August 02, 2014, 03:36:12 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 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 39
241
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.

242
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?

243
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.

244
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D vs. 600D with good lenses?
« on: May 28, 2013, 07:35:14 AM »
To Pato: If we can afford it, 6D seems to be it. I can see what you mean about the EF Lenses. It was a concern for me also. That is why I have decided to go with the kit with 24-105... Roughly, the lens is around 1100 and the body is 2000. You do the math. In the mean time, you are getting a great camera and a great lens. I doubt I will be looking for any other lens other than a couple of much cheaper primes. So, at this point I am not even worrying about the EF lens prices. If the day comes to buy a EF lens that is really expensive, I will assume somehow I am making real good money from this hobby. At that point, the cost will be funded by the hobby and I'll be writing it off as a business expense.

Well, if there was an equivalent EF-S lens for every EF lens and just as good, then they would be just as expensive (or even more). For example, 24-105L beats the EF-S 17-55/2.8 in every way - build, DoF, IQ, focal range, while both are similar in size, weight and price. Take a look at EF 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS USM, the EF-S equivalent would be 17-85/2.2-3.5 IS USM, I doubt that it would be any smaller, better or cheaper. Actually, I'd prefer 6D+28-135/3.5-5.6 over 60D+17-55/2.8. So, I call this myth busted :)

It's busted as long as you're talking about comparing the EF-S lens on APS-C with the EF lens on FF.  But for example, when both are used on the same APS-C body, the EF-S 17-55/2.8 delivers better IQ than the EF 24-105/4L, and (IMO) the former is a more useful focal range (24mm is 'normal' on APS-C meaning no wide angle therefore the 24-105 is not a 'general purpose zoom' covering wide to short tele).

Personally, I'd prefer the 60D+17-55 over the 6D+28-135 any day.  But I'd take 6D+24-105 over both.

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.

245
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D vs. 600D with good lenses?
« on: May 28, 2013, 01:13:44 AM »
Again All.... Thank you for all your input, suggestions on accessories and alternative combinations. I've decided to get the 6D with the kit lens. I want to get the kit lens as I really want to play with different length options, ISO and SS to get real life experiences on different combinations. So no primes as of yet.

To Ecka & ZV: Agreed. My focus is to get the basics and grow with the camera. Add things if I need to. I don't find the need for a flash or a tripod initially. I'm sure I will add when I know what I'm doing a bit more. Only planning to get the UV filter at the moment ( I think?!?) to protect the lens. For tripods... I know they have their place. I have never used one before but I actually love using my body to get the shots. It somehow makes me feel the photo so much more. Quiet shutter is of course my preference and glad 6D accommodates that as well.

I don't use UV filters, so I don't have one, because in my shooting environments the chance of damaging front glass element is very low. No UV filter adds anything good to the picture, quite opposite, you are trading some of the goodness for safety. So, if dust and moisture are not your only concern, then make sure that the glass you are putting to protect your lens is a tough one, "bulletproof" :D. Otherwise, (IMHO) it's not worth it. Most of the UV filters break much easier than the lens glass itself.

Quote
To VividColors: Thanks for your input and taking the time to look at my pictures. It makes me more confident on my choice for going for the 6D.

To Pato: If we can afford it, 6D seems to be it. I can see what you mean about the EF Lenses. It was a concern for me also. That is why I have decided to go with the kit with 24-105... Roughly, the lens is around 1100 and the body is 2000. You do the math. In the mean time, you are getting a great camera and a great lens. I doubt I will be looking for any other lens other than a couple of much cheaper primes. So, at this point I am not even worrying about the EF lens prices. If the day comes to buy a EF lens that is really expensive, I will assume somehow I am making real good money from this hobby. At that point, the cost will be funded by the hobby and I'll be writing it off as a business expense.

Well, if there was an equivalent EF-S lens for every EF lens and just as good, then they would be just as expensive (or even more). For example, 24-105L beats the EF-S 17-55/2.8 in every way - build, DoF, IQ, focal range, while both are similar in size, weight and price. Take a look at EF 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS USM, the EF-S equivalent would be 17-85/2.2-3.5 IS USM, I doubt that it would be any smaller, better or cheaper. Actually, I'd prefer 6D+28-135/3.5-5.6 over 60D+17-55/2.8. So, I call this myth busted :)

246
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D vs. 600D with good lenses?
« on: May 27, 2013, 12:52:14 PM »
One thing I really like about the 6D is the sound the shutter makes - just so smooth and pressable. In comparison my 5D II just sounds like some old man sneezing and those rebels are just as bad. Clunk Clunk hurts my soul!

Sorry, maybe not your highest priority!

+1
The shutter sound was never something I cared about, until I tried 6D :D. Now I love it.

247
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D vs. 600D with good lenses?
« on: May 27, 2013, 08:35:11 AM »
I regret that I didn't start with a FF camera. I didn't know what to get, so I tried to follow the most popular advice for beginners, which was/is like:
- body doesn't matter, half-dead Rebel is fine :) ; (not for me)
- get the best lenses you can afford ...; (best doesn't mean the most expensive)
- ... which are 11-16/2.8, 17-55/2.8, 70-200L, 100-400L; (not really, primes work better for me)
- don't forget about accessories: tripods, flashes, filters, etc; (you can buy these later, if you feel the need) (IMHO, only memory cards, bags and spare batteries are the must-have, everything else is optional).
Now I know that it does not fit my style. I don't need to cover the 16-600mm focal range. I rarely use tele lenses, flashes, tripods, filters ... no need to spend money on that. I should have bought a used 5D with 50/1.8'II and then add 85/1.8USM later (which I recommend for portraits).
The problem is that you never know before you try it. My current choice is 6D+40/2.8STM (people, close-ups, stitching landscapes, travel) +150/2.8Macro for portraits and stuff outdoors.

+1. Find your style first before buying all that extra stuff. You may find that you use a filter about once a year. Don't buy anything until you find a definite need for it. Try without it. You might find a cheap workaround. For example grad ND - I find lightrooms grad filter way more flexible or take two exposures and blend in photoshop. For ND filter - f/22 does the job (well kind of!). Maybe a CPL is one you will need as thats not possible to replicate digitally. Tripod - my knee, lampost, railing etc. even used someones shoulder once.

When you catagorically cannot go further - then buy it.

I can agree to almost anything except FLASH.  I consider flash as one of the most important accessory besides lens and camera.  You can use it as a fill-in flash which makes portraits a lot better.  It's also a great help for extending a little bit a picture's DR.  I can live without a  tripod (most of the time) and filters but I consider flash as a must whenever I take pictures except for some situations.  You may argue that 6D can take a much higher ISO but when you know how to use your flash properly, your pictures will be a lot better.

Well, yes and no. It is a must-have in studio-like conditions or staged scenes (portraits or macro), but for candid or street photography flash can make it look unnatural and be embarrassing for people around you. However, I'm no flash expert, so I may be wrong.
I know that good photograph needs good lighting and outdoors there is plenty of it :)

248
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D vs. 600D with good lenses?
« on: May 27, 2013, 05:24:43 AM »
I regret that I didn't start with a FF camera. I didn't know what to get, so I tried to follow the most popular advice for beginners, which was/is like:
- body doesn't matter, half-dead Rebel is fine :) ; (not for me)
- get the best lenses you can afford ...; (best doesn't mean the most expensive)
- ... which are 11-16/2.8, 17-55/2.8, 70-200L, 100-400L; (not really, primes work better for me)
- don't forget about accessories: tripods, flashes, filters, etc; (you can buy these later, if you feel the need) (IMHO, only memory cards, bags and spare batteries are the must-have, everything else is optional).
Now I know that it does not fit my style. I don't need to cover the 16-600mm focal range. I rarely use tele lenses, flashes, tripods, filters ... no need to spend money on that. I should have bought a used 5D with 50/1.8'II and then add 85/1.8USM later (which I recommend for portraits).
The problem is that you never know before you try it. My current choice is 6D+40/2.8STM (people, close-ups, stitching landscapes, travel) +150/2.8Macro for portraits and stuff outdoors.

249
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« on: May 24, 2013, 12:18:55 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.

250
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« on: May 23, 2013, 02:27:01 PM »
well MTF diagrams  gives you good information about the lens you are picking, so does this curves about problems with 3 layers of filter, there are other constructions  , read earlier answer
IF there had  been only minor problem with a Foveon or similar construction you can be sure there had been  sensors  out on the market since  years back
And Foveon is not the first with a construction like this.They are the first to do a commercial product

Got any diagrams on how those problems are/should be solved?
I think that scientific method is the best, except when people start using it religiously, like "... this is the only way, now and forever, amen" or "... my book says X, so your book is wrong, because my religion is the right one".
Perhaps one of the reasons why Foveon is not very popular, is that it requires more in-camera processing power, which results in slow shooting speed and short battery life.

I would say the biggest reason Foveon doesn't sell is they are stuck in Sigma cameras. Sigma is NOT known for producing a high quality camera body, nor is it know for high quality or high end DSLR features and functionality. Their menu system is a joke. Foveon has some EXCELLENT strengths, and for types of photography that do not require high ISO (i.e. landscapes), it is an excellent design. The problem is that Sigma owns it, and they just plain and simply don't make a very good camera. Personally, I find that to be a sad state of affairs. I think Sigma purchased Foveon thinking the sensor itself would bring in the sales.

I think the Foveon+Sigma story is an excellent example of how camera BODY and its functionality overall is significantly more important than just the sensor.

Yes. I agree.
The lack of third party RAW processing software support doesn't help as well.

251
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« on: May 23, 2013, 11:27:23 AM »
well MTF diagrams  gives you good information about the lens you are picking, so does this curves about problems with 3 layers of filter, there are other constructions  , read earlier answer
IF there had  been only minor problem with a Foveon or similar construction you can be sure there had been  sensors  out on the market since  years back
And Foveon is not the first with a construction like this.They are the first to do a commercial product

Got any diagrams on how those problems are/should be solved?
I think that scientific method is the best, except when people start using it religiously, like "... this is the only way, now and forever, amen" or "... my book says X, so your book is wrong, because my religion is the right one".
Perhaps one of the reasons why Foveon is not very popular, is that it requires more in-camera processing power, which results in slow shooting speed and short battery life.

252
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« on: May 23, 2013, 08:55:24 AM »
Foveon rocks!  ;D
FF+Foveon=FFF
FFF+mirrorless=me happy  :P


foveon dont rock, if so there have been a good foveon sensor out by now with good high iso properties and easy to to convert  to color true pictures with out tons of mathematical calculations.
se my earlier answer:

a Foveon solution with different layers is not a good solution, there are already other solutions tested, a single cell with prismatic properties that divides the RGB to surfaces that are equal and not stratified


Foveon is NOT about high ISO.
Leica is NOT about high ISO.
Medium format is NOT about high ISO.
Why so many people are going crazy about high ISO? I understand that it's useful, specially when you are shooting for money and you need to deliver. I'm not a pro, I shoot for pleasure and I prefer noise-free low ISO camera with better DR and resolution. Sigma Merrill series Foveon is not perfect, but (correct me if I'm wrong) it is only 3-rd generation sensor and at ISO100 it kicks the color-guessing CMOS technology in their balls. :)


no it doesn't regarding  colors and how we se colors. Bayer sensors don't have a lower limit on color accuracy, they can achieve literally perfect (100% match to human eye perception) color.
http://alt-vision.com/documentation/AeroSense-2003-Oral.pdf

Diagrams that can help make sense of this can you found on pages 20, 21, and 22.
The diagram on page 22 is the one that will give you the true, better insight. Look at the human eye curves (upper left graph) and the Bayer camera curves (lower left graph)
Pay attention to their shapes, and how they interact with each other. The Bayer curves is similar to the eye curves. Blue barely crosses red, and green is definitely a hump in the middle. All the slopes are similar.

Now look at the Foveon (upper right) curve. Its nowhere close. Look at where red and blue cross. Instead of being below 10% of their peak values, they're at 50%. Blue should have been finished (totally out of the picture) by about 550n, but it's still going strong all the way to 660nm (pretty deep red). Green and red should both be sloping downward from 600nm on, but instead red is sloping up. This is example  why the Foveon sensors have considerable difficulty discriminating many colors.

Eric Fossum ones wrote, clarity and richness from  the Foveon image  is a equal wonder  as when a jumbo jet taking off.


Diagrams are just diagrams. I don't pick lenses by looking at MTF diagrams, I look at RAW images. Same with cameras. Those signals must be filtered, corrected and processed before you get a picture. Canon CMOS and Sony CMOS deliver different results, why do you think that Sigma Foveon and Canon Foveon should be the same?

253
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Olympus OMD EM5 or 6D
« on: May 23, 2013, 08:36:49 AM »
I think something I'm looking for is definitely not point and shoot (think: something with a viewfinder).

Thanks for all the advice so far, but I'm really considering the EM5 just because of the smaller profile.
If I intend to shoot with a 6D, its profile is much larger and would probably attract more attention. I believe the less attention that I attract, the more focused I will be when composing..
The 6D also lacks weather sealing ("splashproof", fine.)...

Oh, and one last consideration... I am a student so I don't have few thousand dollars to pull out my arse.
Thus, another plus for the lower priced, Olympus camera.
Sigh.

Maybe I should just give up and start using film (I do have an AE-1 and an AT-1 in my closet)...


Why are people all of a sudden scared of being noticed with a camera? Be confident with your equipment. Point it like you mean it. Otherwise whats the point?

In Japan just about every Jim Bob and his uncle has a camera and they take pictures of just about anything.

I get a lot of curious people enquiring about my 7D and what lens I use. Perfect time to chat to them and maybe get a picture of them too!

If you want discreet an iPhone is just as good as any p&s. it's better in fact cos its more useful!!


yeah well you should visit great britain or the usa.   ::)

then you will notice you are one the same level as a suspected peadophile or terrorist.

did you really not noticed how problematic it is in some countrys to take pictures in public?
i mean... the internet is full of reports and videos about this.

and no.. after a dozend such discussions you donĀ“t have time nor lust to discuss you rights with the police or security guys.
 
while the gov. is monitoring every street corner... photographer (especially with a DSLR) are forbidden to take pictures.

http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/001022.html

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/535627/police-reasonably-suspected-photographer-was-terrorist

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/535630/photographer-in-police-picture-ban-sparks-met-probe-update-3-15pm

http://www.yugatech.com/photography/that-no-photography-allowed-policy/

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=2018.0

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=2360.msg50352#msg50352


Been to Hong Kong, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Indonesia, Singapore, the Philippines and Australia. I'm from the UK and that was the only place I ever had police question me. Yes it annoys me but hey I didn't do anything wrong or break any laws. Why should I sweat it. (By the way I am of Pakistani descent and yeah I do get the "terrorist" stare). However what half wit terrorist goes around with a 5D mark II and a 70-200 lens? Yeah if I was a terrorist do u think I would be using that? Twats! (Referring to police).

My point is, if you look like you are on a job (tripod, bag, vest etc) they'll just leave you be. You could also get permission from local authorities before you shoot, that way you are covered if cops turn up.

I think this "guy with a camera must be up to no good" stigma needs to be corrected.


Exactly. Hiding a small stealthy camera seems even more suspicious :).

254
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« on: May 23, 2013, 01:58:19 AM »
Foveon rocks!  ;D
FF+Foveon=FFF
FFF+mirrorless=me happy  :P

foveon dont rock, if so there have been a good foveon sensor out by now with good high iso properties and easy to to convert  to color true pictures with out tons of mathematical calculations.
se my earlier answer:

a Foveon solution with different layers is not a good solution, there are already other solutions tested, a single cell with prismatic properties that divides the RGB to surfaces that are equal and not stratified

Foveon is NOT about high ISO.
Leica is NOT about high ISO.
Medium format is NOT about high ISO.
Why so many people are going crazy about high ISO? I understand that it's useful, specially when you are shooting for money and you need to deliver. I'm not a pro, I shoot for pleasure and I prefer noise-free low ISO camera with better DR and resolution. Sigma Merrill series Foveon is not perfect, but (correct me if I'm wrong) it is only 3-rd generation sensor and at ISO100 it kicks the color-guessing CMOS technology in their balls. :)

255
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« on: May 22, 2013, 11:56:41 AM »
Foveon rocks!  ;D
FF+Foveon=FFF
FFF+mirrorless=me happy  :P

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 39