August 21, 2014, 08:33:11 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 ... 41
16
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: August 05, 2014, 04:50:05 AM »
You mention "well known shortcomings" but I could point to numerous professional reviews where the reviewers said the same thing I've always said: at ISO 100-800 there is very little difference vs. FF.


Having owned FF and a 7D, I'd have to disagree.

 

Yup I would also agree with Michael here on this one. There is definitely noise visible at ISO 800 on the 7D, not much though. Even at ISO 100 I found myself using the NR slider sometimes. With the 5D2 I leave that slider alone 99% of the time.

+1. My 7D was worse on ISO 640 and above than my 5Dc is at ISO 1600. I haven't done any comparisons, but I think my 50D might be cleaner in high ISOs than my 7D.

I switched from 500D (I think 50D has the same sensor) to 7D (back in 2010), which was quite a bit better in noise department. 500D/50D seemed more grainy.
I always tried to keep my 7D macro shots under ISO 800, but now, with 6D I can go up to ISO 3200.

17
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: August 04, 2014, 05:45:21 PM »
Wow.  Here we have one person criticizing a camera sensor for well known shortcomings, and another person declaring that such criticism is evidence of a miserable existence.

He may have been harsh, but his point stands. The web is loaded with clean, sharp, detailed 7D images with gorgeous color. If you are not producing work with similar IQ it is not the camera model. Either you have a faulty unit or your technique is flawed, and it's usually the latter.

You mention "well known shortcomings" but I could point to numerous professional reviews where the reviewers said the same thing I've always said: at ISO 100-800 there is very little difference vs. FF. They didn't notice any horrible noise. The "7D is noisy!" meme gets annoying to those who don't seem to have any problem producing excellent images with it.

Now if we're talking high ISO...yes, the 7D is noisy and soft vs. the 5D2 and especially the 6D, 5D3, and 1DX. But so is pretty much every other crop sensor. Granted newer sensors are better, but still pale in comparison to the latest FF sensors at high ISO.

Well, it is called photoshop ;). Any big sensor camera can produce clean, sharp, detailed images these days.
As a former 7D user (and I did like that camera very much) I must say that my 6D has a lot more potential for what I do - lower noise, lower aberrations, better subject isolation, better contrast (and micro contrast), better sharpness, better cropability, better DR, nicer bokeh, wider and better range of lenses (specially primes, while equivalent crop lenses are either just as big, as heavy, as expensive and still inferior, or do not exist). Every review is subjective, every professional has his own opinion, but we should only discuss facts. Let's keep all the prejudice out of it. Science and religion don't mix.

18
EOS Bodies / Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR Camera
« on: August 04, 2014, 10:27:20 AM »
2. EVF lag -- this is pretty close; current best is about 30% more than human visual system lag

Which lag are you talking about?
The LiveView lag
The after shot blackout lag
The shutter lag
I call "EVF lag" the total lag difference compared to DSLR.
Mirrorless burst mode lag is pretty bad :).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsddzE5f13k

19
EOS Bodies / Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR Camera
« on: August 03, 2014, 04:47:50 PM »
EVF lag.

20
Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: August 03, 2014, 04:04:57 PM »
I think that human vision is closer to 10mm really, a lot wider than 40mm.
If not, then maybe I'm not human :o.

Around 80mm, what I see in the viewfinder is the same size as what I see in my other eye... but in regards to my angle... I almost have 180 degrees of coverage... so I think that makes me more of a herbivore than a carnivore...

Yes, I'm talking about FF equivalent focal length. It is close to 180 degrees.
I don't find it boring at all :).

You may be confusing angle of view wit perspective. I hope your eyes don't have the same perspective as a wide angle lens...

I don't know really, it doesn't bother me. I guess the brain is correcting all the funny stuff, so we don't perceive it.

21
Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: August 03, 2014, 03:57:46 PM »
While it's a much-debated comparison (and I'm not sure there's any definitive answer), 180º sounds far wider than the usual human field of vision. Stare straight ahead, don't move your eyes and head, move your hands apart until they disappear. For me it seems not much more than 90-100º.

That's interesting :). Some say that 99% of what we see is produced by brain. Everyone's brain developed a bit differently, we are all unique. So, we don't have to agree on one number here :).
How wide can you see with one eye, while staring straight ahead? From center to the edge. I think it is ~85º. We can't be that much different. Tell me it's at least 70º :).

22
Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: August 03, 2014, 03:07:01 PM »
I think that human vision is closer to 10mm really, a lot wider than 40mm.
If not, then maybe I'm not human :o.

Around 80mm, what I see in the viewfinder is the same size as what I see in my other eye... but in regards to my angle... I almost have 180 degrees of coverage... so I think that makes me more of a herbivore than a carnivore...

Yes, I'm talking about FF equivalent focal length. It is close to 180 degrees.
I don't find it boring at all :).

23
Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: August 03, 2014, 01:44:54 PM »
My brain.  :o
Other than that, it is the 40 shorty...
Oh yes! My 40 shorty is so unused I'd completely forgotten about it. Picked it up as a novelty item when it was announced, used it a couple of times, and then....ummm

-pw

That's weird. I use mine all the time, it's a great body cap.
Things may change when I'll get a fast 35mm. Still waiting for that 35/1.2L :)).

I'm really happy I managed to constrain myself and didn't buy it. I guess it helped that I had a 40 mm Voightlander. For some reason I was never really happy with that focal length anyway. Perhaps because it is the closest approximation to normal human vision which renders it a bit boring.

I bought one for my daughter... I really like the lens in theory, but I never personally use it.

I think that human vision is closer to 10mm really, a lot wider than 40mm.
If not, then maybe I'm not human :o.

24
Lenses / Re: advice for new lens?please
« on: August 03, 2014, 11:16:20 AM »
Assuming that we are talking about FF:
Travel
24-105L (do-it-all lens) or 16-35/4L (if you like it wide) - these two cost less than a single 70-200/2.8L'II IS USM
35/1.4L (it's worth it, can't imagine why would you consider selling it)
200L (with a teleconverter, 200mm on FF is only a short tele), if you really need a decent tele to drag along.

Street
35/1.4L
135/2L or/and maybe 16-35/4L (if you like it wide)

IMO, 24-70 and 70-200 are just heavy workhorses for event photography and journalism.
In some places it is forbidden to use big lenses, so I would carry 40 pancake for backup.

25
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: August 03, 2014, 10:29:54 AM »
All I can say is that I'm in awe of some people here.  I get involved in print judging, and (annoyingly) most people don't say what type of camera/lens combo was used.  And, obviously, there's no EXIF data to review.  I'll admit it,  I'm just not capable of telling what type of camera or brand was used.  But some people here are so confident that there is a night and day difference.  I'm now worried that I must be missing something.  Some even suggest that my eyesight must be defective if you can't see it (ok, my eyesight is defective and I wear glasses...but I see fine with my glasses on). 

Help me!  When I look at a print, what should I be looking for so that I can determine with high level of consistency and certainty if it was taken with a P&S, M43, crop camera, FF, medium format or large format camera?  If it helps, most prints I see are approx 8x12.  I'd love to get this right so that I don't inadvertently promote an image taken with a crop camera over a FF camera.

This "dead horse" has a message written on him long time ago - "Superior camera can shoot poor snapshots too, so what?" :)). If you don't/can't exploit larger format potential, then you don't need one to do the job.

26
Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: August 03, 2014, 08:53:44 AM »
My brain.  :o
Other than that, it is the 40 shorty...
Oh yes! My 40 shorty is so unused I'd completely forgotten about it. Picked it up as a novelty item when it was announced, used it a couple of times, and then....ummm

-pw

That's weird. I use mine all the time, it's a great body cap.
Things may change when I'll get a fast 35mm. Still waiting for that 35/1.2L :)).

27
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: August 02, 2014, 10:50:04 PM »
OMG that's great. Not even 4 years ago. Funny how a sponsorship will change your "opinion."  Arias has ZERO credibility to me now.

+1

Don't be too harsh on him, he is a nice guy. I do (did) agree on most points of his photographic philosophy (before he lost his way :)) ), like learning the full potential of one lens before buying another, or that "glass before body" is BS (there has to be a balance), FF + nice and cheap primes work amazingly well!

29
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: August 01, 2014, 06:17:45 AM »
Who cares what Zack Arias has to say. His main talent is self-promotion, i.e. he's not much of a photographer. His major source of income seems to come from being a guru/media whore/pitchman. If he wants to maintain that income he has to stop acting like a hopped-up loon.

His understanding of photo history leaves much to be desired. Back in the day many magazine covers were shot with 35mm cameras (gotta love Kodachrome). Photojournalists stopped using 4x5 and 6x6 during the Vietnam War era.

Now-a-days no-one except pixel peepers care about sensor size. No. One. Cares. Got that -- No. One. Cares.

Professionals are shooting paying work with everything from iPhones to 8x10. The impossible Project is now making New 8x10 Polaroid film  https://shop.the-impossible-project.com/shop/film/8x10inch/fi_8x10_1_imp_2_mum

So please don't bore me with senseless sensor wars. No. One (except you). Cares.

:)
Why should we care what careless people think? (except when their carelessness affects our quality of life)
Why careless people need others to support their careless beliefs? (except when they do it for money)
Why bother fighting for carelessness? It makes no sense. (except when you're a troll or doing it for money)

30
Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: August 01, 2014, 05:01:53 AM »
My 2x TC :)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 41