July 29, 2014, 03:04:45 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 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 39
226
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« on: June 21, 2013, 04:40:23 AM »
Yes. I agree.
The lack of third party RAW processing software support doesn't help as well.

Are you saying you can't process the foveon's RAW images with third party software?  Because myself and most others who used it, did so with no trouble.  I have not heard of a lack of support for the new Merrill sensor, if that is what you're saying.  So that's news to me.  You're saying Lightroom 4 cannot open Merrill RAW files?

Yes. I was talking about Merrill RAW files, Adobe has no support for them yet. However, previous generations of Foveon RAW are supported.

I wonder if LR 5 will support the Merrill RAW files from any of their bodies?

I hope so :D

227
Landscape / Re: Beautiful sunsets
« on: June 05, 2013, 08:55:31 AM »

Jun 2  IMG_0473-IMG_0474 by ecka84, on Flickr


Sunsets create shadows.

Where are the shadows in this?

Oh, I forgot, it has been HDR'd to death.


Why? To me it looks more natural than the original image. I can't speak for the rest of the population, but I can see much more than my camera (in term of dynamic range) and it is not my fault :). There are shadows, but they are not black, because this is how I saw it.

228
Landscape / Re: Beautiful sunsets
« on: June 05, 2013, 04:30:51 AM »

229
EOS-M / Re: EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Announcement Soon? [CR2]
« on: June 04, 2013, 12:41:25 PM »
I agree with @ecka... IS (nowadays) is more of a feature for amateur video more so than still photos.  I wouldn't take serious landscape or architectural photos hand holding my camera at 1/15s, although just having that ability helps.
There a lot of churches, buildings will not allow either tripod or monopod. therefore you have to hand hold the camera. You will want IS in that situation.

You don't really need a tripod for mirrorless cameras with small lenses. Half-decent gorillapod should be OK.
I would like to see you use a gorillapod inside Ventican or Versaille

:) me too.
However, that's not my point. There is a bigger chance to use gorillapod in such places, than tripod. Don't you agree?

230
EOS-M / Re: EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Announcement Soon? [CR2]
« on: June 04, 2013, 04:33:03 AM »
I agree with @ecka... IS (nowadays) is more of a feature for amateur video more so than still photos.  I wouldn't take serious landscape or architectural photos hand holding my camera at 1/15s, although just having that ability helps.
There a lot of churches, buildings will not allow either tripod or monopod. therefore you have to hand hold the camera. You will want IS in that situation.

You don't really need a tripod for mirrorless cameras with small lenses. Half-decent gorillapod should be OK.

231
EOS-M / Re: EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Announcement Soon? [CR2]
« on: June 03, 2013, 12:06:18 PM »
Did anyone else raise an eyebrow at the "IS" in that lens name?

I didn't think people really needed to handhold 1-second exposures at 11mm, but I suppose the technology does help sell lenses to novices.

Not really. IS would be nice for video.

My concern for the new lenses are size and weight.
More pancake lenses!

Yes. EF-M 11mm f/4 STM pancake would be great.

232
Lenses / Re: Portrait lens setup -what should I get next?
« on: June 02, 2013, 02:36:24 PM »
..... That's especially true on a crop body - an f/2.8 lens on APS-C is equivalent to f/4.5 on FF......

The optical effects of a lens happen before it hits the sensor, so sensor size has nothing to do with DOF. Subject distance however does have an effect, with a 50mm on ff you would be closer to the subject to get the same shot.


Wrong.
The right way of comparing APS-C and FF DoF is to keep the same distance and framing. When using the same focal length, sensor size has everything to do with subject distance you will want to shoot it from. While at the same distance crop needs a wider lens with a wider aperture to match the FF. Try FF+135/2 vs APS-C+85/1.2 ;)

233
Lenses / Re: Portrait lens setup -what should I get next?
« on: June 02, 2013, 02:13:09 PM »
The whole "buying-FF-lenses-now-and-maybe-upgrading-to-FF-later" thing seems pointless. 24-70/2.8 on FF is equivalent to 15-44/1.8 on crop, which suggests that you need a whole range of primes on APS-C to match a FF with just two f/2.8 zooms (like 24-70 and 70-200). While 5D3 +24-105/4 can easily replace your 50D+17-70/2.8-4.5 , 50D + 24-70/2.8 and even 50D + 35/2.
I would sell 50D, 17-70, 35/2 and buy 5D3, 24-70/2.8, 85/1.8.

234
Lenses / Re: Zeiss 15 vs Canon 14
« on: June 01, 2013, 01:46:22 PM »
For me it is Zeiss 15/2.8 vs TS-E 17L.

235
5D3, period!

236
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Thoughts on Zeiss Canon 5 lens kit?
« on: May 31, 2013, 06:42:28 PM »
I'd choose the best  :)
15/2.8
25/2 or 21/2.8
55/1.4
100/2
135/2

237
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Advice needed: performance of 6D
« on: May 30, 2013, 07:13:48 AM »
5D3 is much better for tracking, shoots 6fps and clearing buffer to CF card is faster than SD. My 6D with Transcend 64GB Class10 UHS-1 shoots 15 RAW images at 4.5fps before slowing down to 1fps. The buffer clears pretty fast and for shooting 10 frames series there should be no problem. However, 5D3 is a better tool for action.

238
Lenses / Re: Zeiss 100 f/2 vs. Canon 85 f/1.2 II vs. Canon 135 f/2
« on: May 29, 2013, 07:07:38 AM »
I was going to recommend the 135L, but the Zeiss is a great piece of glass.  100mm also is also closer to your 35mm.  As somebody else pointed out, the gap between 35 and 135 is a big one.

+1
Every 2x in focal length results in 4x FoV. You can fit four 70mm lens frames inside one 35mm lens frame (shot from the same distance) and almost sixteen 135mm lens frames inside one 35mm lens frame.

239
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D vs. 600D with good lenses?
« on: May 28, 2013, 10:41:32 AM »
Then how comes that EF-S 10-22/3.5-4.5 USM is Canon's only UWA APS-C offer, which is like 16-35/5.6-7.1 FF equivalent? Is APS-C+10-22USM any better than FF+17-40L, while both priced similarly.

Actually, yes.  The 17-40L on FF is a soft mess in the corners, especially wide open, and has major barrel distortion at the wide end (3.6%, although the 24-105L at 24mm has even more distortion).  The 10-22 on APS-C is sharp into the corners, and has far less distortion (1.2%, and that's another area where EF-S wins for the 17-55, which is at 2% distortion at 17mm vs. 4.3% for the 24-105L on FF).

For fair comparison we should use 17-40L at f/5.6-7.1 vs 10-22USM wide open. I've noticed before that 17-40L has soft FF corners at wide angle and stopping it down doesn't help much. For that reason I never bothered to try it myself. However, lots of angry worshipers argued that it's perfect at f/5.6+. I still don't believe them. Perhaps my definition of perfection is different :). Can you confirm that?

240
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D vs. 600D with good lenses?
« on: May 28, 2013, 09:53:02 AM »
Well, of course I'm talking about EF on FF vs EF-S on APS-C. The myth claims that EF lenses are more expensive, because they are meant for FF. I'm just saying, that L lenses are more expensive for different reasons and if those same reasons were included in every EF-S lens, then there would be no big difference in price.

I disagree, sort of...  For wide angle and normal lens designs, the smaller image circle means less glass is needed - for an equivalent level of build quality, an EF-S lens will cost less to produce than a corresponding EF lens.  I say 'sort of' because the reality is that production costs are only one factor (and not the most important one) in determining lens pricing - Canon would likely charge the sameand keep the difference as profit...

Then how comes that EF-S 10-22/3.5-4.5 USM is Canon's only UWA APS-C offer, which is like 16-35/5.6-7.1 FF equivalent? Is APS-C+10-22USM any better than FF+17-40L, while both lenses priced similarly.

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 39