Independence Hall, Philadelphia
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.
Also, am I going to have to look at trying to upgrade my outdated camera body every year?
Why would you upgrade if your current model does what you need it to do?
Just because a new model comes out does not make the previous model "out dated". Of course that is what the camera manufacturers want you to believe.
Also, I'm fairly familiar with the A7 series on paper and the Focus Peaking is looking like a promising next-best-thing to Canon AF - I'll likely still have the 5D3 along for the ride for choosing AF vs Pixel Density... I think my Wildlife shooting is often more Reportage-like than most in my aporoach - and I'm shooting the 400mm f/5.6L for now, maybe I could consider the FD 500mm (around f/4.5L, right?) to use with the a7r and focus peaking.. thoughts?!
Will the Sigma 150-600 sports not be good enough for once a year Africa trips for the kind of photos on website?
Now I am nervous and feel like stopping the sale.
If you look at Nikon, the lenses that were mediocre with the D700 are S___ with the 3x higher resolving D810...
I believe that for instance the 17-40 or the 24-105 will perform badly on a high MP body.
The grass is always greener on the other side, and it is still greener on the other side after you changed the sides:
There is not everything better with another camera system or manufacturer; Sony also has its problems.
It's always been curious to me how mirrorless lovers just assume that everyone wants something uber-tiny, or to give up their OVF for an EVF, or what an electronic shutter, or anything like that.
And read the Pentax press statement: these special editions will "make digital SLR photography even more fun." Well how am I supposed to have fun now with my black Canon? They are sucking the joy of photography right out of me!
Then, compare the light blue swatch on the color checker card at say ISO 6400 RAW, the one just above the black swatch in the lower right corner. Also, make sure you are in print mode. I've been comparing the 7D II and the D7100. The difference should be pretty obvious.
it's not possible to select the 7D in their new comparison tool on DPR.
On the digital photography review site targeting the jack of hearts, and his "hair" and the text below him, the sony is head and shoulders better than any of the other sensors in raw at least.
You can see the hair and read the text in all samples. The difference in sharpness you observe is probably equal to moving the detail, sharpening, and/or clarity sliders a bit.
In any case, this would be invisible outside of pixel peeping. "Head and shoulders better", in my book, means you can clearly and reliably see the difference at normal, or least large, print sizes.
I use the 50mm macro not for real macro (a 100mm or even the 180mm are more practical), but for the specifications of any 50-60 macro lens : ultra sharp , zero distortion, perfectly flat field and the ability to focus close. It has a use in (art) reproduction, studio photography, landscape and architecture. I used Nikon for 20 years before switching to Canon and the 55mm AI-S, then 60mm AF-D were the best lenses I had. They both could easily replace the 50mm of their time for general use, if you did not need 1.x aperture. I just cannot say the same with the 50mm Compact Macro (a 27 year old lens).
However the EF 50 1.4 and the 85 1.8 are horrible wide open in cameras with high megapixels. They just can't handle it, plus the CA in the bokeh which is terrible and unfixable in post process