March 06, 2015, 04:53:27 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 - AJ

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 28
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D sensor poll
« on: January 02, 2012, 01:59:50 PM »
APS-C, because it'll accept EF-S lenses like 17-55/2.8

EOS Bodies / Re: How should I spend my money?
« on: December 29, 2011, 03:35:29 PM »
I meant Tokina 11-16/2.8.  Thanks

EOS Bodies / Re: How should I spend my money?
« on: December 29, 2011, 02:18:22 PM »
Tokina 11-17/2.8

Lenses / Re: A set of lenses for around the world travel.
« on: December 28, 2011, 11:27:50 AM »
1 lens solution.  Canon 15-85 IS bolted onto your 450D.  Simple, light, versatile, great image quality.

3 lens solution.  Your 450D, your Sigma 8-16, then add Tamron 17-50/2.8 (or Canon 17-55/2.8 IS which is heavier)  plus Canon 55-250 IS.

My travel setup is similar to the 3 lens option above.  I used it in SE Asia for 3 months this year, plus another 1 month in the U.S., plus another 1 month backpacking at home in Canada.  I've used a similar setup for a cumulative of at least 18 months on the road over the past 5 years.

Your 450D is a camera capable of great photos.  No need to upgrade to something heavier.

Enjoy your trip.

EOS Bodies / Re: New to Full Frame - some help with lens(es)?
« on: December 23, 2011, 01:27:35 PM »
If you like a wider angle, think about a 35 mm lens.  Consider 35/2, 35/1.4L, and Samyang 35/1.4 (manual focus).

EOS Bodies / Re: What if - interchengeable sensors
« on: December 21, 2011, 06:48:44 PM »
I want to be able to tilt my camera's sensor

Canon General / Re: An EF 70-200 f/4L IS II in Mid January? [CR1]
« on: December 11, 2011, 11:49:11 PM »
If you had carte blanche to upgrade this lens, what would you do? What specs would it have after your upgrades?

Paint it black

Lenses / Re: EF 35 f/1.4L II & EF 24-70 f/2.8L II on January 3, 2012? [CR2]
« on: December 10, 2011, 08:24:34 PM »
A key reason for f/2.8 is being able to shoot selective focus and blur background.  Can't do that with IS or high iso.

As for the current 24-70, it seems that there's plenty of room for improvement.  Have a look at the photozone review.  Klaus hates the field curvature thing.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T4i [CR2]
« on: December 06, 2011, 01:13:22 PM »
Wouldn't it be ironic if the 700D had 24 mpix and the 7D2 had 12 mpix.

Higher-end cam: fewer mpix, less noise, better colors.

Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8 II or f/4 vs. 200/2.8 prime
« on: December 05, 2011, 12:25:54 AM »
I own a 200/2.8 and 1.4x and 2x converters.

The lens by itself is very sharp.  With 1.4x it's still quite good.  Stopping down to f/5.6 helps.  I haven't had much luck with the 2x TC.

In all it's a setup capable of producing good or great photos, but without zoom or stabilization it's not user friendly.  A 100-400L IS would definitely be a lot easier to work with.

Tamron 17-50/2.8.       Small, sharp, under-the-radar.
Tamron 90/2.8.            Sharp, superb bokeh, just a great lens.
Sigma 10-20/4-5.6       Sharp, really nice ultrawide.
Tokina 10-17                Zoomable fisheye.  Yes it's a cool lens.  Really crisp photos but the purple fringing drives me nuts at times.
Tokina 50-135/2.8        Nice portrait lens.  I don't use it that much though.

United States / Re: Prime for 7D?
« on: December 02, 2011, 11:33:30 AM »
I'm with neuranatomist.  17-55/2.8 IS is the way to go.

I've gotten great shots inside museums with my 400D + T17-50/2.8.  A stabilized lens would give you an extra 3 stops.

Another option would be 15-85 IS.  Great travel lens.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« on: November 30, 2011, 03:44:25 PM »
After painfully wading thru this, I think I can sum it up for those of you who start at the end:

Anyone who wants more megapixels than "me" is an idiot and doesn't understand picture quality.
Anyone who wants fewer MP than "me" doesn't do real photography.
Ansel Adams still rocks.

I didn't wade through all of it.

I'm skeptical of an 18 mpix sensor for 5D3.  Why would Canon put its new flagship 1Dx sensor in a lower class body right away?  Doesn't make sense to me.  I'm still thinking 36 Mpix.  Canon will respond to Nikon in this regard.

FWIW, the diffraction thing.  36 mpix is the same pixel density as 14 mpix on crop.  So from my experience with 18 mpix and 10 mpix crop sensors: you're good at f/6.3, okay at f/8.  At f/11 you start to see degradation and f/16 is for smaller prints only.

People have fretted about the diffraction thing every time a new crop sensor has come out.  IMHO 36 FF (and 14 mpix crop) is just about optimal, and beyond that, you start to get into diminishing returns.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Rebel 1000D Lost at Sea
« on: November 28, 2011, 12:36:39 AM »
I heard the photos were great, but the colors were a little oversaturated.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III - which lens will Canon put into the kit?
« on: November 24, 2011, 01:02:35 PM »
I vote 24-104/4L IS mk2

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 28