December 18, 2014, 09:36:11 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 - ecka

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 46
16
Nice review and thank you for samples  :)

There's a typo:

"FEATURES AT A GLANCE
A quick summary of the new Canon 7D mark II features:

2MP APS-C CMOS Sensor"


and noTC vs 1.4xTC vs 2.0xTC sample descriptions are wrong (vice versa).

17
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D Mark II - DXOMark Review
« on: November 05, 2014, 03:46:49 PM »
Jeez... dxomark again.
I don't really understand the magic math they are using :).




18
For me, 24-70L'II is just too big, too heavy, too expensive and optically (for what I do) gets beaten by any decent prime lens (even 50/1.8'II). However, it may be exactly what you need, depending on what are you going to do with that lens. It is a great workhorse, just like 70-200L'II.
For low light, F2.8 isn't really a solution even on FF, while for crop, there is Sigma 18-35/1.8ART, so I'd just forget about everything else in that range. I would get 6D + 24-105L + something + something (like 35/1.4ART + 85/1.8 ).

6D
smaller body (doesn't really feel any less sturdy)
no CF
slower flash sync 1/180sec
half stop better high ISO noise
WiFi, GPS

5D3
larger body (similar to 7D)
better AF system
6fps (1.5fps more than 6D)
better video features and quality (+MagicLantern)

19
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7d mk2 seems very soft?
« on: November 04, 2014, 07:49:03 PM »
Honestly, what do you expect from an APS-C ???
I'd rather get a used 1D4 for only a bit more $.

20
Lenses / Re: Canon 6d vs 24-70mm mark ii
« on: November 04, 2014, 04:04:34 PM »
For the reasons given by others already, I would go with the 6D too; superb image quality and you will likely appreciate the high ISO performance.  What's more, all your lenses will suddenly provide a much much wider angle of view, providing significantly different ways of looking at the world - it's rather like replacing everything at once.  And since you already have 17-40 and 70-200, you might want to consider selling both your 7D and your 24-70 (much of whose angle of view on your 7D will be covered by your 70-200 on the 6D) and buying a decent prime or two to fill in the gap and/or allow you to play around with even shallower focus (if that's of any interest to you) - a fast 50mm, or an 85mm portrait lens, say.  Or you may decide that the gap doesn't need filling....

+1

21
Hi ecka.
OK My bad, it would appear I did miss most of the point if you only consider pixels, but don't the superior 1DX processing and circuitry raise its capabilities in total above that of the 5DIII, 6D? Coming back to a camera being a system not just the sensor, note comparing to Canon, not Nikon or Sony.

Cheers, Graham.

Hi ecka.
Not sure what this is suppose to mean, if I understand at all it means that the 1DX is third to a 6D and 5D III. REALLY????? Is that in some parallel universe or here on earth? Or did I just miss the point?

Cheers, Graham.

5D3>6D>1DX>1D4>7D2>7D

Are we both talking about the "Real-World Resolving-Power"?
Yes, 1DX has less pixels than 6D and 5D3, despite that it is a better overall tool. The "Real-World" part makes it difficult to compare different formats and technologies.

Actually, 12" x 20" > 11" x 14" > 8" x 10" > 5" x 7" > 4" x 5" > new MF 50 MP CMOS sensors >> all FF and APS-C cameras.  ::)

Sure ;)
...MF>D810>A7R>DP2M>A7>5D3>6D>1DX>1D4>7D2>7D>M4/3...

I'm talking about the amount of information these cameras are able to capture. In reality, 20mp bayer sensor produces 20mp images, but it cannot capture all 20mp of actual data, which would represent reality (lens projection) 100% accurately. Huge part of the resolution is just made up (false color, noise, moire, AA filter, DR deficiency, color calibration). IMHO, the efficiency could be 20% to 50%, depending on camera capabilities and lighting.

22
Hi ecka.
Not sure what this is suppose to mean, if I understand at all it means that the 1DX is third to a 6D and 5D III. REALLY????? Is that in some parallel universe or here on earth? Or did I just miss the point?

Cheers, Graham.

5D3>6D>1DX>1D4>7D2>7D

Are we both talking about the "Real-World Resolving-Power"?
Yes, 1DX has less pixels than 6D and 5D3, despite that it is a better overall tool. The "Real-World" part makes it difficult to compare different formats and technologies.

Actually, 12" x 20" > 11" x 14" > 8" x 10" > 5" x 7" > 4" x 5" > new MF 50 MP CMOS sensors >> all FF and APS-C cameras.  ::)

Sure ;)
...MF>D810>A7R>DP2M>A7>5D3>6D>1DX>1D4>7D2>7D>M4/3...

23
5D3>6D>1DX>1D4>7D2>7D

24
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II
« on: October 29, 2014, 04:58:58 PM »
Still, twice (or even x3) cheaper Sigma 35/1.4 stays on my wish list. They really should make it f/1.2 :).

25
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 23, 2014, 08:15:09 AM »
Crop vs. Full frame.

As a 6d owner - my first full frame- im very unimpressed at its low iso quality. There is no 3d-ish POP that i have seen in so many 5d2/5d3 images over the years - image quality that i could easily see was not reproducible on my crop cameras.

To these ultra pixel peeping eyes, the 6d is only slightly better at dynamic range than my t2i.  High Iso handling is generally FANTASTIC, which is why i figure the low iso takes an image quality hit. Low light photography is a whole other ball game compared to my crop bodies.

So while i enjoy my 6d, its nowhere close to the full frame experience i thought it would be. Still dreaming of a 5d3 and non-ancient AF.  :(

Really? From what I've seen, 5D2-3 and 6D images side by side look almost identical :).

26
Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: October 17, 2014, 07:19:32 AM »

I'm sorry to hear about your loss. It's powerful to see these two shots, one as a kitten, one at progressed age. How old was he? 10 or 11 yrs?

He was ~9, I think. Spring 2005 - Winter 2013.

27
Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: October 17, 2014, 07:10:05 AM »
Hi ecka.
I have been trying to tell our adopted cat that best friends don't bite your fingers, I will have to make sure he doesn't see this!

Excellent shot.
Lots of other excellent shots too, waterdonkey and Dustin in particular.
Thanks for sharing.

Cheers, Graham.


IMG_4106 by ecka84, on Flickr

You can't fight their nature :)

28
Canon General / Re: "11-24mm f/4" vs The Holy Grail
« on: October 16, 2014, 01:50:17 PM »
"11-24mm f/4" vs The Holy Grail

... and the winner is ... Samyang 14/2.8  :D
while Zeiss 15/2.8 takes 2nd place.

29
Lenses / Re: Which prime lens for nature fotography?
« on: October 10, 2014, 08:37:18 AM »
I think there are no EF 500 f/5.6 or EF 600 f/5.6 lenses.
Your 400 DO was 1940g.
The new 500/4L'II is 3190g, which may be the one you actually need (the old one is 3870g).
The new 400/2.8L'II is 3850g (the old one is 5370g).
The new 300/2.8L'II is "only" 2400g, which may be the one to get for lower weight, while accepting all the compromises (short reach, worse IQ and AF with TCs).

30
Wasn't the G1X the first?

the first what? Oddball-sensored (4:3), too large-bodied, too slow-lensed, too highly priced, tunnel-viewfindered, pseudo compact camera that hardly anyone bought?  :P


Had Canon stuck the regular APS-C 18 MP sensor into the G1X back in 01/2012 ... and sold that beast at exactly the same price as the then cheapest Rebel [T3/1100D] with kitlens ... who knows, it might just have been successful and Sony's RX-100 with the smaller 1" sensor might not have become such a huge success.  :-)

That's a matter of opinion ... don't you think? :)
All the m4/3 cameras are same "oddball-sensored" (4:3) and G1X sensor is even bigger. I'm not a fan of large sensors compact cameras (specially those without a decent EVF), but I think that 4:3 ratio is brilliant for portraits (in vertical position) and you can crop it if you don't like 4:3. Canon shouldn't have included that tunnel-viewfindered and they fixed that mistake in Mark II. Of course, there is big pile of stuff that should be improved. There is no perfect camera.
G1X is too big - RX100 lacks grip
G1X has bigger sensor - RX100 has faster optics
features vs price, looks vs. ergonomics, etc.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 46