Messages

196

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3, 1D5 and 1Ds4 Timeline [CR1]

« on: March 28, 2011, 07:22:59 PM »

Is anyone else not happy about Canon packing more mega-pixels in?

Low light / high ISO performance is way more important to me than adding (what are in most cases) superfluous pixels.

I'm with you.  I've found that because of space and my personal requirements I mostly shoot at RAWs1.  For more artsy stuff and rare opportunities I'll jump up to the 21mp, but to add another 8mb per shot on hard drives would mean that I'm expanding my 1tb drives even further.  I just don't need them, it seems like marketing going insane (do people still buy one camera over another because of megapixels?)

Hard drive space is a complete non-issue. A 2 TB drive is about $80, and can hold about 80,000 RAW files at 25 MB each (from Canon 5DII). That's 40,000 images per year for two years. Even with a second drive for full backup it's still only $160 in hard drive space, or $80 per year. This is a trivial cost compared to other costs of photography.

As long as low light performance is not compromised I'm ok with high MP counts, however it doesn't seem to work that way, so I'm in favor of sacrificing some pixels in order to get great low light performance.

197

EOS Bodies / Re: 3 More DSLR's in 2011? [CR1]

« on: March 28, 2011, 11:09:30 AM »

The 7D is a great camera, and will produce great pictures even after the 7DMII, 7DMII, 7DMIII comes out. It will still produce great pictures till it gets 150K clicks on it.

Glad to see another happy 7D owner. Just another reason why I don't see a 7DII coming this year. The 7D remains at the top in its category, it is selling great (Note that you can't even find a 7D available right now) and customer satisfaction is off the charts.

Lenses and other bodies have got to be more of a priority for Canon. Incremental differences in other brands aren't sufficient to seriously challenge the 7D and it's going to be a year or two before all the new 60D, T3i and T2i owners are ready to step up a level or two.

If they did release a new model this year, it would be more of a refresh than an upgrade and runs the risk of disappointing. I think they'll wait until they can offer a few more megapixels with a bit less noise at the high ISOs, add in some video enhancements and whatever the new bells and whistles from the next 1Ds might be. Which means we are probably looking at mid to late 2012.

The 7D is a good camera for sports and action, but the 5DII is better in every other way. It's definitely worth the extra. Most of the people I know with a 7D chose it over the 5DII because it was cheaper, but would have preferred the 5DII. Both the 7D and 5DII are a lot of camera for their respective $, and I expect (hope) that the 5DIII will be an irresistible upgrade .

I hope the 7DII has APS-H, then I might get one.

198

EOS Bodies / Re: 1Ds4 & 5D3 Timetable [CR1]

« on: March 15, 2011, 10:37:59 AM »

There isn't a good 35mm equivalent prime for a crop camera.

My 24 f/1.4 works well on my 40D.

Good point, this lens is good on any camera. Although you lose the ultra-wide perspective.

199

EOS Bodies / Re: 1Ds4 & 5D3 Timetable [CR1]

« on: March 15, 2011, 10:36:44 AM »

... FF cameras produce better images/video and have more/better glass options.

Actually you have more lens options with crop because crop cameras fit both EF and EF-S. 

As for better images, it depends how large you print.  My largest prints are 13"x19" and crop works well for that.

You can mount more lenses on a crop, but that doesn't mean you have more options. Crop below 28mm FF equivalent has one v good option: Tokina 11-16 2.8. However full frame has 24-105 f4, 24-70 2.8, 24 1.4, 15mm FE 2.8 (which is boring on a crop), 14mm 2.8 (which is nothing special on a crop camera), 16-35 2.8, not to mention that the 35 1.4 is an excellent lens on FF but becomes a rather boring 56mm on a crop camera. There isn't a good 35mm equivalent prime for a crop camera. And all of the wide angle options are very well made and reliable lenses with USM (except the 15mm FE).

I wish it was different, and maybe one day it will be, but FF has a great many advantages over crop. That's why so many people want full frame. Crop cameras have the advantage of lower cost, and a little better reach at the penalty of lower IQ and fewer focal length options.

What about the EF-S 10-22mm & Sigma 8-16mm for crop ?

These two are a little dark and not constant aperture, and not weather-sealed

200

EOS Bodies / Re: 1Ds4 & 5D3 Timetable [CR1]

« on: March 15, 2011, 12:10:51 AM »

... FF cameras produce better images/video and have more/better glass options.

Actually you have more lens options with crop because crop cameras fit both EF and EF-S. 

As for better images, it depends how large you print.  My largest prints are 13"x19" and crop works well for that.

You can mount more lenses on a crop, but that doesn't mean you have more options. Crop below 28mm FF equivalent has one v good option: Tokina 11-16 2.8. However full frame has 24-105 f4, 24-70 2.8, 24 1.4, 15mm FE 2.8 (which is boring on a crop), 14mm 2.8 (which is nothing special on a crop camera), 16-35 2.8, not to mention that the 35 1.4 is an excellent lens on FF but becomes a rather boring 56mm on a crop camera. There isn't a good 35mm equivalent prime for a crop camera. And all of the wide angle options are very well made and reliable lenses with USM (except the 15mm FE).

I wish it was different, and maybe one day it will be, but FF has a great many advantages over crop. That's why so many people want full frame. Crop cameras have the advantage of lower cost, and a little better reach at the penalty of lower IQ and fewer focal length options.

201

EOS Bodies / Re: 1Ds4 & 5D3 Timetable [CR1]

« on: March 13, 2011, 04:03:32 PM »

Most crop cameras are sold to consumers who are reluctant to pay $1000 - $2000 or more for a lens.  That's probably why Canon seems reluctant to invest as much in EFS. That may change, but why wait when FF cameras produce better images/video and have more/better glass options. The crop cameras haven't even produced a huge weight/size savings if you use good glass (EF-S 17-55 2.8 is same size as 24-105 f4, which is the closest equivalent lens)

Whereas most pros will be the best available lens even if it's 4 times as expensive as the next best option.

I'd love a 20-24mm pancake for the 60D, but failing that, I'll take the 5DII even as a walk around.

202

EOS Bodies / Re: 1Ds4 & 5D3 Timetable [CR1]

« on: March 12, 2011, 11:10:39 PM »

Another prediction about when the 5D3 will be announced !!   After delaying my purchase of the 5D2 for six months because of the latest prediction that the 5D3 was just a few months away I got disgusted with this "cat and mouse" game and bought the 5D2.  I couldn't be happier.      The new body has given me many new challanges and taken my photography to a new level .  I have literally taken hundreds of photos that would have been impossible or mediocre on my old 40D.   I'm glad I stopped waiting for the 5D3 "ghost" to appear.

I went through this same dilemma over a year ago. There's always going to be something better just about to be released. I don't regret getting the 5DII at all. Sure, I'd love to see the 5DIII released, and I'll get one when it is. And I'll get the 5DIV too. In the meantime I'm enjoying the 5DII immensely. I sold the 40D, and bought a 60D for backup, and it only made me even more happy that I went 5D instead of 7D. Nothing wrong with the 60D, but the 5DII produces better pictures and better video.

203

Lenses / Re: More Sigma Primes Coming? [CR1]

« on: March 11, 2011, 09:22:30 AM »

Sigma's primes are not without their problems though.  The 50mm in particular suffers from focus shift when stopping down, the issue is worse on Canon cameras because the autofocus has the more sensitive f/2.8 centre point as opposed to other makes on f/5.6.  When you focus with the lens wide open at say F/2.8 the focus is at one point, when the shutter is released the aperture snaps down, and the point of focus moves, in many cases ruining the shot.

This has been the issue many users have reported since the lens was released.  On the other hand Canon's own f/1.4 although optically good suffers reliability issues, and should really be replaced.  The 80mm f/1.8 is a very good lens, cheap too, it's difficult to see why anyone would pay a lot more money for a one stop advantage (especially if it suffers focus shift).

Could you explain what causes the focus shift? Why would the point of focus move when the iris closes to the setpoint (unless that causes other things to move in the front-to-rear direction)?

I also really like Canon's 85mm f/1.8, and my copy of the 50mm f/1.4 has been fine so far, so again, I'm happy with that. Having bought, and immediately returned, a bad copy of the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (it was terrible), I'm wary of Sigma lenses. OTOH right now it's a non-issue, cos I'm still paying off the 24-105 f/4 L! So nothing at all is gonna get bought for a couple of months!

Thanks.

Martin

Here's review of the sigma 50 1.4 at photozone (http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/521-sigma50f1450d?start=1 ). The graphic near the bottom is pretty self-explanatory. The effect is due to residual aberrations, and it is bad lens design. Focus moves back about 2 cm when stopping down to f4. That's pretty bad.

You can get good focus using live-view, and by f8 the DOF is so big that your focus point will be covered and you will not see this effect. Of course there is no effect at f1.4, but it will be quite annoying between f2 - f5.6, and this is the only reason that I bypassed this lens: f1.4 is soft, focus is unreliable for f2.0 - f5.6, and I have plenty of other options for good shots at f5.6 and above.

204

Lenses / Re: 24-70 II in April? [CR2]

« on: March 08, 2011, 01:07:42 PM »

Sure IS would be great. I loved it on the 17-55 2.8 IS when I was using APS-C

The 24-70 is already big and heavy for this range. I would prefer a 24-50 2.8 IS with excellent IQ in a smaller, lighter package. I can always use the 70-200, or an 85 to get tighter.

I doubt I'll get one of these. I'll get the 24 1.4 II first, and hopefully a redesigned 35 1.4 (or 1.2), or an updated 50 1.2 if it comes out. f2.8 isn't bright enough for really low light, nor is it always shallow enough DOF. Furthermore, the 70-200 2.8 IS II is the only FF f2.8 zoom currently available that is actually sharp enough at 2.8 , but the primes are very sharp by f2.8
.

205

EOS Bodies / Re: All is Quiet. Odds & Ends.

« on: March 04, 2011, 12:55:09 AM »

Careful when you point fingers

Who's pointing fingers?  I just don't think a front camera and faster processor is a "surprise the world" product announcement - considering the impact Honeycomb had with it's 3D interface features, live-sync scrollable widgets,  and fully cloud-based sync. 

Is that a biased analysis?  It really wasn't meant to be, as I own both Android and iOS devices.  :dunno:

Apple products haven't click for me (I tried an iPhone3 for several months but went back to my ancient BB because messaging is so much easier on it), but some people seem to love them. Does that make them a fanboi?

The Tablet market is heating up and I'm interested to see what floats to the top, be it Apple or otherwise. But the Xoom with Honeycomb doesn't appear to be a slam-dunk just yet. The total package of power, usability, ease of use, weight and form etc will be what wins me over, and I think that will be a different equation for everyone. I haven't seen a convincing enough package yet in any of the products.

I think my expectation of a tablet is going to remain very high because I already maintain a smartphone, laptop, desktop, and Camera gear. I'd be sold if it could allow me to leave my phone and laptop at home. Maybe even if it could reasonably replace the laptop, or provide a lot of storage for images.

206

EOS Bodies / Re: All is Quiet. Odds & Ends.

« on: March 03, 2011, 11:49:51 AM »

Let's see where the Honeycomb market share will be this same time
next year.

Ugh.  Fanbois.

Sorry - I made the mistake of assuming you were interested in objective debate/analysis of the device.

Xoom / Honeycombe is far from perfect as well, and initial hands-on review is mixed at best http://www.zdnet.com/blog/mobile-news/motorola-xoom-and-honeycomb-8212-not-ready-for-prime-time/1105 . Wishing it were different doesn't help.

Careful when you point fingers

207

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T3i in Stock (B&H)

« on: March 02, 2011, 11:31:13 PM »

No, I dont put it on auto. I have a point and shoot camera for that. I am trying to learn how to take nice portraits. I do want to know all the features of my camera. Do you think I am better off with the 60D v. T3i?

Both will take nice portraits. I have the 60D and a 5DII. The 60D has two control wheels, the T3i has one. This doesn't sound that important until you start using manual controls. It's much faster working through menu options on the 60D vs Rebel series (even faster on the 5DII).

For nice portraits get two off camera flash units with stands and umbrellas and a nice backdrop. A 24 - 50 mm prime lens is good to use as well. This is a very good website to read:  http://www.strobist.blogspot.com/

208

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T3i in Stock (B&H)

« on: March 02, 2011, 11:14:53 PM »

The 60D is much easier to use, if you use the more advanced features, manual settings etc. If you use it like a point and shoot you'll be fine with the T3i.

If you want something noticeably lighter try the Panasonic GH2.

hmm? i dont get it. if someone wants to use a dslr as a P&S, why not buy a P&S?

Most Rebels are used as P&S. Three of my neighbors bought them to get better pics, and they shoot on fully automatic all the time.

209

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T3i in Stock (B&H)

« on: March 02, 2011, 10:05:23 PM »

I got the 60D and is very heavy. I can still return it. Should I take the t3i? Are the 60D features a lot better than the T3i?

The 60D is much easier to use, if you use the more advanced features, manual settings etc. If you use it like a point and shoot you'll be fine with the T3i.

If you want something noticeably lighter try the Panasonic GH2.

210

Lens Gallery / Re: Canon 50mm Æ’1.8

« on: March 02, 2011, 10:02:28 AM »

The 50 1.8 is inexpensive, but low contrast and a bit soft until at least f4. That makes it underwhelming in low light, and loses my interest for most situations, so I rarely use mine. The focus ring is terrible, and the rough bokeh will spoil an otherwise decent image.

If you have a nice camera, you'll get more satisfying results with a better lens. Even in low light I'll use the 16-35 2.8II or 85 1.8 before the 50 1.8. The 50 1.4 is worth the extra IMHO.