September 02, 2014, 08:26:01 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 - steliosk

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D, DIGIC 6 & 18mp Sensors
« on: March 20, 2013, 07:30:02 PM »
A new sensor! Oh no. What will people whine about now?

No worry, for some folks nothing Canon will ever do will be enough.

well as you may noticed the 650D had a NEW sensor too.
now how well does that worked out?

worse DXO mark then the 550D sensor and the hybrid focus not worth much.

i will be excited when i see the results of this "new" sensor justify it.


EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D, DIGIC 6 & 18mp Sensors
« on: March 20, 2013, 07:28:49 PM »
A new sensor! Oh no. What will people whine about now?

No worry, for some folks nothing Canon will ever do will be enough.

550D 600D 7D 60D 650D share the same sensor, and if the rurmors are valid, 700D and 100D will have 18mp too
where is the evolution on that?

Seems to me that Canon sells the old technology as new, sucking our pockets dry.. so no, its not enough for me!

EOS Bodies / Re: Will the 70d have a new sensor?
« on: March 18, 2013, 08:01:46 AM »
rather old sensor or even new canon has one major issue..


also, there is no mood on developing new radical technologies and when they do, they keep it with minimal standards. compare 5D2 sensor with 5D3, small changes, some maybe in high isos.
Even the 6D has a better sensor than 5D3 but with fewer megapixel :(

And not to say that Nikon who used to have small megapixel sensors, now dominates the market more maturely in terms of resolution and noise and banding etc... etc..

My guess is that the new 70D or 7D mark2 or however they wanna call it (since they are completely screwing the names of each line production) will have a new sensor about 20-22 mp not more and of course with the same old and buggy problems such as noise in shadows and banding with an expensive price tag on.

Never understood why 60D is much more expensive than 600D
some more plastic and better ergonomics? so what? in terms of quality is ABSOLUTELY the same and costs almost the double!

you won't see much of a difference at f/9 on sharpness with any lens
the distortion of 24-105 at 24mm is a bit annoying but if you have 16-35 you don't care, the 35-105 range of 24-105L is perfect, plus its cheap and light as said.

I use mine on a crop body and i'm impressed with this lens sharpness from 24 to 105 at f/5.6 which looks the same as f/8 or 9
honestly? for landscape get the fantastic 16-35 L II if you don't have it already and 24-105L and you'll be fine..

i'd reject the 24-70 f/4, i think its the most stupid lens canon ever made.. not better than 24-105, not sharper, shorter 70 vs 105 and costs almost twice as the 24-105 bulk.

i don't know which one will buy this one over the 24-105.

Lenses / Re: Best lens for baby portraits?
« on: March 05, 2013, 06:13:36 PM »
+1 for the 85mm 1.8

the ef-s 60mm macro is a good choice for breathing distance

if the money is not an issue get the 50L or the 85L II (however those monsters are heavy in your crop body)

Lenses / Re: Canon 6D (Body Only) which lens to purchase?
« on: February 26, 2013, 10:33:04 AM »
+1 for the 24-105

the 35 1.4 and the 135 you mentioned sure offer a better bokeh and sharpness but consider the moments you'll loose on changing lens, plus! the 24-105 is much more usable in trips.

Lenses / Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« on: February 15, 2013, 07:00:03 AM »
Canon has a serious gap in UWA lenses

why not a 16-35 f/3.5 4.5 like the EF-S 10-22 ?
why not a 14-24 2.8 or f/4 ?
why not even wider such as 12mm ? its a shame Sigma has one, and neither Canon and Nikon hasn't.

The ef-14mm 2.8 is really a bad lens, it needed more aperture blades and its way too expensive..
Thats why many canon users use nikon's 14-24 with an adapter for landscape photography. Cheaper, zoom, and same sharpness or even better i've heard, or a samyang 14mm which is a VERY cheap and VERY sharp and very usable. Best value for money no doubt!

Lenses / Re: Canon 14-24 2.8 - With our powers combined....
« on: January 30, 2013, 07:28:57 AM »
Haven't looked back since I started using this combo (Novoflex adapter... cheap Chinese adapters off eBay couldn't achieve infinity focus & rattled):

I got tired of trying to find a 16-35 or 17-40 that had good edge-to-edge performance even at f/11 or did not have decentering issues.

+1 too

Software & Accessories / Re: Any value in using DPP along side Lightroom?
« on: January 30, 2013, 06:36:50 AM »
DPP has better color profiles than LR
better contrast
no yellow casts

The yellow cast in ACR raw processing disappears if the "camera neutral" profile is applied, then the colors should look like dpp or in-camera...

thanks for the tip
i never liked the neutral profile, all the colors look poor and i never used it.

Personally i use 3 profiles

Faithful for portraits
Standard + Landscape for traveling (where i take the sky from landscape, and everything else from standard)

Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?
« on: January 30, 2013, 06:30:01 AM »
Never liked that contrasted fake colour?
Never liked those warm-yellowish skintones?

well , then change to a similar profile in the Nikon  as in your Canon if you think the results are to yellow.
I have change my Canons profiles, I do not like a red/ magenta  cast in the  skin tones .

Why bother? Canon's faithful profile gives me the richest skintones i've worked with.

Software & Accessories / Re: Any value in using DPP along side Lightroom?
« on: January 28, 2013, 10:10:36 AM »
DPP has better color profiles than LR
better contrast
no yellow casts
not better detail at pixel peeping though

try to edit a blue hour (something like this )
in DPP and try to edit it the same way in LR

just put everything to 0 and push the saturation a bit +3 +4 in DPP
then compare the 2 results as layers in photoshop..
you'll see much more richer colour in the dpp image while those orange/reds will become flat yellow in lightroom

That catalogue / database thing is useless (as a matter of fact is the only thing i reject lightroom and use camera raw)

Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?
« on: January 28, 2013, 09:03:14 AM »
Never liked nikon's policy
Never liked the ergonomics
Never liked that contrasted fake colour
Never liked those warm-yellowish skintones

and i never understood this:
d300 = 12mp
d90 = 12mp
d3 = 12mp
d700 = 12mp
d3s = 12mp

Plus the L glass is uncomparable
faster USM moters, better rendering, fantastic bokeh

I chose Canon then and i'd choose even today.

3 things i love on Nikons?
- dynamic range
- cheap d800 36megapixels
- 14-24 lens

Technical Support / Re: at what shutter speed you turn IS off?
« on: January 25, 2013, 09:10:55 PM »
i turn it on when i'm moving or when the light is low and i'm not carrying a tripod with me :P

i turn it off when i use flash, or when my speeds are 1/1000 and above.

i love IS when i have to focus manually through live view.. works like a charm, (especially when i use a telephoto lens) of course i turn it off when my camera is mounted on a tripod.

practically when my speeds are below 1/250 i leave it on, why turn it off?

Lenses / Re: 100mm 2.8L Macro IS as a portrait lens
« on: January 25, 2013, 09:01:14 PM »
+1 for the 100 L macro
lighter, smaller, newer and has IS
awesome bokeh
permits shorter shooting distance.

Wanna sacrifice all that for 1 stop brighter lens which you won't practically use?
i don't know how sharp is the 135 at f/2 you'll probably use any of these lenses at f/4 minimum unless you really know what you're doing.

However the 100 L wide open is way too SHARP.

I own the 100 L macro
I bought it for portrait use and i love it.

here is a couple of samples with my 100 L

its very simple

5D2 focuses faster with af assist beam while 5D3 doesn't
same thing in 6D in 1Dx and all the new aps-c cameras

In low light situations where there is not enough ambient light for the focus point to find target AF beam is a saviour and canon screwed that up with their new cameras..
That costs moments and costs money and if you're shooting an event, people are filled with worries like "did he get the picture or is he still focusing?"

i shoot weddings too and light is a pain in the ass sometimes

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8