December 27, 2014, 04:25:14 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 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 23
EOS-M / Re: Is there a group anywhere of eos m owners?
« on: June 23, 2014, 10:56:33 AM »
As mentioned, several of us here on CR have an EOS-M.....but, there is also always the group on flickr:

Rumor seems like natural conjecture based on the potential "revolutionary" sensor tech rumor of the 7D.  So, it may be one of those rumors based on a rumor. 

But, three years is reasonable, just a bit earlier than I was expecting.  It may depend on how "revolutionary" the new 7D tech is.  My guess, we are looking at late 2015 or early 2016 for the 5DIV and 1DXII.  The 5DIII is all I need, but a 8 fps, and another stop of ISO performance and I'll probably upgrade. 

As for other areas of possible improvement, there is a good list going, just to about making all AF points cross type, more (all?) f/2.8 and AF with f/8.

If the 5D series is the "wedding camera" I can see the f/2.8.  The f/8 may be more for "wildlife" cameras like the 7D and 1D series.

EOS Bodies / Re: New Sensor Tech in EOS 7D Mark II [CR2]
« on: June 19, 2014, 05:30:04 PM »
Really exciting at this point anything is a bonus! I will be glad to see Canon innovating again!

I'm looking forward to 7d2 technology finding its way to ## and ### series cameras.

I'm personally looking forward to a full-frame (5D) version of the 7D replacement, assuming it's as-rumored.

+1.  7DII...Fall 2014, 5DIV/1DXII Fall of 2015/Spring 2016.  That would be 4 years...about right, especially if the technology is truly "revolutionary" I can't see them waiting more than a year (+/-) to get it into their flagship bodies.

EOS-M / Re: Canon EF-M 55-200 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Gets Official
« on: June 17, 2014, 10:02:06 AM »
I never bothered with the EF-M 18-55
It's actually better than you might think - nice metal build quality, the IS works well, and it's sharper than the DxO charts would indicate.  My preferred carry method for this camera is actually to have the body capped, um, body in one pocket and the 18-55 in the other.  When I'm ready to shoot, I just assemble them...

I'm considering the 11-22, but this little telephoto seems like it would be nice for travel as well.  If only it had a viewfinder, it would be the perfect travel camera.  Maybe the M3...

I have both the 18-55 and 22 f/2.  I prefer the 18-55.  It is a very nice lens.  Images are comparable to what I used to get with the EFS 15-85 on my 7D.   

Regarding the f/6.3, isn't the f stop somewhat moot with contrast detect AF?  Of course more light is likely better, but I thought that was more of an issue with phase detect.  Canon has had P&S cameras for years with >f/5.6 and contrast detect AF.  How is this any different?

Software & Accessories / Re: RRS or Markins?
« on: June 13, 2014, 11:54:46 AM »
I went through this about 2 years ago and chose the Markins Q3T ballhead for my Gitzo traveler tripod.  It has been great.  I'd easily recommend it.

Site Information / Re: How often you visit Canon Rumors?
« on: June 12, 2014, 05:18:10 PM »
I have a couple sites I visit at work when I am bored, angry, or stressed.  CR is in the rotation.  So, the frequency of my visits goes up with each of those, typically 2-3 times per day.  Conversely, days when I am happily busy, I don't visit at all.  Weekends I maybe visit once per day.

Unfortunately, I've been visiting a lot lately.... :'(

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma USB Dock does not work
« on: May 31, 2014, 12:42:44 PM »
I suspect I just need to return the sigma dock, but I just received it and the 50A.  I already owned the 35A.  But neither lens will twist onto the dock far enough so that the pins on the dock connect to the pins on the lens.  The net result is that the software never "sees" the lens. 

Anyone else have this problem?  Am I missing something obvious?

Lenses / Re: Canon Working on Faster f/2.8 Ultra Wide Zoom [CR2]
« on: May 15, 2014, 09:52:31 AM »
Love the idea of the updates.  But I wonder if Canon's plan is to keep size and weight down with f/2.8 zooms (rumored 12/14-24 L and the 24-70 II) so they will not have IS and f/4 (16-35 f/4 IS; 24-70/105 f/4), requiring less glass, will have IS. 

If that is the case, my decision is simple, the 16-35 f/4 IS.  Four stops of IS will be much more useful to me for landscapes than 1 stop of aperture. 

Glad I've held off on buying my UWA zoom lens.

Try tracking kids with contrast detect  ;D

:)  Faster AF with phase detect is something I couldn't live without.  I only use contrast detect for landscapes.  They move slow enough, typically.   ;)

I was just wondering how severe the problem may be, and if AFMA adjustments were just putting a band-aid on a more severe wound. 

I picked up a 35A in March and have the 50A pre-ordered.  I initially had AF issues with the 35A in that I felt my keeper rate was much lower than my other lenses.  But I also noticed that the AF wasn't quiet.  There was a clicking sound.  I re-AFMA'd the lens, and the clicking sound went away (I think these are separate events).  The AF is now both quiet (no clicking) and accurate at short distances.  I have noticed that it is off at longer distances and have ordered the dock so I can AFMA multiple distances.

While the 35A is working well, that doesn't inspire confidence.  Especially when combined with everything I am reading.

Everyone talks about the price different with the Sigma lenses, but that is just upfront costs.  The savings will quickly disappear if the life cycle of the Sigma lens is half the Canon.  Plus, one of the benefits of Canon's L lenses is how well they hold their value.  If Sigma's aren't built as well and don't hold their value as well, then the true cost difference could quickly become negligible or even favor Canon.

All that said, I am past the point where I can return the 35A so I'll play with it some more.  If I don't cancel my 50A order, I am planning on scrutinizing that lens a lot more before the return period ends.

Are the issues both with phase and contrast detect AF? 

Shane...great shots.

But am I hearing this right, both Eldar and Viggo are sending their lenses to Sigma to fix the AF?  Anyone else having issues?  I know TDP and lenstip identified some issues. 

Anyone not having AF issues?

BTW here are some shots from yesterday, of my son and his mother running towards me… Shot at f1.4 using a 6D, center focus point.

The first shot is back focused, and only the last one is okay sharp to me at least. So it seems the tracking can't keep up.  I've got a few from indoors today that are really sharp, so I guess going back and forth with calibration is always a good thing.

The thing about the Sigma is that it is soo sharp that even slightly misfocused shots appear sharp enough.

How can you tell that it is back focused?  I can't see where his focus point was.  Is it in the exif data?  Sorry if this is obvious.

First of all, it is a great series of shots that any father should be very happy with......

But to expand on what Viggo said, look at the blur on the wife over the three shots.  First shot she is almost in focus.  Granted it looks like the separation between the two increased, but part of that is back focusing on the first shot.  And I agree, looking at the sand, it is sharpest behind the subject.

Again...thanks for the posts.  Very interesting and helpful.  I agree, the differences in this set range from very minor to imperceptible.  I can see a few instances were I like the bokeh better with the 50L, but others where I like the sharpness and detail of 50A.  But, for the most part, the images are extremely similar.  With Viggo coming around to trusting the AF..... :D

I would also point out that I have personally taken similar tests, and when I express that I believe I can tell a difference (knowing that sometimes there isn't one) I have got it right, normally to the chagrin or complete unacceptance of the poster.

I believe people spend too much time reading forum opinions, tests, reviews etc, and their buying decisions are influenced by that reading. I believe people are sold something on subtleties and nuances that they themselves can't actually see or appreciate and to "justify" that purchase, when no justification is needed, they will make silly claims about minutia.

I've taken a few of the online tests.  I am usually right ~70% of the time, so there is a little something to it, but, ultimately, sometimes I can't tell the difference.

On your second point, I absolutely have seen some people spend too much time reading and basing too much of their opinion in details only analytical tests are able to discern.  I am sure I've done it myself.  That said, I think we are in the phase where we are getting to know not only the 50A but the Sigma Art series.  Sigma did something very interesting.  But it will be over the next year or two where there is enough use out there to really know what that means.  Are there AF issues?  Does the dock fix the AF issues?  Do Sigma Art lenses develop issues with time?  Does Sigma Art have a "unique" color to them? Etc.

Just because there is the potential for over analysis doesn't mean you do not do any analysis.  Which is why I really appreciate a side by side comparison performed here at the start of this thread. 

EDIT-originally followed Mackguyver's post.

I think that is a very fair assessment.  Of course, I own the 50 f/1.4, so for me the list is a little different, but this thread is about the 50L vs 50A.  Of course, I would expect to learn a lot more as the 50A as more people get their hands on production models.

I also think there is a lot of benefit in things that may be subtle to others.  For example, the dock is likely necessary from the start.  I had told myself I didn't need the dock until Canon did something to prevent the Sigma lens from working.  Having read more, it looks like it would be good to have the dock from the start to better tune the AFMA at different distances.

I do "get" the concern that reaction in threads like this can give lenses a bad reputation, potentially undeserved.  With the 50A, potentially with AF issues or maybe color.  But, to me, it is more subtle.  As for the color, I see a difference.  I may prefer the 50L, but what it really means is that I'll develop a color profile for the 50A to see if that addresses the issue.  But it doesn't change the fact that everything I've seen to date says that this is a very good lens. 

The AF issue is the main one I am interested in seeing if it proves out.  But, hopefully I'll have my own lens soon to assess.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 23