February 01, 2015, 01:14:54 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 - sdsr

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 50
Canon General / Re: Canon Says No to Retro Design for Them
« on: February 20, 2014, 03:59:41 PM »
The retro thing may be a temporary fad anyway.  I happen to rather like the look (it's partly what drew me to the Olympus E-M5), but aside from the clunky Nikon DF it seems confined to the realm of mirrorless cameras, which don't sell well regardless of what they look like, and even there the latest flagship mirrorless cameras don't look retro at all (any of the Sonys, Olympus E-M1, Panasonic GH4 (which looks just like a slightly undersized dslr), even the upcoming Fuji whatever-its-name-is).   

Canon General / Re: Canon Says No to Retro Design for Them
« on: February 20, 2014, 03:48:53 PM »
What the camera looks like is relatively unimportant - what it does is what matters.  Unfortunately, with the
exception of the dual pixel 70D (which has yet to prove itself), Canon seems to be lagging in almost every
department, sensor development, high iso performance, mirrorless, etc.  On the other hand, it seems to be working for the bottom line when other manufacturers are struggling.

Behind whose high ISO performance does Canon's lag (the 6D's in particular)?  As for arguably the single most important aspect of a camera, focus accuracy (and, perhaps to a lesser extent, speed), who beats Canon in the dslr context?   It's true that they don't seem to be interested in mirrorless, but it's hard to blame them for that - outside parts of Asia, they just don't sell well (however much some of us may like them, however much it seems they *ought* to succeed). 

Can you imagine? "Sorry the image isn't very good but the lens is so light!"
You must be talking about the new Nikon 58mm - LOL

That is one remarkable combination of sky-high price and unimpressive performance.

Have you read the lenstip review of the Nikon?  Ouch!


The ultrawide zoom seems a perfect partner for the a7r as a landscape/hiking combo.

Reviews on the 24-70 are not flowing as expected and the few I've seen seemed unimpressed by the quality/price ratio.

SAR suggests that the fast prime will be a 35mm, but I would say that a 85mm would better suit the current lineup.

Yes, it seems quite perverse for the next prime to be another 35mm, even if it's faster, especially since the current 35mm lens tends to get very favorable reviews.  I've read good things about the inexpensive Sony ff 85mm 2.8, but it's no longer inexpensive if you buy the right adapter for it and I'm not sure how many other Sony/Minolta lenses I would want to acquire to use with the adapter.  Nor, for that matter, do I know whether, aside from focusing faster, that Sony lens would have any advantage over my Canon 85 1.8, which works really well on the A7/A7R.  Does anyone reading this have any first-hand experience with that Sony 85mm lens?

EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 20, 2014, 10:11:54 AM »

I personally think that better equipment won't make you a better photographer, better equipment just makes taking pictures more convenient, easier and more fun.

But don't you think that having equipment that makes taking photos easier, more convenient and more fun makes it more likely that someone will want to use that equipment more, experiment more, and think better about what you're doing?  What ultimately matters most in making photos that are worth looking at is having a good eye; and while it's obvious that someone with a good eye can make fantastic images with lesser equipment, and equally obvious that buying superior equipment doesn't thereby give you a better eye, I suspect that the fewer technical obstacles your equipment provides the better your chances of improving your eye (though that may never happen).

EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 19, 2014, 10:57:42 AM »

My favourite photography genre is macro and I do a lot of it! Shooting with a MR-14 EX and extension tubes, I absolutely love the IQ of my subjects but equally hate the noise and banding in the shadow areas. Will full frame solve this issue?

If you hate noise and banding in shadows, I would (other things being equal) recommend a 6D rather than a 5DII or 5DIII - the 6D not only provides less noise at high ISOs (though the difference there among those three cameras is far less than the superiority of any) but less noise, and much less banding (I don't think I've ever seen it in a 6D file, but it's quite obvious from 5DII and 5DIII).  But if it's just a concern about high ISO noise, even a 5DII will seem like a revelation compared to any Canon APS-C body.

As for the suggestion that you buy books and learn better technique etc. with the equipment you already have, I don't agree - provided you can afford the upgrade.  A FF camera won't, of course, make you more artistic etc., but your images will look at least technically better and there will be less you will be able to blame on your tools....

According to sonyalpharumors, the Samyang 85mm f/1.4 E-Mount lens (compatible with Sony a7 & a7R) is now in stock at B&H ... but when I check with B&H, they say it is only for APS-C sensor cameras ... does anyone have some clear info on this?

Samyang's European site says it's for both:


It will be nice to be able to use their manual lenses (evidently they're about to start introducing AF too) on mirrorless camera bodies, which allow for effective manual focus via in-viewfinder magnification and focus peaking.  I bought a copy of this lens back when I owned a Pentax K-5 and despite (or perhaps because of) the focus chip, and because of the inaccurate infinity stop, I found it almost impossible to get anything in focus.  I rather doubt I'll get this one again, though, as my Canon 85 1.8 works so well on the A7s.

Lenses / Re: 35mm f2 IS for city photography at night?
« on: February 19, 2014, 10:12:55 AM »
Another thought: The 24-70/4L IS may be a good option. It covers the 35mm focal length, has IS, and gives the flexibility of a zoom. It's obviously more expensive than the 35/2 IS, but weather sealed and comparable in price to the 35/1.4L

The TO has the 24-105 F/4 IS, so adding the 24-70 F/4 IS to his kit would be a bit redundant ...

Right, especially in low light where any slight improvement in corner sharpness etc. the newer lens might have will surely get lost.  As for whether slow apertures are a hinderance at night when you're not trying to freeze action, a couple of months ago I posted some photos I took on a snowy dusk/night in NY with the 70-300L (which has IS, of course) attached to my 5DIII - so no fast apertures and pretty high ISOs and, if I remember right, I didn't apply any noise reduction when converting the RAW files.  If interested, you can go here:


PowerShot / Re: need help deciding:To canon or not to canon
« on: February 18, 2014, 04:06:44 PM »
On the surface, those requirements read like the spec sheet of the G1X mk II.

At this stage, downpour-sealed, great IQ and small'ish size are, in that order, my main criteria. Is the G1X2 weather-sealed and if it is, to what extent?

In that case, the E-M1 seems the way to go, at least if you attach the 12-40mm zoom.  In case you've missed Ming Thein's hot shower test:


PowerShot / Re: need help deciding:To canon or not to canon
« on: February 18, 2014, 04:01:39 PM »
I like mine, and am looking forward to my X-T1 ...

Options for me are really leaning towards the Sony A7, the Olympus E-M1 and the Fujifilm X-T1 ... as they're all priced basically the same where I park it ... and small enough to carry around. Add a nice prime, weather-sealed of course, and I'm good to go. Only, there are no weather-sealed primes for these camera, or are there?

It's hard to find plausible-looking information about whether the Sony FE primes are weather sealed (some say they are, others say they aren't, still others say they are, somewhat), but even if they were I doubt they're up to E-M1 or even E-M5 standards.  If they were, you would think Sony would make a big deal out of it.  As for Olympus, the excellent 60mm macro is weather sealed, but I don't think their other primes are. 

Re Sony A7 vs Olympus E-M1, the Olympus is one of the best designed cameras around and it has the virtue of the best (in some ways, at least) range of native lenses of any of these compact systems; it really is a pleasure to use.  But if image quality matters a lot (i.e., if you don't print small and like pixel-peeping), the A7 is unquestionably better (the A7r even more so) than the E-M1 in that regard, the relentless protestations to the contrary on 43rumors notwithstanding.  And since the image quality of the E-M1 strikes me as no better than the E-M5's, it made little sense for me to replace my E-M5 with an E-M1, especially given that the A7 costs more-or-less the same as an E-M1 (for me, the only advantage of the E-M1 over the E-M5 is the bigger viewfinder; the other "improvements" are all fluff). 

The Fuji looks nice, but I hope the image quality is notably superior to the X-E1's.  It could be that the copy I bought was defective, but I don't think it ever created a really sharp image, regardless of light, if the subject was more than a few yards away, and while it's true that even their RAW files have low noise, it's pretty obvious that they achieve that by applying heavy noise reduction that you can't avoid; you can even see this via dpreview's comparison tools. 

Canon General / Re: Canon lack of innovation
« on: February 18, 2014, 02:42:25 PM »
Apple, Samsung, IBM, Canon, Sony, Ericsson, Nikon ... you name them, they are all in the same race.

True. But does any of them treat you like a real person ... cares for you as a person ... shows compassion and understanding towards you as a person ... ??? Or do they see you as simply part of the many who buys their product because their marketing succeeded ...  ???

All I want them to do is provide appealing products I (might) want to buy, along with attendant good service if needed; and while at the moment I get the impression that the Sony A7R is capable under the right conditions of creating images that are, technically, a bit superior to what any current Canon body is capable of, I think Canon overall meets those criteria very well, probably better than any other camera company.  I don't care what their motives are if they meet those criteria (nor do I if they don't). 

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "shows compassion and understanding towards you as a person" but if Canon started to send out social workers and therapists to make sure it understood me as a person, I would probably buy some more locks for the front door.  Are we supposed to show compassion and understanding to Canon & Co. in return?  (Fuji, given the extent to which it appears responsive to customer input by constantly issuing firmware updates, may come the closest to "caring" but unless the XE-1 & lens I bought were defective I have no desire to give them any of my money whether they care about me or not.)

And I rather doubt that any company succeeded for long based simply on marketing.

Lenses / Re: 35mm f2 IS for city photography at night?
« on: February 17, 2014, 04:44:00 PM »
A couple of observations:

First, all the lenses you currently own work really well in cities at night on 6d, with its superb low light performance, including the 24-105.  Sure, if you want to keep the ISO as low as possible or want to freeze action, something faster is nice, but otherwise I'm not so sure.  It would be helpful on the SL1, though.

Second, as for the Sigma 35 1.4 vs Canon 35mm IS, I think those digital picture charts show that they are in fact quite similar in terms of sharpness (that was my experience, anyway), and if you were going to use them in bright daylight, I might suggest you toss a coin.  As for cities at night, each has an advantage the other lacks: while IS is nice to have if your shutter speeds get slow, city lights provide ample opportunities for coma (distant street lights near edges and corners, for instance); and if that bothers you (it does me), the Sigma is the better choice - it has the best coma performance of any fast lens I've used: it's only slight wide open and only a little stopping down makes it disappear altogether, whereas the Canon starts off much worse and takes longer to go away as you stop down, which rather defeats the purpose of using a fast lens (that's one reason why I like the 24-105 so much - coma isn't a significant problem with slowish zooms).  This won't be an issue on the SL1.  Check out the lenstip reviews - they address coma better than anyone else's I've seen.

Lenses / Re: 70-200 2.8 advice
« on: February 16, 2014, 05:48:53 PM »
No apology needed, you gave great advice. I just can't see myself justifying any extra 1000$ for a lens that may be 10% better (feel free to correct me on this) especially since this isn't my job and I don't earn money for it. If the lens really is night and day then i may consider it, but then i'd rather buy an extra wide angle lens. Is the canon really twice the lens of the sigma/tamron?

Reviews I've seen of the Tamron VC (you'll find some here) suggest the difference is pretty subtle, though of course whether the difference(s) matter(s) is for you to decide.  But unless you really want/need f/2.8, consider a 70-200 f/4 IS or, my own favorite zoom, the 70-300L IS, both of which are optically and mechanically superb and weigh and cost a lot less than the 2.8.  And if you do buy a 70-200 2.8 II, check it out carefully - I tried three, all of which were decentered, before giving up and deciding that for my purposes the other two L zooms were quite good enough.


that thread is on a fred miranda review using canon lenses on an a7r for landscapes.

thanks I saw that article.  that is why I am considering the Sony A7R.  Which is the better way to go?  Waiting for Canon may be a long time and if a body comes out it will be expensive.

It seems you can't readily attach Canon lenses to Nikon bodies, for the reasons given here:


So if you're deciding between a Sony or Nikon body, the answer seems pretty clear - get the Sony, which also gives you the usual advantages of mirrorless bodies & EVFs. 

Of course, as others have pointed out, whether you'll find the A7r gives you better results depends on how you use/view the results and what your criteria are - the extra resolution and dynamic range may or may not make a difference to you; and bear in mind that while you will almost certainly get better center resolution if you attach a Canon lens, that may not be true of corners:


My hunch, after playing with an A7r for a couple of weeks (and an A7 before that), is that Canon lenses (the ones I tried, anyway) yield slightly better results on A7 bodies than they do on a 6D or 5DIII (though of course they're easier to use on the latter), that the difference isn't just a matter of extra resolution (if you like viewing images 1:1 on a good, big monitor, the results certainly have an extra "wow"factor, even if you don't use a tripod), but that the 6D is probably better at high ISOs, at least in terms of noise. 

But I've not done anything approaching scientific tests, which is why I say "hunch" (I imagine there are useful A-B comparisons of the same thing shot with the same lens on different bodies on-line or, if not, that there soon will be).  If you're in a position to rent, why don't you rent an A7R & metabones Canon-E adapter and find out first-hand if you notice an improvement that's significant to you?  (And don't just try it on landscapes, unless that's all you photograph.)

Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Price leaked
« on: February 14, 2014, 05:39:02 PM »

Shown off to who, if you don't mind my asking?  It's such an exotic piece of tech that only other photogs would know what it is. 

With that same money, you can you get a second FF body along with this new Sigma 50...  Just saying.

Or, if you make that second FF body a Sony A7/A7r, you could get the Zeiss/Sony 55mm 1.8, which probably makes photos that are indistinguishable from the Otus 99% of the time, and has AF (and, at present, is $200 off - i.e. $799 - if you buy it with an A7/A7r).  Come to that, the Zeiss/Sony on a 7R could well create better images than the Sigma, no matter how good it is, or even the Otus would on any current Canon sensor (leaving aside such questions as whether you need to track fast action).  Interesting times....

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 50