February 27, 2015, 08:24:58 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 - docsmith

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 24
16
EOS Bodies / Re: Where is the EOS 5D Mark IV? [CR2]
« on: January 30, 2015, 03:07:59 PM »
They are saying all the words I want to hear.  That could be a worthy successor to the 5DIII.  Now, they just have to make it so. 

24-28 MP
Cleaner low ISO noise
Whatever benefit they can get out of higher ISO
8 fps
etc....

17
Lenses / Re: Canon 70-200 ii Focus Breathing Numbers
« on: January 29, 2015, 02:38:26 PM »
Interesting video.  Also, highlights some of the issues with various "reviewers"

18
EOS Bodies / Re: A Sony & Canon Sensor Partnership Mentioned Again [CR1]
« on: January 28, 2015, 10:00:16 AM »
Whatever gives us the best sensor.

BTW, I was looking over at this site and was intrigued that even for Nikon, the D4 and D4S sensors were not from Sony.  The site has them listed as Nikon, but I wonder if it is someone else.

http://www.senscore.org/

19
More charts that make the lens appear more favorable:

http://www.lemondedelaphoto.com/TEST-Sigma-150-600-mm-f-5-6-3-DG,10403.html

Compared to the Tamron:
http://www.lemondedelaphoto.com/Tamron-SP-150-600-mm-f-5-6-3-VC,9304.html

Still waiting for TDP ISO 12233 test results.  I get a kick out of the numbers and they sometimes illustrate something I can not distinguish on the ISO 12233 results....but, at the end of the day, TDP chart results correlate best with my real world experiences.


20
Thanks for the link.  Looks like the 150-600S is handily beating the Tamron at 150 mm and 300 mm.  Too bad I think most people, especially considering the size and weight, will want this lens for 600 mm.  Thus, if this result holds true with other reviews, I would favor the 100-400 II or 70-300 for 150-300 mm range as they have distinct size and weight advantages.  And the advantage over the Tamron @ 600 mm is limited with the Tamron being half as expensive and lighter.

I'm interested to see what other reviews, such as TDP, show, but the 150-600S continues to be "Highly Recommended" (Camera Labs, Ephotozine, a bunch of others), but in the last year some very tough competition has entered this range.

21
Lenses / Re: Canon EF Lens Technology Video
« on: January 14, 2015, 04:20:02 PM »
was awesome..

just me or does he sound like Kai in serious mode?

It sounds like the guy that stole Kai's lunch and made him such a Nikon fanboy ;)

22
EOS-M / Re: Why do I keep my Eos M?
« on: January 09, 2015, 01:01:52 PM »
Same set up, 5DIII is my primary camera and I bought the EOS-M a couple years ago.

I use it when I want a small and light camera, when I want a "second body" (say, when shooting birds, have it for the occasional wide-angle shot), or when I do not want to stand out as "a photographer."  I also think I have found another use for it.  I think I will get an EWA-Marine housing, a filter adapter and use it for underwater photography.  I could also use my 5DIII, but I feel better taking something I spent $300 on underwater.

I've been impressed by the IQ.  It could be better and I honestly hope that Canon releases a very good M3.

But, I do use my 5DIII >95% of the time. 

23
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III Replacement Talk [CR2]
« on: January 09, 2015, 06:42:39 AM »
Works for me.  A true replacement for the 5DIII (which I would consider) with similar price and image file size and then the "3D" but called the 5Ds that essentially are answers to the D800.  I would expect the 5Ds to be lower production higher priced cameras compared to the 5DIV.

24
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 150-600 sports testing
« on: January 02, 2015, 02:47:42 PM »
Thanks for the offer Sanj.

I also have the 150-600S (and shot with the 5DIII).  I have been using it for a month.  Once you get used to the weight (about 2-3 times out shooting with it), I have become more and more impressed with it as a lens.

But I do wonder about IQ and AF speed with the 1.4x TC.  I currently only have the 2x III.  I am considering getting either Canon's or Sigma's 1.4xTC if I start hearing reports that the IQ and AF are good.  Thus far, I have heard one such report.  So, I would love to hear your opinion.

Thanks

25
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: December 31, 2014, 11:08:23 AM »
If you can afford it, get both.

The thought has crossed my mind more than once.  ;)

I am also waiting on more reviews of the 400 DO II.  So far all we have is Roger's quick test, but, at least the resolution, looks exceptional. 

But, for now, the 150-600S will suffice.  I can fit it in my backpack, but am using a Pelican Storm iM2500 with it when traveling.  But it is great that the 100-400II seems to be such an exceptional lens.

26
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: December 31, 2014, 07:09:06 AM »
Mr. Carnathan certainly loves Canon!

Too bad this lens is sharpest at the wide end.  I have a 70-200/2.8 II that fills that need.  I was hoping for very sharp at 400mm.  The new Sigma is looking better and better.

John

Just about everyone who has reviewed the Sigma has complained that it is too heavy for hand-held use - not only is it heavy but the heaviest part, the front lens elements, protrude out very far unbalancing an already heavy lens. The beauty of the Tamron 150-600mm and now even more so the 100-400 II is their portability combined with pretty good IQ.
I wouldn't say they complained that it is too heavy for hand-held use.  Actually, they used it hand held and certainly noted its weight.  I am one of the few with the 150-600S and have only used it hand held.  Sure it is heavy, but I've gotten used to it.  It is a heckuva lens.  Believe me, I am tempted by the 100-400II because of its size and MFD, but so far I am sticking with the 150-600S. 

Bryan's reviews are almost always reflective of my own experiences.  If he loves the lens, I have little doubt I would too.  My only issue is that I really wanted more reach than 400 mm.  So, I am watching the IQ and the AF performance of the 100-400II +1.4TC.  But all that time, I am shooting and liking the 150-600S more and more.

27
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms Development of High Megapixel Camera
« on: December 30, 2014, 11:48:42 AM »
.
I haven't read through 19 pages of comments...

But I believe if this is the 5D4, a lot of people will be using the 5D3 for a lot of years to come.
The 5DIII was nearly perfectly aimed at event photographers.  I don't get why they would change that with the 5DIV unless it had two modes, one for ultra resolution/large file size and another that maybe used pixel binning to create smaller higher quality images that allow it to be an improvement over the 5DIII for event photographers. 

But, barring something like that, I think you are right. 

28
Lenses / Re: 400mm DO II
« on: December 19, 2014, 06:21:58 AM »
Huge improvement over Mk 1.  The fact that Roger is using new test charts makes it impossible to really compare it to other lenses, but, still, it is significantly better than the 100-400 II and 400 DO I.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/12/a-brief-400mm-comparison

29
Lenses / Re: EF 100-400mm II - first impressions
« on: December 18, 2014, 06:04:14 PM »
Hi Alan

Thanks for the test shots. Any impressions of the AF speed and accuracy with the 1.4x TC?

Thanks

30
Lenses / Re: Lens as a gift. Non Photographer buying... :)
« on: November 25, 2014, 06:39:33 AM »
On a crop, 100 mm L macro would give you the ff equiv of 160 mm.  Little long for portraits.  Good for macro.  I never used my 100 L for portraits when I shot crop.  On FF it is an amazing portrait lens.

I would go with the 85 f/1.8 if you want tight portraits or the Sigma 50 f/1.4 for a general portrait lens.   The 70-200 f/4 or a 24-105 f/4 (Canon or Sigma) are other thoughts for a "mid-range" zoom on a crop.  What is your budget?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 24