April 20, 2014, 08:21:19 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] 5 6 ... 35
46
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 26, 2014, 08:09:14 AM »

The philosophy down here is buy better glass before upgrading the body.
That's a leftover from the film era, when the body was mostly a light-tight box for your lenses and for your sensor (film), and no one caring about quality were shooting APS.

Now, an FF body will make your L lenses work better.


I still agree with the sentiment... for 2 reasons... Lenses don't depreciate quickly... so you are better off running your body into the ground (150K of actuations) because it won't really be worth that much after a few years when you try and sell it.  Point in case... the 1d iii which sold for $6K and is now selling for $1k.  Whereas... if you bought a few nice lenses, you can still get well more than 16% of their original value.

And you can put an L lens on an older body and still get fantastic results... depending on what you are shooting.  If it is landscape or portraiture, the advances in high iso performance and AF performance are minimized and you can still get some amazing images using an older XTi.  Heck... if you are still rocking the t2i, there haven't really been that many advances along the lines of the crop sensors that would warrant buying a t5i. 

When I sold my XS... it was a wash... when I sold my 60D, I lost $200 in depreciation... and when I sell my 5D mkiii, I will lose around $1000 in depreciation... which kills me.  But maybe I avoid that by just using the mkiii until it dies in 10 years.

If you can throw $10'000 on glass, but you cannot justify spending more than $500 on a body, then you are being unreasonable. APSC sensors are only using 40% of the L glass potential. Even if you only got 3 or 4 lenses and use them / love them equally, then each one will only get a quarter of your attention, while the body is used for 100% of the time. If you worry so much about the resale value, then why not buying used bodies? I'm sure about one thing - I should have bought a used 5D with 50/1.8'II instead of a Rebel with some zooms (for the same price). Yes, I'm not one of those "covering the range" people.
I think that there is a conflict between two topics - "lenses before body" and "FF vs Crop" - which shouldn't be merged. However, when they do merge we get "$10'000 of L before FF" which sounds like "marriage without sex", or "FF with only $8000 of L" which sounds like fun (and the right way to do it), or "FF before any L" which sounds like "sex before marriage" (kinda fun too :), for a hobby).

47
PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 12, 2014, 03:33:38 AM »

48
Lenses / Re: More EF pancakes?
« on: February 11, 2014, 03:37:59 PM »
mMmmmm ... 20mm pancake :P sounds delicious.

49
Camera Body Gallery / Re: Anything shot with Sony A7R
« on: February 11, 2014, 12:20:16 AM »
Thank you for sharing. I envy you guys so much :). I'm a huge FF mirrorless fanboy and I was spreading this "ideology" online for years. However, now, when it is actually happening, I cannot join the club due to financial difficulties :(. I may have to tier down from 6D to something more humble, soon :). So, please, keep them coming.

50
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: February 10, 2014, 11:58:15 PM »

IMG_1941 by ecka84, on Flickr

Very nice capture. Colors, composition, DOF, bokeh ... the lot :)


Thanks :)

51
Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Price leaked
« on: February 06, 2014, 07:42:37 PM »
Relax :). It may cost even less than 35Art, like $799.
35Art MSRP:$1,400.00 - Price:$899.00
50Art MSRP:$1,300.00 - Price:$799.00
...makes sense?

52
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: February 04, 2014, 04:37:19 AM »

IMG_1941 by ecka84, on Flickr

53
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: January 08, 2014, 12:29:35 PM »
6D + EF 40mm f/2.8 STM  ISO-12800


IMG_3625 by ecka84, on Flickr

54
The f/2.5mm is a Macro lens it is not a general purpose lens. The 40mm f/2.8 was Canon's entry into a super cheap STM prime for their STM initiative, the 50mm f/1.8 was just a super cheap lens to promote entry level photography with primes, and the 50mm L prime is horrible. The last version was so bad at f/1.0 that they dropped the entire idea, and the new version is equally horrible. At f/1.2 it has lower picture resolution than an iPhone 5. It also has image quality that has to be compared to lensbaby, a plastic lens made to be extremely horrible on purpose for visual effects. The 50mm f/1.2L is one of the worst lenses made by any manufacturer period.

Canon's only non-gimicky 50mm is the 50mm f/1.4. And actually it's a pretty decent 50mm, it actually has more resolution at f/2 than any other 50mm lens in the world released, prior to 2013. It is extremely hard to make a 50mm lens that is fast and most deliver extremely poor image quality. The Canon 50mm 1.4 actually beat out every other 50mm lens on the market at f/2, delivering what I would consider the fastest 50mm aperture with an average resolution of 2400 LPPH or more (which is the minimum resolution I consider acceptable), but it was disappointing to see such a poor focusing mechanism and such poor coatings because it wasn't updated for an extremely long time.


Just because you don't personally use or like a lens doesn't make it "gimmicky". 

The original 50/1.0 lens, which you call "horrible", was almost unique in its time and still makes beautiful photos at f/1.0:  http://www.jessicaclaire.net/index.cfm/postID/263

The 50/2.5 macro is for any purpose you want to use it, not just macro.  It's cheap and sharp, though it has the old buzzy AF motor.  Cheap + sharp + 1:2 macro = a good combination.

The 40/2.8 is a wonderful pancake lens and is a cheap way of shrinking your big dslr and still having really sharp photos.  Brilliant and a joy to use.  Cheap + sharp + very small = a good combination

You're right, the 50/1.8 is "just" a super cheap lens to promote entry level photography with primes.  But wait, that's a good thing.  What's wrong with that?  That actually makes some people very happy.

The "horrible" 50/1.2L which you compare to a plastic Lensbaby has been used for a tremendous amount of professional work.  It is good enough for David Burnett, Sebastiao Salgado and Mario Sorrenti, but not good enough for you?  And this guy seems to make decent photos with it:  http://www.flickr.com/photos/petezelewski/ ... not bad for using what you say is "one of the worst lenses made by any manufacturer period."

As for the Canon 50mm f/1.4 having more resolution at f/2 than any other 50mm lens in the world released prior to 2013 ... not exactly.  That would easily have been the Leica 50/1.4 Summiluxhttp://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01/the-great-50mm-shootout

In the Lensrentals "Great 50mm Shootout", you'll note that both Canon 50/1.4 and 50/1.2L scored higher in resolution than any of the 50's from Nikon, Sigma or Zeiss.  That's pretty good for lenses you consider gimmicky or not good.  Leica scored higher, but Leica is in a much higher price category.


Moreover, just looking at lens in EF-mount, the Zeiss 50mm f/2 clearly beats the EF 50mm f/1.4 at f/2.


... which is a $1200 manual focus f/2 macro lens. Lensrentals clearly shows that Nikkor 50/1.4 beats all of it's price category rivals and Sigma is the sharpest in the center, while the good old plastic-fantastic 50/1.8II would put all them to shame, for the price that is :).
I'm not a pixel-peeper, but I do prefer sharp-cropping over soft-zooming. Any decent lens can produce perfectly good and sharp snapshots. Actually, you don't need a DSLR for that (or anything with a big sensor, you can make bokeh in photoshop these days :) ). 50L is not my dream fifty, nor is the 50/1.4USM. If the new Sigma 50/1.4 is anything like their 35Art, then I'm getting one, but for now - nothing beats my 40.

55
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: January 07, 2014, 05:56:39 PM »
6D + Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX APO DG HSM Macro
crazy crop, 1/9 of the frame (~450mm equivalent)
I guess the lack of AA filter works for me ;)


IMG_3300 by ecka84, on Flickr

56
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon abandoned EOS M?
« on: January 04, 2014, 05:39:17 PM »
Sonyalpharumors.com has recently posted a link to the top-selling mirrorless and DSLR cameras in Japan http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/2013-sales-sony-nex-5r-is-the-most-sold-mirrorless-camera-in-japan/

According to this link, Canon EOS-M is the second top-selling mirrorless camera in Japan. I know it's not worldwide but anyway, it seems that Japanese like it.

Another interesting thing is that EOS Kiss X5 (T3i) is the top-selling DSLR in Japan.


DSLR percentages:
Canon share: 48.7%
Nikon share: 41.5%
Ricoh share: 3.4%
Sony share: 1.7%

Mirrorless percentages:
Olympus: 25.4%
Sony: 23.1%
Panasonic: 11.5%
Canon: 9.2%
Ricoh: 7.8%
Nikon: 5.7%


Canon's single EOS M body gets 9.2%, while Panasonic's 10 (ish) bodies are getting only 11.5%? :D

57
Reviews / Re: Review: EOS M System
« on: December 09, 2013, 10:13:19 AM »
I'm not sure if I would prefer EF-M dedicated Samyang 10/2.8 over the normal one (with EF mount) + adapter.
...


Since I already have the adapter I think I'd go for the EF mount after checking the specs on the 16f2, http://www.syopt.co.kr/common/pdf/f=16mm.pdf.  The EF mount is 585g and a length of 89.4mm while the EF-M mount is 615g and a length of 115.4mm.   You don't get a smaller form factor for the M, you just get a built in adapter.  The EF-M mount is about 75g lighter than the combo if that makes a difference.  I assume the 10F2.8 would be a similar story.

The 300mm is a more compact design at only 320g and 73.7mm on the M, http://www.syopt.co.kr/common/pdf/f=300mm.pdf.  It doesn't have an EF equivalent.  Maybe there will be other lenses like this in the future targeted for the smaller form factor bodies.


And that is going to be the basic problem with 3rd party options.  The lenses designed for M specifically benefit from being designed for the flange and are nicely compact.  Lenses that are designed for APS-C with an M mount are not really specifically designed for the body and won't have the great small form factor.  Still, better to have some options than no options...and Canon hasn't exactly been pumping out the lenses.


Yes. Perhaps that's because Canon is marketing it as a pure consumer product (EF-M system), so 1-2(3) lenses is enough, and if you are an enthusiast, then you must add the EF-to-EF-M adapter, or skip the whole thing and get a Rebel (which lacks a lot of dedicated, affordable primes as well). I think that Canon non-professional product segmentation/politics is a big mess, god help them ...
Their only APSC DSLR UWA lens is the EF-S10-22USM and they are squeezing this lemon for 10 years. It is decent quality, but now they are expecting Americans to use it on EOS-M or something? Who's making these crazy decisions? :) They should learn from Sony - "If you can't make something, buy someone who can".

58
Reviews / Re: Review: EOS M System
« on: December 08, 2013, 06:49:22 PM »
I was really excited to see this lens coming for one huge reason:  towards the end of the video I saw this and took a screenshot of it:

This is the first third party lens I have seen that supports the EOS-M mount.  That's exciting, because it speaks to at least some confidence that the mount isn't going to be abandoned.  I've already put in a request to review the lens when it launched in an M mount, so here's hoping that will happen.

I thought that Samyang 16mm f/2.0 ED AS UMC CS and 300mm f/6.3 ED UMC CS Reflex Mirror Lens was the first third party lenses for Canon M mount.

I checked the Samyang site, and you are right, although I've not yet seen a retailer selling them in that mount.

Terrific news!  Thanks for posting this.

I had no idea any third party manufacturers were looking to add lenses for the EOS-M mount.  Obviously Samyang feels there is sufficient market for M mount lenses, maybe other third parties will follow suit?

I'm not sure if I would prefer EF-M dedicated Samyang 10/2.8 over the normal one (with EF mount) + adapter.
I've checked some sample images taken with this new 300/6.3 Mirror lens, and it produces such interesting bokeh effect, just like the rest of it's family :), only this one seems to be a bit sharper.

59
Reviews / Re: Review: EOS M System
« on: December 07, 2013, 03:09:45 PM »
I was really excited to see this lens coming for one huge reason:  towards the end of the video I saw this and took a screenshot of it:

This is the first third party lens I have seen that supports the EOS-M mount.  That's exciting, because it speaks to at least some confidence that the mount isn't going to be abandoned.  I've already put in a request to review the lens when it launched in an M mount, so here's hoping that will happen.

I thought that Samyang 16mm f/2.0 ED AS UMC CS and 300mm f/6.3 ED UMC CS Reflex Mirror Lens was the first third party lenses for Canon M mount.

60
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Any reason to choose a 7D over a 70D?
« on: November 15, 2013, 12:47:51 PM »
3 simple reasons:
Speed - fps and buffer size that can do 25RAW series;
CF - faster and safer;
Build and ergonomics.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 35