual focus quickly back in the days? Aside from a lot of practice, was there a technique involved in shooting fast manual?

Some technique, yes.  But of course, the focus screen wasn't the plain one on modern dSLRs - there was a split prism and microprism collar around it as focusing aids.  You can get such focus screens for current bodies, too, although only some bodies feature easy user replacement of the screen (e.g. the 6D and 1D X do, the 5DIII does not).

I loved the focus screen on my OM-1.... split prism in the center..... makes me wish for the equivalent in the digital era.....

If you are manual focusing a DSLR you have to use live view. The viewfinder is just not good enough.... it gets you close, but not spot on. You really need live view and then to zoom in on your target to properly check focus. Easy to do on a tripod, but hand-held gets a lot trickier.

Also, and this might be my faulty memory speaking, but back in the good old days before auto-focus, when the lenses were designed for manual focus, there seemed to be a lot more twist to the focus mechanism than with today's auto-focus lenses. It used to be that you had around 180 degrees of twist to focus with, now it seems like less than 90, making it harder to precisely manual adjust a lens.

213

Lenses / Re: Open your eyes

« on: April 17, 2013, 09:03:08 AM »

You better get used to the fact that CR is not a private hobby anymore. It is a business that wants to make profit. 15k visitors per day according to http://digsitevalue.org/s/canonrumors.com . Advertising is the way to fund such a website. As long as the site can still inform and/or entertain you, it is fine. Just don't be naive and expect somebody else's altruism funding it for you. And yes, it is still you who has to compare prices before you buy.

I hope CR is not making any income from this site, because I couldn't find a copy of their US FTC Disclosure statement anywhere...

possiblly because they are not a US site........

214

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits

« on: April 16, 2013, 09:15:28 PM »

A breeding pair of Ospreys.... breeding!

Shot with SX-50, F8.0, ISO100, 1/400 sec, 1200mm equivalent focal length.

215

Lenses / Re: IS mandatory? 70-200 f/4 IS vs. f/2.8 Non-IS

« on: April 16, 2013, 09:00:23 PM »

I ended up getting the 70-200 F4 IS. It is a lot lighter than the F2.8 version, and if you are going to be lugging it around all day the extra weight becomes a big factor.

216

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits

« on: April 16, 2013, 07:13:51 PM »

I came across a grey heron the other day in the local park being very tolerant of the people and dogs walking past

Nice image Hannes!  I'm pretty certain this is a breeding aged Great Blue Heron however.  Unless you are from overseas somewhere, I'm not aware of any "Grey Heron" in the US... I could be wrong but I'm fairly certain.  Nice image, none the less!

Looks like a Great Blue Heron to me as well.... I see them all over the place (Eastern Ontario, Canada) and there is one that regularly feeds at the end of my yard.... I never get tired of seeing them.

217

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]

« on: April 16, 2013, 07:08:21 PM »

Anyway, whilst y'all going on about low-light and high-ISO performance, I want low-ISO performance ... ISO 50 ... or better yet, ISO 25.

Um...why?

The 5DIII (I'm not personally familiar with crop cameras) is noise-free at ISO 400. It's just as noise-free at ISO 200 and ISO 100. There's no more noise to be cleaned up, so what's there to be gained by ISO 25?

Being able to use the camera with extremely bright light and not need a filter.

Being able to take longer exposure photographs in normal lighting without needing a filter.

ISO25 film produced some excellent shots.

There might be a very good reason for no ISO25...... If it is so bright that you need it, you have a lot of light pouring into the camera.... and light is energy, and energy causes heating. What happens to your sensor on a long exposure? will the heating damage the sensor or will it just create a whole lot of thermal noise? Would you get a cleaner picture at higher ISO with a ND filter keeping the heat away from the sensor?

I don't know..... just asking....

218

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Confusion about Macro Photography

« on: April 16, 2013, 11:35:23 AM »

Why is it that Macro Photography is all about taking a picture of something which is amazingly small and Macro Economics is about large scale hugemongous economies.  Shouldn't Macro Photography mean that you are taking gigantic pano's in Dubai?

Very confusing!

Just because you are using a Macro lens does not mean the subject has to be close and small.....

The andromeda galaxy.... The image is unedited from the camera jpg, with the exception of cropping to the center 50% to meet website guidelines. The shot was taken an a very clear night, handheld (with the help of a tree for bracing) with a 60D, F2.8, ISO3200, 10.4 second exposure, no image stabilization, manual focus, and no flash . All image settings were neutral or camera default.

219

Canon General / Re: Why do you do Photography?

« on: April 16, 2013, 11:24:55 AM »

I do photography because it is a good excuse to go canoeing. I go canoeing because it is a good excuse to do photography.

220

PowerShot / Re: SX50 outperforming 5DIII +100-400mm

« on: April 16, 2013, 11:10:24 AM »

Don
Those photos of Ospreys are really useful - just what I would liked to have done. The complete SX50 camera at £350-400 clearly outperforms in telephoto bird photography the Sigma 120-400, which costs £600-800 just for a lens alone! The Sigma open wide at 400 is f/5.6, which is hardly brighter than the SX50 f/6.5 at 1200mm. The Sigma may have much faster autofocus, and a 5DIII has superb high iso noise, but for relatively static photography in good light, which is what most of us do for birding, the SX50 wins hands down - the quality is far, far better.
Thanks

I admit that this is using the camera under ideal conditions.... and that in poor light or with moving targets that a DSLR with good lenses should do much better, but the fact that in good light with a stationary target that I would need a $10,000 lens to get the same shot absolutely floors me.  Yes, I am planning on getting a 7D2 and if they ever come out with it, an upgraded version of the 400 F5.6 for bird photography..... but this "toy camera" has just become an integral part of my kit.

221

EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]

« on: April 15, 2013, 09:13:26 PM »

My prediction:

They announce the camera, nobody likes it and the forum is filled with complaints, yet somehow it sells well.

DXO tells us the sensor is useless, yet somehow people manage to take great pictures.

222

PowerShot / Re: SX50 outperforming 5DIII +100-400mm

« on: April 15, 2013, 06:19:04 PM »

and one more from the SX50.... a crop of about 40 percent of the frame

223

PowerShot / Re: SX50 outperforming 5DIII +100-400mm

« on: April 15, 2013, 06:16:33 PM »

SX50 compared to a 60D with various lenses:

First 70-200F4 at 200mm
Second 70-200F4 with 1.4 teleconverter
Third Sigma 120-400 at 400mm
Fourth SX50 at 1200mm

All pictures are 600x450 pixels cropped from the center of the frame.

Pictures are minimally processed in Lightroom. Note how teleconverter caused loss of contrast, plus the Sigma lens has much less contrast than the 70-200. I was very impressed with the colours out of the SX50.

224

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: "I am boycotting Nikon" campaign

« on: April 15, 2013, 07:59:46 AM »

Like so many issues, there are no simple answers. For example, look at Ducks Unlimited.... There is not a government or environmental group in North America that has done a fraction as much as them to preserve wetlands......and they are doing it so that they can shoot ducks.

225

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF 400 f/4 DO IS II

« on: April 14, 2013, 10:38:35 PM »

I just want a sub $3000 400mm F/4. Non-IS, non-DO, I don't care.

A 400mm F/5.6 is just too slow, and a 300mm F/4 just doesn't get close enough. A 400mm F/2.8 is just too expensive.

Sigh.

sounds good to me....

I'd even like to see a sharper 400  F5.6 with IS...