July 30, 2014, 09:31:04 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 - bvukich

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 46
541
EOS Bodies / Re: 1D & 1Ds Rumors [CR1]
« on: April 08, 2011, 12:43:12 PM »
For me, the 1.3X crop on a FF sensor is a gimmick. By switching from FF to 1.3X crop will not by us anything except a smaller file size and a narrower angle of view. We can do the same thing at post process by cropping the FF picture.

Absolutely.  1.3x crop mode is pointless.  1.6x crop mode (assuming to afford EF-S compatibility) is impossible.

For Nikon it makes a little more sense, because their crop lenses vary only in image circle cast; afaik the physical specifications of the mount are identical.  With EF-S, lenses are allowed to intrude into the mirror box by a specified amount, and lenses that do (generally wide angle) will not clear a FF mirror.

542
EOS Bodies / Re: Estimate the price of the 'expected bodies...
« on: April 08, 2011, 12:36:41 PM »
I highly doubt 24-70/2.8 IS or non-IS would ever be a kit lens.  It is too specialized, and too expensive.

543
EOS Bodies / Re: Estimate the price of the 'expected bodies...
« on: April 08, 2011, 11:31:53 AM »
I'm budgeting for $2899/body $3899/kit at release.

That's assuming it's accompanied by the rumored 24-105L II.  If it's not a new version of the 24-105L I'd put the kit at $3699.

544
EOS Bodies / Re: 1D & 1Ds Rumors [CR1]
« on: April 08, 2011, 11:12:17 AM »
I think the rumorer meant the MP count is into "MF territory" at 42 MP, not that there's actually a MF sensor.

Absolutely.  Unless it came with a new mount and lenses, or mirrorless + CD AF that is usable.

Beyond image circle considerations (which apparently you can get around with TS lenses), there is the fact that you can't have a MF sensor on a EF mount body for the same reason you cant have a FF square sensor and retain the mirror.  Assuming the sensor is full 645 format (56 × 41.5mm), that would result in a mirror that is 58.7mm, which significantly larger than EF flange distance of 44mm.  Even a pellix mirror would be to big, but perhaps possible if you sacrifice VF coverage at the top (bottom) of the frame.

545
Canon General / Re: Canon 70-300 is L vs non
« on: April 08, 2011, 10:50:54 AM »
I'm in nearly the same boat.

70-200/2.8+1.4TC Vs. 70-300L Vs. 100-400

70-200/2.8 would be more flexible, but I lose IS.
100-400 has the extra length, but lesser IS.
70-300L looks like a good compromise, but will be too slow indoors.

Given unlimited resources, I'd get the 70-200/2.8IS + 1.4&2TC.  But that's not the case.

546
Lenses / Re: Samyang 8mm Fisheye
« on: April 07, 2011, 04:47:49 PM »
Post some pictures!   :)

547
EOS Bodies / Re: What do you want from the 5D mk III
« on: April 06, 2011, 02:12:56 PM »
Better AF, all points cross, double cross in center + zones.
16bit Raw, and the DR to make them useful (so at least +2 stops or why bother)
High ISO improvements.  ISO 102400 may be silly, but clean ISO 12,800 or even 25,600 would be awesome.
No low ISO banding

548
Software & Accessories / Re: External mic for DSLR
« on: April 05, 2011, 04:02:28 PM »
Hotshoe powered, that's kinda cool.

549
Site Information / Re: What originally brought you to canon rumors?
« on: April 04, 2011, 01:54:52 AM »
I think for me it started with the omnipresent rumors of a 24-70/2.8 IS.

Next it was the 60D, which I anxiously awaited word on, but I was less than thrilled about what was finally released.  I ended up getting one anyways, and it should hold me over until my latest obsession is released, the 5D3.

550
Lenses / Re: Lens Recommendation for Weddings.
« on: April 01, 2011, 04:39:57 PM »

Whatever equipment you choose, watch your step!

http://su.pr/32PLzd


So remember kids, always use underwater housings when shooting weddings.

551
Canon General / Re: Travel case
« on: March 31, 2011, 10:05:31 AM »
Just wondering if Crumpler's C List Celebrity amounts to the same thing? In addition to the backside opening, it seems to have room set aside for a laptop.

Do you have that one?  Does it stick out as far in the back as it looks like it does (pictures on Amazon and B&H)?

After a small incident I had at a winery, involving their display of bottles with ribbons around them (making them top heavy, and unstable), I'm very conscious of the distance things protrude from my back.

552
Canon General / Re: Travel case
« on: March 30, 2011, 02:24:17 PM »
The loaded Flipside 400AW fits inside the Storm im2500 hard case

Just added both to my Amazon wishlist.

I'm in the market for a new backpack, and that sounds like a killer combo.

553
Canon General / Re: Travel case
« on: March 30, 2011, 02:12:02 PM »
Not to be an echo chamber, but everything neuroanatomist said is dead on.

I use a Pelican 1510 with padded dividers.  Ample room, and easily fits in the overhead compartment.  Then I put my (empty, flattened) Canon 200EG backpack in my checked luggage.

Also, on some airlines a backpack counts as a personal bag, and doesn't count as your one carry-on.  So that's something to keep in mind too.

554
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark II Stock Shortages in US?
« on: March 29, 2011, 12:41:58 PM »
The 60D is also out of stock nearly everywhere.

555
EOS Bodies / Re: 3 More DSLR's in 2011? [CR1]
« on: March 28, 2011, 11:26:31 AM »
This also plays out in the overall upgrade strategy that Canon appears to be following.  One area you see that is the AF systems chosen for the non-1-series bodies, where improvements are slow to 'trickle down' the lines.

I think body strategy regarding AF is one of the strong points of Nikon vs. Canon.  Nikon has more of a gradient for AF performance across it's line, with each body (more or less) inheriting the AF system of the next higher model's previous generation.  With Canon there are large steps in AF performance.  Even the 7D with it's highly regarded AF system is only comparable to the 1D2 maybe the 1D2N (from what I've read, I haven't used either).

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 46