September 18, 2014, 03:59:03 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 - verysimplejason

Pages: 1 ... 44 45 [46] 47 48 ... 90
676
PowerShot / Re: Comparable Camera to the Sony RX100
« on: February 18, 2013, 01:25:06 AM »
I'm afraid, there's currently none from Canon.  If you are willing to sacrifice a little bit of IQ just to get a Canon compact, S100 or S110 is the choice.  You may also want to get the G15 which is a little bit bigger.  But really, there's nothing from Canon that can go near RX100 in terms of IQ except G1X which isn't exactly pocketable.  If you're willing to use a belt bag instead of your pocket then G1X can easily replace an RX100 and more.  Oh and there's another one I remember.  You can also get an EOS-M with a 22 mm pancake lens.  This is the best recommendation I can give you if you want a "near" pocketable alternative to RX100.

Quote
"Physically the EOS M shares similar vital statistics to its nearest rivals. The EOS M body measures 109x67x33mm and weighs 298g with battery but no lens. In comparison Sony's NEX-5N (which also shares an APS-C sensor) measures 111x59x38mm and weighs 269g with battery, making it shorter but a tad thicker. Panasonic's GX1 measures 116x68x39mm and weighs 318g including battery, making it a little wider and thicker. The Olympus E-PL5 measures 111x64x39mm and weighs 325g including battery, and is the only one of the group to include built-in stabilization.
 
 

Just for the record, Sony's Cyber-shot RX100 measures 102x58x36mm and weighs 240g with battery, making it smaller and a little lighter overall, and impressively that includes its built-in 3.6x optical zoom that's equivalent to 29-105mm. For completeness I'll finally add that Canon's own PowerShot G1 X measures 117x81x65mm and weighs 534g with battery, making it noticeably chunkier and heavier than all the models above even with its smaller sensor, although it includes a 4x / 28-112mm equivalent optical zoom.

While Sony's RX100 is undoubtedly a miracle of miniaturization, the figures above should tell you the EOS M is roughly the same size and weight as its interchangeable lens peer group when comparing bodies alone. But of course a camera without a lens only tells half the story and bigger differences emerge when you mount your optics. Canon launched the EOS M with just two native lenses, a 22mm f2.0 pancake (61x24mm, 105g, 15cm closest focusing, non-stabilized) and an 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS zoom (61x61mm, 210g, 25cm closest focusing distance). So fit the pancake and the EOS M becomes 57mm thick and 403g, and fit the zoom and it'll become 94mm thick and 508g."

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_M/


677
Lenses / Re: Starting Lens Recommendation
« on: February 16, 2013, 01:50:09 AM »
Option 4 + 5Dc. Sell the rebel, your better off learning on that camera.

+1.  or better yet, just get a 50mm F1.8, 5Dc, an external flash and some off-camera flash accessories (the most basic accessories as suggested from strobist.com).  Just add lenses as you need them.

678
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D - error 30!!!
« on: February 15, 2013, 11:32:31 AM »


Worst case..... pick up a cheap rebel at the camera store, shoot with it for the rest of the trip, and sell it when you get back.

I didn't win the lottery to buy cameras like that mate.. was already a stretch to get this one.
went to a shop tried a different battery and nothing changed. needs to go back.
gonna have to shoot the rest of the trip with my iphone..  :'(

the camera was out whole day at 1 / 2ÂșC i guess at night went down to -2. I only had about 600 shots with the camera.. i'm disappointed with canon! Also earlier had a very few drops from light rain. my old 350d had been in worse conditions and survived very well!

send it for repairs to know what's exactly wrong before being disappointed.  As we all know, sometimes there's a bad apple among the production and this happens not only to Canon but for almost all manufacturers.  That's why it is also good to break-in your camera before going to extreme environments.  Good luck with your IPhone pictures though.  I hope it can serve you well.

679
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon T4i or wait for T5i?
« on: February 15, 2013, 04:30:10 AM »
A good 5D or 5D2 will be better.  Couple it with a 50mm or 40mm and a cheap external flash and you're set.

680
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Announces the Canon EOS 6D DSLR
« on: February 15, 2013, 04:13:48 AM »
I was looking at some old reactions for 6D.  I was surprised that some of the people bashing 6D are the same ones praising it or at least giving it some credibility nowadays.  :) ;D

681
Lenses / Re: How do yall compose a shot using a fisheye lens?
« on: February 15, 2013, 01:07:24 AM »
Like this:


Fishy Snow by Jesse Herzog, on Flickr


Kensington's Backyard by Jesse Herzog, on Flickr


692A9981 by Jesse Herzog, on Flickr


692A9581 by Jesse Herzog, on Flickr


692A0309 by Jesse Herzog, on Flickr


692A0321 by Jesse Herzog, on Flickr

nice shot on the last one.  Canon 8-15?  Too expensive though for me... :(

682
Lenses / Re: Zeiss 50 f/1.4, Canon 50 f/1.2 and Canon 50 f/1.4
« on: February 14, 2013, 09:50:12 PM »
you might want to consider also the Sigma 50 F1.4 though personally I haven't used it yet.

683
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Firmware Coming Soon
« on: February 12, 2013, 08:15:45 AM »
anyone with high hopes that this FW update will bring a noticeable performance boost of the AF system?

I'm hoping this will be the case. I'm currently renting an M to try it out, and I can see where all the autofocus complaints are coming from. If you're comparing it to a point and shoot, it's fairly normal. If you compare it to a DSLR, it's almost comically slow.

Supposedly, it has the same built-in phase-detect pixels on the main sensor as the T4i. How quick is the live-view focusing on a T4i? Because the EOS M should theoretically be able to perform just as well.

Currently, it sure does act like a purely contrast-based system. Phase detection should be able to tell which direction it's out of focus, so it shouldn't have to hunt as much, but as much as the M is hunting around, it seems like it has no idea which way it's out of focus. Maybe a firmware update can adjust the balance phase and contract detection.

Still, if Fuji is able to get the AF performance the X100S has in the preview videos, it's a little disappointing that the M has to be so sluggish.

Please don't compare EOS M with X100 with regards to AF performance.  Fuji has a smaller sensor thus focusing is a little bit better.  Focus is much more forgiving for smaller sensors.

684
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Upgrade from 40D
« on: February 08, 2013, 02:18:18 AM »
The only real answer for all your needs would be a 5D3.  I'd be happy to get a 6D though if I were in your shoes.

685
Canon General / Re: What's your definition of "Pro"?
« on: February 07, 2013, 11:33:01 PM »
Pro's are those who make money through photography.  I aspire to be an "ARTIST" though than a pro.  If I earn money through photography, then good.  If not, as long as I churn out good pictures for my collection, I'm fine with it.

686
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D III or 1D IV for sports!
« on: January 31, 2013, 04:39:15 AM »
5DMK3 since you don't have any problem regarding the lens focal length but is having problem with ISO.  5D3 is better in ISO performance than 1DSMK3 by at least one or two stops.  1D4 is much worse than 1DSMK3 in ISO performance.

687
Lenses / Re: Lens suggestions requested
« on: January 30, 2013, 11:22:49 PM »
I'm guessing you're an APS-C user.  If you have the budget, a 70-200 L/70-300 L/100-400 L lens would be nice.  If you don't have a budget, you're not planning to move to FF soon, and you're not into sports that much, a 55-250mm would be very nice.  It's colors and focusing is surprisingly good especially in good light.  That 18-270mm isn't that good a performer especially that you have a 10-22 and a 24-105 lens but if I were you, I'll not dispose of it.  It's still usable when you want to bring only one lens.  But just the same, if I were in your shoes, I'll bring the 10-22 and 24-105 if I really like to travel light.

688
Lenses / Re: Please explain the need for f2.8 zooms
« on: January 30, 2013, 11:13:16 PM »
Anything faster is always welcome because of the availability of open-wide aperture for most low-light situations.  I think they're main disadvantage is that they're heavier and bulkier.  That's something you don't want to bear for 4-8 hours.  I think that's the main reason why primes are still very popular even if some zooms are quite as good or better than primes.  That and also the price.  If I'm not doing professional work, I prefer primes all day except for some very rare moments.  If I'm doing professional work, of course I want the fastest zoom I can afford.  This is because I want to get all possible pictures I can get at one time.  You don't want to miss some moments because you're changing lens or it's too dark for you to shoot.

689
Lenses / Re: Which 15mm f2.8?
« on: January 30, 2013, 05:26:09 PM »
+1 to samyang 14mm. Also sold as rokinon, bower, etc... Manual focus but easy to use.  IQ comparable to nikon 14-24.

690
Used transcend and sandisk for 3+ years and encountered no problems. I prefer transcend because it's faster than sandisk even with the same specs.

Pages: 1 ... 44 45 [46] 47 48 ... 90