April 17, 2014, 11:17:46 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 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 35

Thanks for sharing your ideas.

A third wheel would be really useful I believe; the puzzle for Canon would be to review controls layout keeping current usability also when wearing gloves; anyhow, I believe they could make it.

I have seen that Sony is putting four wheels on their a7 and a7r cameras; one is dedicated to exposure compensation. Such wheel, and the low camera weight are the reasons I was considering buying an a7.

The best mirrorless cameras all have a separate external exposure compensation wheel/control, including M43 (which is where I first ran across it).  It's extremely useful, but to get the most benefit from it you need an EVF rather than an optical one so you can see the effects of the adjustments you make while you look through the viewfinder (EVFs let you see the effect of other changes you make too, of course).  For that reason, and because on-sensor focusing when done right is more accurate (leaving aside tracking fast-moving subjects), I would like Canon to make a FF mirrorless body with an EVF; it would be fine with me if it's the same size as a 6D or 5DIII (I like my Sony A7r, but attaching, say, a long L zoom or native equivalent to it seems a bit silly ergonomically).  Oh, and put IBIS in the body too, please.

EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: March 03, 2014, 03:28:59 PM »

 ;D ;D ;D ... believe it or not, using the focus peaking feature, the a7R with a cheap adapter is actually much faster then the autofocus on EOS-M with its native lenses. I've had the EOS-M for almost a year and made over 30000 images with it, and I was very satisfied with it's image quality ... but after having tried some of the competing mirrorless cameras, I sold the EOS-M last week ... now I plan on getting a Panasonic GX7 and a Sony a6000 ... pretty sure of getting the a6000 (when it is released), but I'm still undecided about the GX7  :-\

Did you update the firmware on your M?  I thought that made a significant improvement, and certainly faster than what I can achieve (at least with wide apertures) manually on my A7r (not that speed is usually an issue for me); though of course you may be much more adept at mf than I am....

As for the GX7, it certainly has its admirers, but its IBIS isn't nearly as good as that in Olympus bodies (esp. the OM-Ds), and the one I briefly owned never made images that looked as sharp as those I get from my Olympus - but maybe I had a bad copy.

Meanwhile, I suspect this post is closer to the truth than many around here would like:


EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: March 01, 2014, 04:45:25 PM »

An EOS-M2 sized as is, but with 70D sensor (= with useable AF), priced like an SL-1 and a higher-end EOS-M3 equipped with best-in-class EVF, wheathersealing and RT-speedlite trigger, sized and priced like a Fujifilm XT-1 ... would be the only ticket for Canon to replace sales of all those rebels nobody will want to buy any longer a year or two from now ... maybe not even @ USD 299,- in firesales.

Excellent mirrorless cameras have existed for a while, but outside the far East it's *them* that "nobody wants to buy", in part, perhaps, because they're not cheap compared to APS-C dslrs.  The XT-1 is $1300, the OM-D E-M1 is c. $1400, the newest Panasonic will cost even more, and the next tier down from Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic are c. $1000 (most of them without weather sealing) - and that's body-only.  What's more, unless you spend a bit more and buy an Sony A7 (and are willing to work around the limited native lens selection), the image quality is no better than an APS-C dslr provides.  So unless small body size really matters, it's unclear exactly why anyone *should* prefer these alternatives.  I happen to like them a lot - Olympus OM-D and Sony A7/7r, at any rate - but for now it's pretty clear that I'm in a minority in this part of the world (apparently Fuji have yet to sell a million worldwide of all their X-series cameras put together). 

EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: March 01, 2014, 04:15:38 PM »
How much improvement was gained with the new firmware update?

Improvement in what?

The most significant improvement was in AF speed and it improved quite a bit. Still not best in class, but acceptable.

Right.  What it didn't speed up is the time lag between taking shots, which I found far more annoying than the focus speed (I hardly ever photograph moving things, so that wasn't much of a problem for me) or, of course, all the other irritating design features.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS M2 Coming to North America & Europe?
« on: March 01, 2014, 04:09:46 PM »
I love this camera. ill buy one just to hold onto it in case my m1 breaks.

the metal casing saved it from a few drops very recently- and that touch screen is unrivaled. carry it with the 10-22, and the 50 1.4, and its just a beautiful thing.

shame on the haters, you guys dont now what your missing. its a great TOOL.

Assuming you're referring to the original M rather than the M2 (that's what your opening sentence implies, at any rate) some of us who don't like it ("hate" is too strong) know exactly what we're missing because we owned one and, even though it can make very good images, think it's a trial to use ergonomically, whether compared to a dslr or other, better designed, mirrorless bodies.     


Great work putting it all together drjlo ... thanks for sharing ... personally I prefer the Metabones, because all my lenses auto focus with it (except 50 f/1.4), also the tripod mount can be easily removed, so the adapter becomes smaller and a tiny bit lighter.

Thanks from me, too.   So far my only AF problem with the Metabones is that my 70-200 f4 IS had a hard time focusing at 200mm.  (Maybe it didn't help that it was below freezing when I tried it; if it ever warms up significantly here I'll try it again!)  No problems with 24-105L, 100L, 85 1.8, 40mm pancake, or 28 IS.  The only Canon mount Sigma lens I own is the 50-500 OS, but I can't imagine ever wanting to attach that monstrosity to my A7r!

Canon General / Re: Off Brand: Nikon Announces the D4S
« on: February 26, 2014, 01:46:04 PM »
I was right, ISO 409600 is going to revolutionize shooting!  Look at the fine details and complete lack of artifacts on this shot!  Coal mines, Mammoth caves, and Marianas Trench here I come!

It's a funny one, BTW, because the guy with the D4 has every shot in focus, and the guy shooting the D4S...not so much...

Aside from that, what struck me most in these photos was the horrible greenish patches on the model's skin (far worse on the D4 than the D4S), like an exaggeration of the green bias seen on many JPEGs, camera monitors and viewfinders in recent FF Nikon dslrs.  I hope the RAW files aren't similarly infected.

Lenses / Re: Review: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 Distagon T*
« on: February 26, 2014, 01:31:14 PM »
As you can image, and predictably, the lens is phenomenal and possibly the best 50mm (yes, it’s 55mm) lens ever made for an DSLR.
Here in Germany the "fotomagazin" jounal has made a test and review where they say that the Sony/Zeiss Sonnar T* FE 55 mm F1,8 ZA has a better IQ at 1/4 of the price.
I don't get 100% through their test methods to see if they did something wrong but the results are hard to believe as the optics are comming from the same source.

The Sony/Zeiss certainly can make remarkably images when attached to an A7r, as I've been discovering over the past week or so, though unless I rent one I doubt I'll ever be in a position to compare it to the Otus first hand.  Can that review be read on-line?  I tried finding it on their site, but without success - maybe I'm looking in the wrong places, or my German isn't good enough....  People complain that the Sony/Zeiss is overpriced, but given how good it is I'm not so sure (it helps that I was able to get mine through a Sony promotion that resulted in a $200 discount).


I agree Sony pricing is wacky, e.g. behold the RX1R and accessory pricing.  I probably would not have bought the FE 55 mm, or the A7R, if it werent' for the great deal at Focus Camera.  I have owned Canon 50 f/1.8II, Canon 50 f/1.4, Canon FL 55 mm f/1.2 (converted to EOS), Canon 50L, and I have used the Sigma 50 f/1.4 (non-ART).  I have sold them off one by one and am left with only the 50L, which I would have sold except it works great with 5D III AF system despite its issues.  Heck, the 50 mm range of my Canon 24-70 II probably is the sharpest of all of them.

Unlike many who find the 50 mm range boring, I love that focal length, and I blame Canon for not coming up with a truly great fast 50 mm for so long, too busy putting IS on their wide angles  :'(  The FL 55mm f/1.2 was fun, but manual focusing at wide apertures just took too long to be useful in real life for events, people, kids, etc.

Too bad you didn't keep your 55 1.2 - manual focusing on a mirrorless body is so much easier than on a dslr.  But at least you'll be able to compare your 50mm L if so inclined (the metabones EF-Sony E adapter works very well) to your new Sony 55mm (or to any other brand of 50mm lens; and when you do you may perhaps decide it's not overpriced after all.

EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 23, 2014, 05:11:17 PM »

I think he said that so that you are limited to just you and the camera. Zero Post-processing. If you can take amazing pictures, then that makes you a photographer. Post-processing makes you an editor, and although thats what it takes to be photographer nowadays i.e. be both photographer & editor... It wasn't like that back in the day. And you have to agree... Seldomly, do we all take good pictures anymore, we all take half-assed pictures then throw it in lightroom to correct it, then crop it so they frame it better and lastly do a bunch of touch ups to make it clean and/or artsy.

Perhaps you should speak for yourself....  This distinction you're making is false anyway.  Yes, it's nice if you can get it "right" in the camera in the first place, but that's still editing; the only difference with PP is that you're doing it somewhere else, outside the camera.

EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 23, 2014, 05:06:46 PM »

If you have talent and vision, it's not going to be lessened by using the tools available to you.

Quite so; and if you don't have talent and vision, being forced to use a limited range of equipment won't impart them.

As for shooting JPEGs, no thanks.  I like looking closely at photos, and if you do that you'll see that cameras' JPEG-creation tends to involve processing that smears fine details.  It may be possible to reduce or avoid that by experimenting with the camera's JPEG settings, but why bother if shooting RAW lets you avoid that? 


[....] This lens is a marketing gimmick though. It has nothing to do with the Zeiss Otus and the technology it uses. [....] The 55mm f/1.8 ZA is not revolutionary. It's about as impressive as sending someone to walk on the sidewalk. The 55mm f/1.8 ZA is boring design that shows no skill or technical mastery. [....]  If you look at DXO's sharpness figures and drill down to the raw data the Nikon 85mm f/1.8G obliterates the 55mm f/1.8 ZA over 98% of the frame at all apertures....

I've not read any of the marketing bumph - do Sony claim it is related to the Otus or that it's "revolutionary"?  Have you used a Sony 55 1.8 side-by-side with said Nikon lens and witnessed said obliteration yourself?

Anybody using the Sony/Zeiss FE 55mm lens yet? 

DXO testing shows results very close to the Otus 55 mm, in fact second best for any lens behind Otus and the best audiofocus lens DXO has every tested.  I should receive one soon along with A7R; I just hope all the ergonomic issues, Sony-specific software/hardware issues don't make me regret buying that combo to use alongside my 5D III.


I have no idea how it compares to an Otus in real life and probably never will (unless I rent one for kicks), I've not owned mine for very long, and so far I've only used it hand-held, but I'm finding the sharpness, clarity, contrast, colors etc. on my A7r to be quite remarkable, even on fairly distant subjects, whether in bright sun or at night, and at all the apertures I've used so far (it's impressive at 1.8 but does improve a bit with stopping down).  Excellent bokeh too.  I can't agree with those reviewers who have said they don't ever see any chromatic aberrations - while its performance may well be better than that of most fast lenses, I certainly see it in the usual worst-case high-contrast scenarios, but it's easy enough to fix in, say, LR; and while the files respond very nicely to tweaking, the RAW files look pretty damn good viewed 1:1 in LR with no more than its default import settings.  (I've also seen a bit of shutter shock on a couple of photos where I wasn't paying attention and the camera selected the shutter speeds where that happens (1/100-1/125 or so).)  It perhaps goes without saying that it's considerably better than the 28-70mm kit zoom.

I suppose it would be nice if it had IS (or OS or whatever Sony calls it), though I've not had a problem resulting from its absence so far (and it wouldn't help the shutter shock anyway, would it?), but given how well it does I'm disinclined to think it's overpriced for what it is.  (Then again, I was able to take advantage of the current promotion and bought it with the camera for $200 off....)

I also suspect that, as a practical matter, it's easy to exaggerate how good this lens is.  Yes, this lens/body combination captures remarkable detail etc., remarkably well - but I've also obtained excellent results from several of the Canon lenses I've tried on the camera too, including such bargains as the 40mm pancake and 85mm 1.8 (though this isn't as good at 1.8 as the new Sony is).  In many situations, especially if you're not viewing the images 1:1 or making huge prints, there may not be much of a difference in image quality (though of course you'll get much faster focusing from the Sony lens). 

Anyway, there seems a pretty good chance you'll be pleased with it - I hope so!

Reviews / Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« on: February 22, 2014, 05:06:35 PM »
Only in CR or similar forums did I ever come across a few people talking about what kind of noise is there in some dark/unimportant area of the image or some posterization in the OOF area etc ... unfortunately, now I've begun to look for those issues, instead of concentrating on the most important aspect of the image i.e. subject matter, the message the images conveys, composition etc :-[
I need to get back to what's important to me in an image.

Easy for you to say, now that you have a Sony A7.... :P

Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: February 22, 2014, 04:47:38 PM »
1. If you really want to avoid GAS, steer clear of review/chat sites that blow subtle differences among bits of equipment out of all proportion to the difference, if any, they're likely to make to the photos you make with them.

2. On a related note - which could, of course, cut both ways - one way of dealing with GAS is (assuming this is an option where you live) to rent the latest expensive toy that everyone is getting excited about.  This will satisfy your curiosity, which may be enough - you could easily discover, as I sometimes do, that your reaction is indifference: yes, it's good, but the results aren't appreciably better than what I'm getting now.  And, by the time you send it back the initial urge may have passed anyway - yes, this is surely best 35mm 1.4 lens ever, but, frankly, I don't really like how the world looks at 35mm....

3. There's nothing wrong with GAS if you can readily afford it. And it needn't be that expensive.  For instance, if you bought a digital body that works well with old manual lenses (i.e., a mirrorless body of some sort - a second-hand m43 with IBIS is a good idea) you could acquire many new lenses to play with that are really cheap and a pleasure to play around with, in part because they're made so well, in part because they can be really good.  And while doing all of that you may be distracted from wanting to buy $2000 lenses - especially once you get used to how inexpensive lenses can be....

4. And on a note related to *that*, if you're disciplined and don't keep everything you buy, it's worth remembering that, unlike camera bodies, good lenses don't depreciate much: you won't lose much if you sell an L lens you bought new, and if you bought it second hand in the first place you may even sell it for more than you paid for it.  (When I ditched all my Pentax equipment on switching to Canon, the only notable loss was on the camera body; I sold several lenses for more than I paid for them, and they were far from L quality.)

5. You need more lenses.

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