August 27, 2014, 01:12:50 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 - Mt Spokane Photography

Pages: 1 ... 378 379 [380] 381 382 ... 548
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark II Shelf Life
« on: June 01, 2012, 04:30:13 PM »
Past trends really mean nothing.  Its sales that drive a product.  If sales are good, and Canon is making a profit, it will stay for a while.

I certainly hope that there is no Canon Propritary QR plate.  I can purchase a nice Arca Swiss compatible QR plate for my lenses that lets them balance perfectly for $25.  I have several.
No need to pay Canon $500 to upgrade lenses, and another $200 to upgrade each of my tripod heads. 
Thats what not to like.

AND the Nikon version as well.  I may actually consider buying the Tamron in an F-mount since my EOS line is adequately covered for my needs in this range.
Time'll tell.

I'm not sure it would put much pressure on the Nikon version, its pretty much inferior accross the board.  It does have lower CA's, but sharpness really is not close. Its not priced at much less either.  I was interested in seeing how it compared to the nikon 24-70G for my D800, but it would be a downgrade.
In the case of the old canon lens, it might be a better lens, but the focus shift bothers me, as you stop down, focus moves backward.  Doesn't do that on the Nikon version either.

With 179 million DSLR's shipped from Jan - April 2012, there seems to be no problem selling them.  However, there were 33.5 million mirrorless cameras shipped during the same period too.  All this is having a toll on point and shoot sales.
Last year, 534.5 million interchangable lens cameras were shipped, but mirrorless were not broken out as a separate category.

I would not use one on a crop.  The 17-55mm EF-s will be as good, and has IS.  I'd get a refurb 5D MK II.  Then, when you can afford it, start looking at wide aperture lenses.  In low light, f/2.8 is still limiting you, even on a D800 or 5D MK III, so for low light, the best bet is a 5D MK II and a prime lens.
Here is a 5D MK II ISO 6400 raw image cropped to 100% with no sharpening or NR.  Obviously, sharpening and NR will greatly improve it.  135mmL @f/4

Here is a D800 image taken with my 24-70mm f/2.8G, a more expensive lens at ISO 6400.
  Its very noisey at 1:1, but NR and sharpening will clean it up somewhat.  You have to downsize it though to get it equal to the 5D MK II.


Lenses / Re: Would Canon produce new 28/1.8?
« on: May 31, 2012, 10:32:17 PM »
similar to nikon's new 28/1.8G?

Yeah, but they will add IS and charge $1299 for it.

Its marketed as being ideal for a D800, but, with a D800, IS would definitely be a plus.  I've been using a D800 and its pretty difficult to get the full benefit of that resolution without IS or a very fast shutter speed.  Even with much more expensive Nikon lenses, I've had to be very deliberate and use a tripod to get the best images.
I am curious to see some independent testing.  If its actually good, its a bargain.

Lenses / Re: 400mm f/4. Anything good and "affordable"?
« on: May 31, 2012, 10:23:25 PM »
The simplest, cheapest and most effective option is a 7D.

It will multiply any lens by 1.6 with no loss of aperture speed and better quality than any teleconverter. Cheaper than many of the options being suggested here.
someone else suggested the same to me just the other day!

I have the 7d, and use it with all those lenses.  Its great as long as light is bright, but as it gets darker, its worthless while my 5D MK II and MK III keep right on going.  A 1.4 or 2X TC with the 70-200mm MK II really loses ability to focus except in good light, while the 100-400mmL keeps on going.
There are lots of choices, and every one is a compromise, so pick your poison.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Delays [CR2]
« on: May 31, 2012, 02:08:53 PM »
Its amazing how many think that making a camera is just simple kiddie stuff.  Its complex and difficult, and even small things can have wide reaching effects.
Canon wants the camera to be better than the D4, and it likely needs more work to get there.  I have not put one on order, I'll wait and see first, so its not a issue to me.
Still, I think that some new management is in order, just like Nikon did a few years back.

Lenses / Re: 28-300 L lens- thoughts?
« on: May 31, 2012, 12:21:12 PM »
Thanks for your responses!

As for the bird pic- nice shot! It does seem to be a bit soft for my personal taste though- is it straight out of camera or processed? Maybe with some DPP sharpening it would be fine. I know I have to do that to a few images taken with my other lenses too.

The bird image is a 100% crop, and is sharpened.  With a 11-1 zoom, I'd say this is typical of the best you can get at 300mm.
Here is the original before cropping:

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: My D800 Review
« on: May 31, 2012, 12:16:25 AM »
I saw a bird at our feeder today, it was tame and I grabbed the D800 with my 80-200mm f/2.8D lens.  I stopped it down a bit to f/4, but even then I only got one keeper out of almost a dozen, and even then, my 7D and 100-400mm L would have been better.
This is a only slightly cropped image, it should have been better.  Its just that the camera demands the best glass, and the 10 year old lens doesn't measure up.  Even a old Canon lens like the 100-400mmL is much better.

I've been using the updated LR4.1 for several hours today.  It is working fine, no issues for me.

Lenses / Re: the look getting dated?
« on: May 31, 2012, 12:00:45 AM »
Many or even most people have a point and shoot camera with a small sensor, and a huge depth of field.  I've bought little used DSLR's from many who just felt that it was out of focus due to the shallow depth of field, they preferred the everything in focus look.
So, I think you might be right, the average casual point and shoot person has been trained to expect everything to be in focus, and they are uncomfortable to the point of thinking something is defective with a shallow depth of field.

Lenses / Re: 28-300 L lens- thoughts?
« on: May 30, 2012, 11:54:02 PM »
I bought one locally on Craigslist for $1500.  It is a good lens, but with that long zoom range, there are compromises.
I sold it because it was too heavy, and I needed to fund my new 5D MK III.  Actually, I used it a bit on my MK III and then sold it before the credit card bill came due.  i'd recommend it with no qualms.
Here is a 100% cropped image taken with the 5DMK III at 300mm f/5.6.  Bokeh is not the greatest, but its ok.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Considering an EOS 35mm (film) body
« on: May 30, 2012, 11:42:19 PM »
The thing to watch out for on ebay is the guy who was given a camera found stashed away in grandpa's closet for 15 years, and has no clue as to whether it works or not.
Get one from sombody who has tested it and gives you return rights if it doesn't work.  Pay with a credit card, and, if the deal goes sour, you can charge back as a last resort.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Advice for checking a used 5Dmk2
« on: May 30, 2012, 03:27:39 PM »
After watching some interesting bits in a local camera store - sales guy with an xacto knife near the exposed sensor - taking my sensor loop is a good start.  Also taking a few shots of a blue sky at f22 to see if anything else is impacting things.  Burst mode shots, AI Servo shots.

Any publicly available 'stolen gear' list I can check?  A box is a sure sign of a proper sale - but last thing I want to do is pick up a stolen one.

You can usually tell a stolen camera, they do not give you a address and do not have the original box, manuals, receipts etc, just what they grabbed out of someone's car or residence.
I'd recommend buying a refurb with warranty, or a new one while the Canon discount is going.  $1400 for refurbs using the Canon CLP when they have them.

Pages: 1 ... 378 379 [380] 381 382 ... 548