October 26, 2014, 02:14:44 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 - sdsr

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 47
EOS-M / Re: How Much Would You Pay...
« on: July 15, 2014, 03:04:04 PM »
For $1.5K you can buy a Sony A7, which will give you much the same high ISO performance you're asking for (you're not going to get it via current technology on APS-C).  For <$600 you can buy a Sony a6000, which may be as good as the 70D in terms of your AF requirements (I don't know first hand as I don't shoot fast moving subjects and have never used a 70D, but reviewers seem impressed by the a6000's AF) and has better image quality than an M (good though that is).  As far as APS-C and FF mirrorless bodies are concerned, those (and the other two A7 bodies) are what Canon would need to match or surpass (IBIS would be nice) as far as I'm concerned.  If Canon did such a thing - I guess it's not impossible - I would pay at least those prices; but I wouldn't pay a penny if it/they didn't/don't have a built-in EVF.

Two questions:

What can Canon put into a T6i to make it interesting?

What can another brand put into theirs to make Canon envious?

At the moment I can't think of anything to answer either of those questions.  Anyone?


Making it interesting to those who read this forum and making it something that consumers are going to want to buy are probably rather different things.  I have no clue about the latter.  To interest me it would have to be something like the Sony a6000 but with IBIS added, and that surely won't happen.  As for Canon being envious, they may be noticing the slight uptick in mirrorless sales in recent months, but otherwise they seem to be doing rather well as it is (even if some might think they don't deserve to).

Canon General / Re: What's Would You Keep? [The anti-G.A.S. thread]
« on: July 11, 2014, 04:01:23 PM »
As you say, old MF lenses provide a cheap, engaging adventure, often with superb results too.

I like the way you put it, and it's so true. I picked up a Sigma FDn 70-210mm 3.5-4.5 APO the other day that gives stunning results on my NEX, both with a Metabones Speed Booster and without. It's strange to say, and unexpected for a Sigma, but optically that lens is in 'L' territory. Maybe that's why it (deservedly) carries a red stripe.

Thanks for the tip!  So far my dabbling in old MF lenses has been limited to primes, so that might be fun to try.

Canon General / Re: Seeing Rebels....
« on: July 11, 2014, 03:47:47 PM »

Tourists are on holiday, not a photography shoot. Let them enjoy their holidays and their snapshots. Life is complicated enough as it is.

Yes, of course; to that extent you and acutancephotography are right - A-mode is just fine (but then if snapshots are the criterion, one has to wonder why they're using a dslr of any sort in the first place...).  What amuses/interests me is the implicit assumption that tourist photography is just about replicating postcards and providing photos of husbands/wives posing awkwardly in front of monuments - or is that simply what the term has come to mean (just as "soccer mom" has somehow come, rather insultingly, in the US to be the archetype of a certain sort of clueless/lazy/uninterested photographer)?  Maybe that's Dylan777's point.

Regardless of that, is it really still the case that in A mode you can't select focus points? That would drive me nuts.  (The only camera I have with me is a Sony a6000, but as the lens attached to it is an elderly Pentax-M I can't use the camera in either of its two "intelligent auto" modes to find out first-hand.)


I know I want 4.0 for the weight savings, and non-IS version is not an option. Is the 2.8 really that much better if I don't need 2.8 aperture?

As everyone else has been saying, no, not much better (probably not better at all unless you do side-by-side comparisons at 100%), unless you need the extra speed.  For that matter, one could say much the same thing of the 70-300L (where the extra focal length makes up for differences in aperture with regard to depth of focus - plus, it has very smooth bokeh).

EOS-M / Re: Next official EF-M Lens
« on: July 11, 2014, 02:45:40 PM »

Personally, I would love a vastly improved/full frame version of the M but not sure if Canon will have something substantial out before the competition.

I would love that too, but it's beyond any doubt that the competition, such as it is, is already way ahead of them (esp Sony A7/a7r/A7s & A6000, or, if you don't mind the smaller sensors, the better M43 cameras)!

Canon General / Re: What's Would You Keep? [The anti-G.A.S. thread]
« on: July 11, 2014, 02:41:12 PM »
I like my GAS - it pushes creativity too; especially when it comes to old MF lenses that I adapt to my NEX body. In fact that part of my GAS is quite easy to afford.... and thankfully it keeps me from buying more L lenses.

I quite agree.  I'm lucky enough not to be a professional photographer and thus to the extent I have "needs" and "essentials" they're merely want-driven and thus arguably not really needs at all.  As you say, old MF lenses provide a cheap, engaging adventure, often with superb results too.

If I hadn't started using mirrorless cameras 18 months ago, it would have been rather easy:

6D or 5DIII w 16-35mm f4 + 70-300L + 100mm L + a fast 50mm (Sigma Art, I guess).

That said, if stayed with dslrs and really had to cut back, I could do quite well with merely:

SL1 + Canon 10-18 + the latest Sigma 18-250 macro - a surprisingly good combination that together costs less than just about any L lens by itself

But the more I use mirrorless bodies the more dslrs feel obsolete to me (I was using my 5DIII outside for the first time in ages yesterday and, aside from being far less useful, it felt like so much pointless ballast).  But I'll keep one, if only so I can easily use my 70-300L.

Otherwise, until Canon comes up with a decent mirrorless camera I would pick:

Sony A7r w Sony/Zeiss 55 1.8 (much of the time I could probably stop right there) + a wide zoom (the impending Sony perhaps, or the Canon 16-35 f4, so I can use the lens on the 6D/5DIII) + Canon 100L + a few favorite cheap vintage fast primes (which oddly seem far less obsolete to me than dslrs)

or even, if I wanted to minimize weight/bulk

Olympus OM-D w a few Olympus & MF fast primes + Panasonic 100-300

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's D800E 30% sharper than D800
« on: July 10, 2014, 05:24:38 PM »

Consider that across the Internet, criticism of DxO typically only comes from people that own Canon products. That piece of data speaks volumes about how DxO results are absorbed, don't you think?

I'm not sure what "typically only" means (do you mean "usually" or "most of the criticism I've seen" or "most of the criticism I've noticed"?) but I often see criticism of DxO on forums (esp. m43), including at DxO itself.  Perhaps that "piece of data" speaks volumes too.


I think we have a winner. This should be considered as the "BEST" reply on CR in 2014.....LOL ;D

Yes, no contest. 

I wonder if Jglaser writes similar things when he changes brands of laundry detergent.

Lenses / Re: Video Review: Canon EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« on: July 08, 2014, 11:41:48 AM »
In what ways do you think it's not as good as the 10-22, aside from the obvious differences in focal length and max. aperture?  (I'm impressed by the 10-18 but have never used the 10-22.)

Canon General / Re: Seeing Rebels....
« on: July 08, 2014, 09:11:40 AM »
My office is on Independence Mall in Philadelphia, and I spend a fair amount of time in NY, so I see loads of tourists and yes, among dslr users Canons seem to dominate, with Nikon a close second.   Entry level bodies + kit lens dominate, but I'm sometimes surprised by the number of higher-end bodies w L lenses attached (I've even seen one or two tourists with two 1Dxs + big white zooms dangling from their necks - hard to imagine enjoying that experience, esp. in a steamy mid-Atlantic summer).  I tend to keep a look-out for other brands, but I doubt many will be surprised if I say that I don't often see M43, Fuji X and Sony A7/A7r; finding a fellow A7r or OM-D user is so rare I'm almost tempted to overcome my anglo reserve and go and talk to them....  (If you want to get funny/inquisitive looks, try using a mirrorless body of some sort with an old manual lens attached, as I often do.)

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Anyone own both Canon and Nikon
« on: July 08, 2014, 08:57:04 AM »
Like others, I tried a Nikon D800e and was driven nuts by the ergonomics/menu system.  Of course, one can get used to that, but I might be inclined to suggest a rather different solution if you don't need AF: get a Sony A7r instead.  Aside from costing much less than the D810, it can be used with all your Canon lenses as well as the Nikon 14-24 (does anyone suggest that the Nikon 24-70 is as good as, let alone better than, the Canon 24-70II?).   Some who have used both the Sony A7r and the D800e report that the Sony has even better image quality, though of course there's no way of knowing yet how it compares with the D810.  Either way, I think those who warn about how difficult it is to obtain very high image quality with these 36mp sensors overstate their case - you can get great results hand-held, and while the very best lenses may be necessary for ultimate performance, you can get impressive results with other lenses too (I recently took a series of photos with an old Pentax Super-Takumar 50mm 1.4 lens on my A7r - very pleasing results).

EOS Bodies / Re: Which is better for high ISO, 6D or 5D Mk III?
« on: July 08, 2014, 08:33:44 AM »
I have both.  I haven't ever done any side-by-side comparisons, but my impression is that the 6D is probably slightly better overall, but probably not noticeably so unless you're specifically looking for/at noise, and that the 6D is noticeably better (esp. less banding) if you try to lighten shadows.  So I wouldn't recommend that you add a 5DIII for high ISO purposes.  It's possible, of course, that the 5DIII will provide better AF performance, thereby resulting in better image quality for *that* reason, but - perhaps because I don't photograph the sorts of things where this would matter - I've not noticed that, at least with still objects, aside from the obvious advantage of having more focus points to choose from.

EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 07, 2014, 08:57:29 PM »
If it were mirrorless w EVF & IBIS, both at least as good as Olympus OMDs', and had image quality that's significantly better than an SL1's, I might be interested (not excited, though, barring some technological revolution that makes it as good as FF for image quality).  Chances of any such combination showing up strike as being as close to zero as makes no difference, however, so for APS-C purposes I'll stick with my SL1 & Sony a6000 for a while longer.  I'm afraid my reaction to dslr announcements is "oh, not again"....

(If I only shot APS-C, regularly photographed herons-catching-fish, and didn't have FF my response might be a bit different, I suppose.)

EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs Sony A7s vs GH4
« on: July 02, 2014, 04:15:59 PM »

- The Metabones Adapter, (not the speed booster) AF pretty much did not work, at all. I might have a bad copy. I hear it is slower, but is still supposed to work, but I had no such success with it.

AF on that adapter only works with a rather small number of lenses.  A list is posted on their website (though I've found that one or two work that aren't on that list including 28mm IS and, weirdly, the new 10-18mm EF-S); maybe the lenses you used aren't included? 

(But even if the AF doesn't work, you should still get EXIF data and in-camera aperture control, which for me is the main use of that adapter because Sony's mirrorless bodies - like most these days - make MF relatively easy.) 

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 47