August 28, 2014, 07:10:15 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
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.

677
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.

678
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.

679
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.

680
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.

681
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.

682
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.

683
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.

684
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.

685
There should be an RX1 variant with 24-105 F4/F2.8 lens.  Add a battery grip like the Fuji XPRO and this would be almost perfect for most usage.  The 35mm even if it's F2 isn't that interesting enough for its price of 3K.

686
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma Announces New 30mm f/1.4 for APS-C
« on: January 29, 2013, 10:14:03 PM »
I still like my 28mm F1.8 better than this because it is an FF lens.  My only gripe is its chromatic aberration @ F1.8 though it is easily corrected in the post. 

Oh and what I really need is a cheap 18mm or 20mm with optics comparable to that of the 24mm IS USM.  It would be my choice UWA when I stepped up to an FF camera.

687
Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?
« on: January 28, 2013, 09:36:08 PM »
Ergonomics and lens.  I also don't like initial Nikon colors.  I agree though you can change your settings or in PP but still I prefer Canon colors.  I also like their after-sales service.  I also like the quality of my Canons.

What I like in Nikon:
DR.
They're not afraid to lower down the cost.
They almost always release very competitive bodies and lenses.

688
Power went out during my son's birthday tonight and so I had to crank the ISO to 5000 and shoot with ambient light.  This shot is straight out of camera, ISO 5000, 1/50th second shutter speed at 70mm (Tamron 24-70mm VC):

(Even at 100% the grain looks like about ISO 800 a generation ago)

Nice pic. Im still trying to save for 6d. Your 24-70 seems a very nice lens.

689
Software & Accessories / Re: Starting to work with RAW. Help?
« on: January 25, 2013, 02:18:44 AM »
Most of the time, it's DPP for me (around 80-85%).  It can handle most of the basic adjustments, cropping and sometimes HDR.  For the most serious work, it's LR + photoshop + DXO.

690
EOS Bodies / Re: Which is better? 5D MKII or 6D?
« on: January 24, 2013, 07:31:22 PM »
3. The 5D2's AF is NOT BAD AT ALL for those who know what they are doing.

if YOU knew what your saying you would not make such a simple statement.

the 5D MK2 AF is BAD compared to the MK3 AF for anything that needs tracking... period.


it has absolutely nothing to do with "those who know what they are doing".
those who know what they are doing, will have a way higher number of keepers with the 5D MK3 tracking.

a F1 driver, no matter how good, can not compete with a ford bronco on a F1 racetrack.

I think it all depends on where you want to use it.  For sports, 5D2 won't have much keepers.  Maybe for the good photographers, around 1 out of 5.  For stills, 5D2 is great already.  Having said that, I'd still take 6D.  The difference in price isn't much.

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