February 27, 2015, 02:36:29 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 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 53
Photography Technique / Re: Yet another crop vs full frame thread
« on: December 08, 2014, 04:33:54 PM »
Sorry to say that it's not done by just taking two fast shots and compare.

Well, that`s exactly what you do when you take bird photos. You don`t have time for pixel-peeping, all you have to do is to take the shot.
The question was a simple one: which photo has more detail?
To me the answer is obvious, no matter the DOF or the aperture. In this particular situation the crop sensor camera provides more detail. Period!

Yes, but it's not clear why - as others have noted, the 5DIII image looks worse than it should, for whatever reason.  And if you're going to make such a comparison, you should crop the FF image so that it matches the APS-C one.  Your response to Maximilian misses the point - to test whether FF cropped or APS-C uncropped is better, taking casual photos isn't the way to do it; you make a careful comparison in circumstances that allow it and then apply the results in the field.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Co-worker dumps $5k on Nikon
« on: December 08, 2014, 09:35:05 AM »
Who talks about not knowing anyone who buys Nikon?  Aren't most people who read this forum aware that Canon & Nikon dominate the non-smartphone camera market by a wide margin?  Don't we all see Nikon cameras being used, even if not quite as many as Canon?  Either way, the buying habits of one person don't do anything except disprove an assertion that no-one has made and has no bearing at all on whether Nikon "is always making a loss" or how well Nikon cameras rate at amazon.  The apt response is "so what?" - just as it would be if I mentioned that I started with Nikon, switched to Pentax, and then switched to Canon, which I've kept but supplemented with Olympus & Sony.

EOS Bodies / Re: Focus problems with the Canon 7DII?
« on: December 07, 2014, 09:16:39 PM »

I have to admit I was a bit disappointed in the crop image quality after a decade of full frame. I don't have any trouble telling 5D2/3 files from 7D2 at 100% in lightroom. I suppose I knew that would be the case but the reality is still  a bit disappointing. It seems like Canon should be a little further along with the IQ by now. But, I'm getting shots that I just couldn't get with the 5D3 and my lenses so "it is what it is". It is an absolute hoot to shoot with but IQ is not up to full frame specs. Apparently the laws of physics are alive and well.

As you suggest, it's not surprising (you can see the same thing if you do comparisons with the relevant tool at thedigitalpicture.com), and it's not a reflection of Canon's IQ backwardness that it's FF sensors make better images than its APS-C - the same lens tends to make slightly better images on a FF sensor than on a crop sensor, regardless of camera brand; I see it on my Canon FF vs APS-C bodies (I don't have a 7DII, but at most I would expect it to narrow the difference), and also my Sony a7r vs a6000.  Pixel peeping is more fun with FF sensors.... 

Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 06, 2014, 10:53:41 PM »
The A7s and r?  They're just over grown compacts with large sensors.  They should cost under $1k and be sold in the checkout line at Walmart.

I hope writing that made you feel better.

Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 06, 2014, 10:49:15 PM »

BTW, Sony fans, IBIS may be great for many commonly used focal length lenses, but it is severely challenged when using supertelephoto lenses.

Perhaps, but even if IBIS is less effective for longer lenses, it will surely be better than nothing (it will be nice to get some sort of stabilization for my Canon 135L).  And if the lens has IS you can decide to use that instead, just as you can now when attaching Panasonic lenses to Olympus bodies (apparently Sony's IBIS works in conjunction with, rather than as an alternative to, the IS in Sony lenses). 

Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 03, 2014, 01:52:53 PM »

....  7d2 ... is not a revolution of technology, so its hardly a gme changer.

But a7 is.
First ff mirrorles. Yep i know about leica, but its too exotic and pricey
A7r offers really nice sensor in a compact body
And a7s low light performance is incredible. In a light and small package.
A7ii first ff ibis.
And they can easily use canon lenses with af. You can call it a first step to universal lens mount if you want.

Im not a sonynfanboy, just a general phot shooter and a7 looks very promising to me

Disputing the meaning of "game changer" seems pointless to me (and regardless of whether it qualifies, I have no doubt the 7DII is excellent for what it is), but regardless of that I'm very partial to the Sony a7 line myself - I've owned an a7r for almost a year, was impressed by the a7s I recently rented, and am tempted by the a7II.  However, to say that "they can easily use canon lenses with af" is highly misleading.  On these bodies AF doesn't work at all with some Canon lenses (and may not work at all for most third party Canon-mount lenses), and when it does, while accurate (no AFMA required), it's slow - so slow that it's useless on anything that isn't essentially motionless.  Much of the time mf is faster (though mf just works better with lenses designed for mf rather than af). 

So far, these cute little Sonys seem to me to serve a fairly specific range of people - those prefer small camera bodies, prefer mirrorless, don't need long/fast lenses and aren't much interested in sport/BIF photography and/or prefer using old (or indeed, any) manual focus lenses.  I have no idea how big that range is (it does include me...), but it may be rather small, esp. the mf lens subcategory.

As for Canon ripping us off (as someone put it) by putting IS in lenses only, just how much cheaper would the already cheap 10-18mm lens be without it?  Does anyone know what proportion of the price of the 24/28/35 IS primes is attributable to IS?  I wish every Canon EF/EF-S lens had it....

Lenses / Re: Lens Fungus - Advice Needed
« on: December 03, 2014, 10:58:01 AM »
Since the fungus doesn't have any effect on the images you make with the lens, and you really want to be rid of it, you could try selling it if you explain the situation and provide a suitable photo recently taken with it.  You probably won't get much for it, of course. But why not just keep on using the lens until it affects your images (presumably you should keep it stored separately from your other lenses)?  Look at it this way: it's a relatively inexpensive lens which has evidently served you well for several years; so you've probably gotten your money's worth out of it, figuratively if not literally.  I would rather buy a used one (or a used L) than spend any more getting it cleaned.

Lenses / Re: What is your favorite lens/camera combo in your camerabag?
« on: December 02, 2014, 04:17:54 PM »
It used to be 6D or 5DIII + 70-300L or 70-200 f4 IS L + something shorter and faster, but during the past year I've mainly been using mirrorless cameras and find myself less interested in reach than before and increasingly fond of manual focusing; the resulting loss of weight/bulk has made the process more enjoyable for me.  When I'm wandering around town I'll typically just take a Sony a7r or a6000 + one or two lenses, usually old mf but sometimes Canon EF.  During a recent trip each time I went out I had a small bag that contained Sony a7r + Olympus 24mm 2.8 + Sony/Zeiss 35mm + Pentax Super-Tak 50 1.4 or Nikon 55mm macro + Nikon 100mm E series, and sometimes just the camera + 50mm.  Light, compact, not obtrusive, and technically very satisfying.  (If Canon were to conjure up a similar camera body, so much the better....)     

Reviews / Re: www.photozone.de reviewed EF-S 24/2.8 STM
« on: November 28, 2014, 07:25:26 PM »

A 24/2.8 with a large enough image circle for full frame would be no more compact than the 24/2.8 IS. Geometry is driven more by angle of view than absolute focal length - study the cross sections of other 24mm lenses for crop and full frame lenses.

My Olympus/Zuiko 24mm 2.8 is quite a bit more compact than the 24mm IS, and not much thicker than my Canon 40mm pancake.  Is that because it's MF only?

(It's nice, by the way, to see that despite the complaints we often read about Canon pricing, this new Canon EF-S pancake, like the recent 10-18mm, is a remarkable bargain.)


Pentax users are often quite avid about their equipment and I can often see why from the results I've obtained with my gear. (Tho I'm wondering about the results I'd get using a Sony A72 with K-mount adapter instead)

Rather nice, I expect - I haven't a clue how Pentax AF lenses (if that's what you have) work via adapters (can you change apertures?), but I love the images I get from my elderly Pentax/Super-Tak lenses on my A7r; it doesn't hurt that they're superbly made, a pleasure to look at and handle and inexpensive to boot.  With IBIS, so much the better. 

Street & City / Re: Famous icons in your city
« on: November 23, 2014, 10:26:02 AM »
Independence Hall, Philadelphia

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.  ;)

Right, though in this particular case the addition of OM-D style IBIS is, as far as I'm concerned, much more than a minor tweak of the sort that tends to distinguish camera lines that get regular updates; I seldom use anything but primes on my mirrorless Sonys and, aside from two Canon primes, none of the ones I own has IS.  As others have said, it's helpful to have stabilization as good as Olympus's best for whatever lens you attach (presumably, as with Olympus, if you attach a lens with IS you choose which version of stabilization you want to disable the other; you don't use both together).  I'll certainly buy one.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Would you get Zeiss 135 f2?
« on: November 19, 2014, 11:16:36 AM »
It's one thing to "not mind" manually focusing, another to have no choice but to manually focus and, what's more, to do so on a camera body that doesn't make it easy to do so (I really like, and perhaps even prefer, manually focusing, but only on mirrorless bodies, which make it easy via in-viewfinder magnification & focus-peaking).  I would suggest you rent the Zeiss as well as the Canon 135mm L and see which you prefer using - even if it were true that the Zeiss is, under ideal conditions, a better lens, you might get better results from the Canon because of its autofocus (esp. wide open), and save money in the process.... 


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?!

Focus peaking is extremely useful, though in my experience it's best used in combination with magnification (you get 10x and 15x magnification in the EVF), though this can vary with how close the subject is to you and how shallow the depth of focus is. It's not as fast as AF, of course, but sometimes the difference in speed, if you do AF with single point and need to move the focus point around a lot, is less than you might fear.  Done right, accuracy is fantastic, and of course it beats AF most of the time if you're dealing with tricky conditions (shooting a subject through branches etc.).  Manual focusing can never have been easier.

As for telephoto lenses on A7x bodies, you may find this interesting/useful - he used an A7 rather than an A7r, but I wouldn't be surprised if the A7r results were at least as good:


Presumably there are similar reviews out there using an A7r.  I've been very pleased with the results I get from my 70-300L on my A7r (I can't remember whether AF works with this lens - I use MF with it exclusively), though I've yet to meet an AF lens which is as nice to focus manually as a MF lens (mainly because the latter usually have a longer throw, making it easy to effect very small changes in focus).

Lenses / Re: Selling 200-400
« on: November 03, 2014, 03:02:38 PM »
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. :(

You may find this encouraging:


Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 53