February 01, 2015, 05:14:43 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 - ecka

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 49
16
Lenses / Re: My New "L"
« on: January 17, 2015, 06:08:24 PM »

You shoot crop, so the 60mm will double as a very good portrait lens while the 100mm will be a bit long for many portrait purposes.

Can I encourage you to focus your L envy at a different L? I think you'll get more benefit...!

Hi Joey - thanks for your response.  I have both crop and FF camera's and I would like a macro to fit my 5D.  I have no problems with the 60mm macro, it is a fine lens and has produced some awesome pictures, but I don't see the need to keep both lenses when I would have one lens that will work with both cameras.   I've attached one of my favorite pictures using the 60 macro.  The exposure is a tad dark, but the butterfly had just hatched and was posing perfect on my daughter's finger for a hand held shot.  It's amazing just how furry butterflies are.  :)

-wes

Do you know that you can use EF-S 60/2.8 Macro on your 5D with EF 12 II Extension Tube, or similar third party alternatives? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAr9FfFxlqo

17
Photography Technique / Re: Extension tubes and mfd
« on: January 17, 2015, 08:23:12 AM »
Infinity or not, I didn't notice much difference. 40STM pancake works great with extension tubes. I'm using Marumi Ext. Tubes 13+21+31.
13mm gives me ~ 0.33x at infinity and ~ 0.5x at MFD. Not a small magnification difference (1:3 vs 1:2).
21mm ~ 0.55x - 0.7x
31mm ~ 0.8x - 1.0x
I think that sharpness depends on the lens itself. If it's not that sharp at MFD, then it won't be with ext. tubes as well.

18
Canon General / Re: Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path
« on: January 14, 2015, 05:47:35 PM »
...
Besides, if us lumpen proletariat took your advice and all went full frame, ...

Then sooner or later there would be no more APS-C cameras in production. FF would become much cheaper. FF Rebel class would materialize and bring a lot of joy for everyone. As simple as that.


And wildlife and sports shooters who enjoyed longer reach without having to shell out for the equivalent reach on full frame are hosed. So now you have a "cheap" full frame body...and have to spend twice as much on lenses. :P

No. Why? :) 50+mp FF can capture everything that 20mp APS-C can (and more, 2.5x more), with the same lens.

But never at the same speed, same price etc. CR is made up of people who are a far cry from your run of the mill dslr shooter. The majority do not want FF: they don't want the size, dof,  longer focal length, cost, lens size/ cost etc etc.

My daughter returned recently from Iceland where she had her 1100D and 55-250 STM, and she has some superb images of Puffins, including some in flight. The last thing she wants is a FF camera for all the reasons given above.

The same though crossed my mind with ATM's comment about being held back by APS. He must shoot some very niche stuff.

It is possible to get the same speed in crop mode, if you like, but you'll lose the "crop later" feature.
The majority want magic P&S, which runs without batteries, with a FB upload button and x-ray vision :).
Actually, EF-S 55-250 STM is a very good lens, almost as good as it gets, on a crop body. The sensor size is the real bottleneck there and if you want much better IQ from a zoom lens (than 55-250), then you should get larger sensor camera.

19
Canon General / Re: Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path
« on: January 14, 2015, 05:12:04 PM »
50+mp FF can capture everything that 20mp APS-C can (and more, 2.5x more), with the same lens.

I'm not aware of any Canon full frame bodies with 50MP.  :P :-X

Not yet ;)

20
Canon General / Re: Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path
« on: January 14, 2015, 04:49:57 PM »
...
Besides, if us lumpen proletariat took your advice and all went full frame, ...

Then sooner or later there would be no more APS-C cameras in production. FF would become much cheaper. FF Rebel class would materialize and bring a lot of joy for everyone. As simple as that.


And wildlife and sports shooters who enjoyed longer reach without having to shell out for the equivalent reach on full frame are hosed. So now you have a "cheap" full frame body...and have to spend twice as much on lenses. :P

No. Why? :) 50+mp FF can capture everything that 20mp APS-C can (and more, 2.5x more), with the same lens.

Quote

Conservatism and technology don't mix well.


Perhaps not, but conservatism and business have worked quite well for Canon, particularly in the present economic climate.  :-X

Funny :), but I agree, Canon could have done better and that's the point.

21
Canon General / Re: Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path
« on: January 14, 2015, 04:33:43 PM »
And perhaps Canon doesn't make such cameras because of all those people whining about not needing such cameras :)

Canon doesn't care about whining on the Internet.  They care about sales data, and to a lesser extent forward-looking market research.  The sales data show that dSLRs continue to outsell MILCs by a huge margin.  Overall camera sales are dropping, but there is not a significant differential between the two ILC types.  Although the EOS M was the second best selling MILC in Japan after its launch, globally it was basically a flop…and as such really not too different from the MILC market as a whole.

MILCs exist in multiple sensor formats, from multiple brands.  It's totally irrelevant what people say they need or do not need on the Internet, what matters to Canon is the fact that people aren't buying them.

Sure, they only care about profits. However, when the market becomes over-saturated with cheap crop cameras everyone produce, what will they do next?

22
Canon General / Re: Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path
« on: January 14, 2015, 01:28:32 PM »

It doesn't mean a £1250 body isn't worth it.

I never said it was or was not.  I said that for a lot of people a rebel with kit lens is great value and likely to be all they need.   I am being asked to defend something that you said, not that I said.

As you'll see from my kit list (I haven't listed my actual video gear, which makes the 1DX look cheap) if I wanted a full frame camera, I would have one.  I don't want one.  I've not been convinced that for MY NEEDS that it would be of any benefit to me, in fact, for MY CIRCUMSTANCES I condsider various arguements against..

1. I bought into the 7D as it was the first DSLR with a PAL mode and manual exposure. (The 5D2 got these in a firmware update subsequent to the 7Ds release, so in fact I wasn't saving money at all, I was buying the best tool for the job available at that time.

2. With an eye on what the bigger boys were doing with the EF mount, specifically the RED ONE at that point, and it was all s35, not 135.  So I anticipated (correctly) that s35 would be the dominant video format.  Video is more important to me than stills.

3. I had decided with my previous camera that whilst I would buy third party DC and DX lenses etc, I would not buy any other EF-s lenses.  My logic was that EF lenses would have more of a future life, future value, and that I could get third party fast zooms for APS-C / s35 that would still be in the more universal EF mount (i.e. the Tokina and the Sigma f2.8 wide zooms would work on an s35 camcorder with an EF only mount)  The key to this was nothing more exciting than the EF mount is out of patent, so third parties can copy it.  I went back on this slightly with the EOS M, because the EF-m 22 suited the compact nature of the beast, and the 18-55 was just so cheap and is actually pretty useful for discreet shooting.  I won't be buying any more specific EF-m lenses however.

4. When the 5D2 caught up with the 7D (except for full hdmi output during recording, stills af) I used one on a few shoots and found it impossible to use with bright lenses near their maximum aperture, tried with and without zacutos, external screens, follow focus etc... the 135 sesnor with fast lenses is just too critical.  The jello and moire was also worse on the 5D2, although far from perfect on the 7D (the M does not a bad bash actually)  I had more latitude with the 7D, and so stuck with the 7D.

5. Occassionally, and I do mean occassionally it would be nice to be able to go above iso800 in video mode and be confident of the results.  I have a bag of very fast lenses (f1.4 primes, f2.0 primes and f2.8 zooms) and I ususally light or manage light in some way.  If I'm doing run and gun I'll be on my ENG xdcamhd camera, which is even more forgiving with its 2/3 ccd block, servo zoom lens, integrated audio etc.  DSLRs have their strengths and weaknesses.

I'm not against full frame cameras in any way shape or form.  I might buy one for my hobby stills.  They are not my first choice for video and so my upgrade path is more like to another APS-C, sorry s35 camera, the C300, although I'll probably hire until they go 4k this far into the product life cycle.

Just because something works for me, doesn't mean it will suit anybody else.  Just like going full frame.  If you are happy and you know it clap your hands.  The whole superiority thing grates though.

The thing is, you don't need f/1.4 on FF to mimic s35/APS-C @ f/1.4 image. My mostly used combo these days is 6D+40/2.8STM. Image-wise (and price-wise), there is nothing similar for 7D and it's crop siblings. EF-M 22/2 is the closest match, while still not as good. The new EF-S 24/2.8STM pancake is fine, only a stop too slow :). When it comes to optics, FF just wins.
The difference - Rebel with a kit lens can be decent - FF with a kit lens can be amazing.

23
Canon General / Re: Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path
« on: January 14, 2015, 09:30:02 AM »
Neuro, I really ask you to post to the topic of the respective threads rather than launching repeat personal attacks on me (and on other members of this forum).  Every time you run out of arguments you come with the same type of sh*t. I'm getting sick and tired of it.

Post information and opinion re. the "upgrade path (from APS-C gear to FF gear)", rather than taking guesses at other user's "personality recipe". That's not the subject of this thread. So stop the cr*p.

So, you have a problem...you know the solution...  Personality recipe: two parts stubbornness, one part wishing for something that doesn't exist, throw in a dash of good heart and sprinkle generously with jealousy.

Maybe one too many mirrorslaps to the head. 

I believe you asked someone else to stop whining, then went on to whine about how Canon doesn't make the camera you want and you don't want to pay for what they do make.  That's topical?  Ok, fine.

And perhaps Canon doesn't make such cameras because of all those people whining about not needing such cameras :)

24
Canon General / Re: Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path
« on: January 14, 2015, 09:26:04 AM »
...
Besides, if us lumpen proletariat took your advice and all went full frame, ...

Then sooner or later there would be no more APS-C cameras in production. FF would become much cheaper. FF Rebel class would materialize and bring a lot of joy for everyone. As simple as that.


What came first the chicken or the egg?

What does your accountant say about it? :)
If nobody would buy APS-Cs, why would they produce any?
APS-C was there first and it would be only natural if it would leave first too.

Quote
My accountant tells me its a big jump from £250 for a complete shooting kit (which a lot of people can afford) to £1250 for a body only (which fewer people can afford, or at least justify) and she's really great with numbers.

It doesn't mean a £1250 body isn't worth it. Ask your accountant how much do you spend on thing that are bad for you :). And you don't buy a new camera every month, do you?

P.S.
Imagine your doctor says something like - "we could threat your leg, but the amputation is so much cheaper..., even if you have the money, the difference in price is just unjustifiable...".

25
Canon General / Re: Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path
« on: January 14, 2015, 06:59:25 AM »
...
Besides, if us lumpen proletariat took your advice and all went full frame, ...

Then sooner or later there would be no more APS-C cameras in production. FF would become much cheaper. FF Rebel class would materialize and bring a lot of joy for everyone. As simple as that.

Quote
If your idea of fun is resolution charts and dynamic range then please let me know early on in the conversation, I may have to make my excuses and leave to monitor how the creosote is drying on my recently coated allotment fence.

As said before, I've seen first hand how better cameras can help people take better photographs, and sold hundreds and hundreds of cameras on this slightly disingenuous premise.  In my retail days I never sold anybody a camera or lens that made them a better a photographer.

If embracing poverty is your only argument, then you've chosen the wrong forum. Conservatism and technology don't mix well.
Better food alone won't make you stronger, faster or healthier, but if you follow the "food doesn't matter" theory, you will fail every time.

26
Canon General / Re: Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path
« on: January 14, 2015, 06:21:28 AM »
If you mourn the lost money on your EF-s macro more than you treasure the last picture you took of a parent  then you have a black black heart.

these two things are definitely not "EITHER - OR" as you try to imply. 
So stop YOUR whining.

I 1) BELIEVE I have a fairly good heart and 2) I KNOW my APS-C gear is denying me the technical quality I could get from using FF-sensored cameras and the gear is also not as good as it should and could be in helping me capturing the images I want to record. So in short, FF gear would be a far etter tool for me.

Only problem is, I am not willing to shell out a couple 10000 Euros to buy yet another antiquated, mechanical  mirrorslapper and matching lenses and there are no mirrorless FF cameras + lenses available yet worthy of may purchase.

Today we could and should by all means already have fully capable Canon FF cameras as small as the Sony A7 and priced @ 999,- or even less since mirrorless cameras can be built at much lower cost. Plus native lenses to match - some bright, good, fat, big and expensive Ls AND also a good range of small, "optically more than good enough" lenses like say that sole little Canon pancake EF 40/2.8.

Such FF gear would be affordable to many people, not only the filthy rich.  It would not make people "better/more capable photographers" per se, but it would give them better "last shots of their parents" and it would help them to get those shots more easily. For instance, parents faces would be in focus instead of the fence in the background behind those faces. The less capable a photographr is, the better should their tool be to maximize chances, that at least some shots still turn out as desired and are at least non-blurred, in focus and corectly exposed.  8)

Good points :)
+1

27
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: January 12, 2015, 05:32:14 PM »

IMG_1261 by ecka84, on Flickr

28
Canon General / Re: Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path
« on: January 12, 2015, 05:22:31 AM »
IMHO, Rebel with a kit lens(-es) is a decent grade.
IMHO, putting L lenses on your Rebel is NOT an upgrade. At the short focal range it's an overkill and sometimes awkward to use, while at the long focal range it's a compromise (cheaper).
IMHO, 60D/70D and 7D/7DII are the better implementations of the same grade. They all produce the same APS-C grade images.
IMHO, the "upgrade path" mostly works for those who don't know what they want
and/or can't afford or are not ready to spend $3K+ on camera gear (just yet :) )
and/or don't care about the difference, don't care to learn it
and/or are easily affected by the "Crop is the new FF" propaganda
and/or want the "extra reach" without the extra weight, which is a myth too. Just wait for that 50(or more)mp FF camera, which may be Sony, but still  ;D.
Upgrading your camera gear may lead to upgrading your computer, your monitor, your HDD storage and your printer, so that you would be able to actually see the results of your upgrade. Getting an L is not it.

29
I would bring the FF setup, but then why not bring both? The tiny EOS-M with it's 22/2 pancake and 90EX (which works beautifully on both) won't break your back, hopefully :) + it is nice to have a backup. In some situations it is handy to have one camera for stills and one for video, I mean for shooting stills and video simultaneously. Not sure about the tripod though. Maybe something really small, like a tabletop..pod or that gorilla..thing :).

30
Lenses / Re: Canon 35mm F2 IS image quality
« on: January 05, 2015, 11:05:54 AM »
Technically, it's this change in distance that changes the perspective.  But, it's the change in focal length that necessitates the change in distance to capture two images of the same subject that fills the frame.  Because filling the frame with your subject is typically understood as a given for such a comparison, then focal length does affect perspective.

Perspective depends on subject distance alone, technically and practically.
One might have numerous reasons for wanting to change the subject distance- in your example you are trying to frame the subject similarly with a lens of a different focal length. In another example, I might want to have the same amount of DoF with a different aperture (let’s say you want to take a photo with a 85mm lens and due to the low lighting conditions you need to use f/1.2. Instead of shooting from where you’re at, you step a few feet back to ensure that everything will be in focus. Would you say that the aperture changed the perspective in this case? You might say that in my example the framing is changed while in your case it stayed the same. The misconception about focal length affecting perspective might arise from the fact that one equates perspective with framing. While the focal length dictates framing (as it directly controls the angle of view and therefore controls the field of view at a given distance), focal length doesn’t affect perspective. It is merely one of the reasons that cause us to alter the subject distance.

OK, technically FL doesn't affect perspective directly (just like sensor size doesn't affect DoF), but FL dictates framing and distance, so the perspective will change anyway. What if the background is far away or even close to infinity (like moon)? Running around won't really change the perspective, but the FL will affect it.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 49