Messages

301

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Less talking and more shooting

« on: June 11, 2012, 08:48:47 PM »

Without wanting to get flamed, I just want to say that I see too much discussions here about what lens, what camera, what gear etc here on the forum. Its nice talking about the gear but to be honest, if we are talking too much then it means we are not shooting.

The bodies and lenses are there to be used on the field. I just got back from a 6 weeks backpacking to SE Asia. Took all the gear I built up over the past few years, that is, my 5DII, 16-35 II L, 24-70 L, 50 1.4 and 70-200 IS. I used to talk a lot about my gear, thinking what to use to shoot a particular afternoon stroll. But when I was out there, I just had my camera and 1 or 2 lenses with me for the day. The lenses got dirty, camera survived a typhoon, and at the end of the day that is what it is all about. The gear is there to be used on the field, out there. And I shot what ever I saw with what ever gear/lens I had with me at the time. Forget about deciding whether you need the 50 1.4/1.2/1.8 or 24-70 with or without IS, when you are out there, that is the least thing you think about. You just shoot. And you shoot with what ever equipment you have with you. And yes the lenses will get dirty, dust will get inside, UV filters might crack, but afterall that is what shooting is all about. I also had my compact digi cam in my pocket. I got some great shots without my 5DII. You dont need the latest lens with a flat MTF chart with IS and the 5DIII, its not all about the equipment.

So if you find yourself talking about a dust speck on the inside of your 50mm you bought 2nd hand from ebay and thinking if you need a 1.2 or what case/bag you might need just for that one time afternoon garden party next week, I really think you are talking too much, and not shooting enough. So go out there and shoot. Get your hands dirty, get your gear dirty and only then will you get some great photos.

You seem to be bursting with enthusiasm after doing lots of shooting. That's nice.

302

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Rebel T4i vs 5D Mark III - $850 vs $3499 - Is it really worth 4 times the price?

« on: June 11, 2012, 08:34:51 PM »

I've been shooting with a Rebel XTi for as many years as it's been out now and have been quite happy with it. I've somewhat outgrown it however and have been itching to dive into full-frame for some time. I withheld grabbing a 5D Mark II in anticipation of the Mark III. Now the Mark III is here. It looks like a wonderful camera- definitely an upgrade from the Mark II. But I'm still finding it hard to get past the sticker shock of $3500.

I know the Mark III is a class ahead of the Rebel line, but I'm curious as to just how much. Is it really 4 times better than the Rebel? Is there a huge difference in IQ between L-glass on a Mark III and L-glass on a 4Ti? What are the main, must-have features that would make the Mark III outclass the 4Ti? I know it comes down to what your specific camera needs are, but I'd really like to hear some ideas. Thanks!

The 5D II has considerably less sticker shock. You mention that the 5D III is definitely an upgrade from the 5D III, should we infer from this that there is something troubling you about the 5D II's IQ?

303

Lenses / Re: sigma 50mm f1.4

« on: June 06, 2012, 12:01:47 AM »

I've got the new version.  Awesome lens.  Really good bang for the buck.

The old lens has a crinkled textured finish.

The new version has a smooth finish.

i cant seem to find any with the smooth finish only crincle finish even on B &H

There isn't a smooth-finish version on Sigma's website, either.

Soze, are you definitely referring to the 50mm f1.4? Can you post a picture of it?

I hate Sigma's crinkle finish. If they've got rid of it on this lens, I'll buy one.

304

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & 3D Prediction from Japan

« on: June 04, 2012, 09:22:26 PM »

Interesting rumour. It's hard to believe that canon will come out with a 70d before a 7dmk2 as the 7d is older than the 60d...

Thats the nature of consumer v pro level cameras. The Ti cameras get updated yearly. The xxD cameras get updated about every 2 years. Anything in the xD level usually takes more like 3 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Canon_DSLR_cameras

Also, if releasing a new 7D at $2000+ has the same effect as the 5DIII did on the 5DII (lowering the price 20%), than nobody would buy a 60D. They'd end up with the 7D costing the same as a 60D, and nobody in their right mind would turn down AFMA, 8fps v 5fps, weather sealing, etc for a swivel screen. Also, the T4i is getting the 60D's autofocus, so again, fewer reasons to buy the 60D. It's why it will probably get upgraded first.

I can only speak for the UK market but since the 5DIII's launch (at £2,999, about $4,615), prices for the 5DII here have been edging up. We certainly haven't seen any price drop since March, let alone a 20% drop.

305

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Isn't a new standard tripod mount long overdue?

« on: June 04, 2012, 08:37:26 PM »

Here's a suggested design I knocked together in 10 minutes. The camera base plate and example lens plate include provision of 1/4 inch screw fitting for existing tripod heads.

306

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Isn't a new standard tripod mount long overdue?

« on: June 01, 2012, 09:22:03 PM »

I certainly hope that there is no Canon Propritary QR plate.  I can purchase a nice Arca Swiss compatible QR plate for my lenses that lets them balance perfectly for $25.  I have several.
 
No need to pay Canon $500 to upgrade lenses, and another $200 to upgrade each of my tripod heads. 
 
Thats what not to like.

You'll see that I didn't suggest a Canon proprietary QR plate but rather a new standard attachment across all manufacturers. QR plates only exist because of the stupid standard tripod mount. Introduce a quick-mounting bayonet-style fitting and throw your QR plates away. Or, incorporate a bayonet mount with a quarter inch thread in the middle for backwards (in all senses) compatibility.

Do you still watch VHS videos?

307

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Isn't a new standard tripod mount long overdue?

« on: June 01, 2012, 02:40:49 PM »

If there is one mechanical feature of a camera that annoys me more than any other, it's the tripod mount. The quarter-inch screwthread has been with us far too long. It's too fiddly, not secure enough and without specially designed quick release plates, the camera is at risk of rotating (drooping) when in portrait orientation.

It can't be beyond the wit of camera and tripod makers to get together to agree a new, better and simpler industry standard. I'm thinking of some kind of bayonet mount which would slide and lock the camera to a compatible tripod head or quick-release plate. It would prevent the camera drooping when in portrait orientation, eliminate reliance on screw tightness (and associated worries of over- or under-tightening) and eliminate any need for screwdrivers, coins or scraped knuckles. Properly designed, it could allow the attachment point to be as long as required by the feet of tripod collars. It could even replace quick release systems and plates altogether. Most good tripod heads could be easily updated with a new top plate.

What's not to like?

308

Lenses / Re: Would Canon produce new 28/1.8?

« on: June 01, 2012, 10:08:28 AM »

The announcement of the 24mm and 28mm f/2.8 IS lenses makes me wonder whether we'll ever see another affordable, properly fast wide-angle prime from Canon. I have a 28mm f/1.8 and for me, it's a great restaurant / bar / party lens. An optical upgrade would be nice but I can't see it happening without a big price jump, and then you'd be thinking about the 24mm L or 35mm L.

309

Lenses / Re: Most requested lenses for replacement?

« on: June 01, 2012, 09:53:52 AM »

#2 85/1.8 IS - Make it 1.8 IS with faster AF

How much faster could its AF be??

I agree with EOBeav that a 135mm with IS could make it too expensive to remain popular. A large part of the 135's appeal is its price. If it went to $2,000+, it might not have a viable market.

This is even truer of the 200mm f/2.8. If that lens received IS and a $1,500+ price tag, only prime-obsessives would buy it. If ever there were a certain candidate for a lens not being replaced, this is it, IMHO.

310

Lenses / Re: Most requested lenses for replacement?

« on: May 29, 2012, 10:09:45 PM »

I keep hearing that the 17-40 is less sharp than the 15-85 - but on a aps-C you will find it sharper, particularly at f5.6 or slower.

Why do you keep repeating that long after I disproved it in my original post? (Hint: follow the link I provided.)

Comparing the EF-S 15-85mm with the EF 17-40mm is spurious; it only shows that the EF 17-40mm isn't optimised for a crop-frame camera. Its field of view on FF is more or less equal to the EF-S 10-22mm on a crop frame. Try TDP's comparison of these two lenses at 17mm and you'll find the 17-40mm fractionally sharper.

15-85mm on crop-frame is a simpler optical design than 17-40mm on full frame so it should be no big surprise that the 15-85mm is sharper on a crop-frame. On full frame, the 17-40mm is much better than the 15-85mm, not least because it doesn't smash the mirror to pieces. 

311

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 90mm macro or Sigma 150 OS?

« on: May 28, 2012, 08:16:41 AM »

I went through a similar lens selection process recently. At the time, I had a 70-200mm f/4 IS and I wanted a macro lens. I liked the idea of the Sigma 150mm OS because it would give me a faster tele option to complement my zoom. In the end, I decided against this multi-tasking route and instead replaced my 70-200mm f/4 IS with the f/2.8 version and got the Canon 100mm f/2.8 to use solely as a macro.

I made this choice because I didn't like the idea of lugging around the Sigma (1,150kg) along with my f/4 zoom, just to give me a faster option. As it is, I can leave the Canon macro at home and cover my fast tele needs with just one lens. Getting the 70-200mm 2.8 IS also allowed me to get the cheaper non-IS macro since I invariably shoot macro with a tripod.

All that said, the Sigma 150mm OS is an excellent lens by all accounts so if it fits in with your needs, go for it. I suspect the new Sigma 180mm OS will be way more expensive.

312

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D3200 is likely to be the real market threat

« on: May 23, 2012, 10:24:21 PM »

Why should I be overpaying - so that Canon can make more money off me???

Correct. Welcome to capitalism.

How is that a good deal for me, the buyer?

It isn't, nor is it intended to be. Welcome to capitalism.

I didn't buy my 5D2 until it was available for about 60% of its original suggested retail price. I will do the same with the 5D4 (the 5D3 not being a worthwhile upgrade for me). Welcome to consumer power. 

313

Lenses / Re: Your dream 50mm f/14

« on: May 16, 2012, 01:15:03 PM »

Round diaphragm blades.
Ring USM.
That's it.

Above all, for God's sake don't make it an L.

314

EOS Bodies / Re: For those interested in 7D2

« on: May 16, 2012, 12:36:11 PM »

I haven't seen any evidence from Canon that they've made any great strides in sensor noise performance recently so I'm not expecting any big leaps in this aspect from 7D to 7DII. Since the 7D doesn't have any other significant weaknesses, it seems very good value to me. I will probably buy one next month with a reasonable expectation that the 7DII's announcement won't leave me wishing I had waited.

315

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: A former Nikon user's thoughts on his first 24 hours with the 5D Mark III

« on: May 13, 2012, 02:24:59 AM »

If anyone queries the noise on the pole dancer's legs, just tell them it's cellulite.