August 28, 2014, 01:36:32 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 - Etienne

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 40
31
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 15, 2014, 10:41:36 AM »
There is no reason why the 400F5.6, in an updated version, can't have the same IQ as the 400F2.8. It's that full stop faster that you pay so much for.

For example, the 24-70 F4 and the F2.8 are similar in IQ, but twice as much for a half stop.....
The 70-200 F4IS and F2.8IS are similar in IQ, but twice as much for a half stop....

Not to sound too pedantic, but the difference between f/5.6 and f/2.8 is two stops, not one. (Which only further reinforces your point.)

That's not pedantic. It needed to be said, or the author might have continued to make this mistake.

There's also a reason an f/5.6 lens can't be as sharp as a really good f/2.8 lens - diffraction.

Diffraction does not affect FF until around f/11. Diffraction doesn't even affect APS-C until f/8 . An f/5.6 lens can be every bit as sharp, or sharper than a f/2.8 lens. Large aperture does not necessarily mean sharper images, even stopped down. Just look at the Canon 50 f/1.2L, which is not as sharp as the 50 f/1.4 at comparable apertures.

32
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 15, 2014, 12:26:29 AM »
There is no reason why the 400F5.6, in an updated version, can't have the same IQ as the 400F2.8. It's that full stop faster that you pay so much for.

For example, the 24-70 F4 and the F2.8 are similar in IQ, but twice as much for a half stop.....
The 70-200 F4IS and F2.8IS are similar in IQ, but twice as much for a half stop....

Not to sound too pedantic, but the difference between f/5.6 and f/2.8 is two stops, not one. (Which only further reinforces your point.)

That's not pedantic. It needed to be said, or the author might have continued to make this mistake.

33
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 13, 2014, 04:01:52 PM »
I wish it would be 200-500, and lighter

x2

I wish Canon would release 500/600mm for the common mortals

My bag can get pretty heavy. I think I'd even prefer a 200-400 and keep it as light as possible, 800g maybe?

34
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 13, 2014, 10:45:25 AM »
I don't understand why they don't make it a 70-400 or 80-400 to have a less big gap between this lens and their 24-70's. You see at Nikon and Sony that there is no quality loss with these extra 20/30mm, so why? To keep the original?  :P  For me, the 70-100 range is important, on FF as well as on crop.  :) They make you buy an 85mm or an 70-200mm.  :-X

Does anybody really need every mm covered without gaps? Sure it can be nice, but I find the 16-35 and 70-200 combo extremely versatile. 35-70 not covered ... So what? There is no way that you can always have the right lens on the right camera at the right time. You either have to use a superzoom, and accept lower IQ, or use two or more cameras simultaneously. If you really need instant versatility and high IQ, then use the 24-70 2.8 on one body, and one of the L tele-zooms on another. Of course cost and weight could be problematic.

35
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 12, 2014, 09:19:09 PM »
I wish it would be 200-500, and lighter

36
Lenses / Re: Video Review: Canon EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« on: July 08, 2014, 12:33:40 PM »
My light weight walk around UW setup is EOS-M with EF-M 11-22 4.5-5.6 IS .... much lighter and smaller than the SL1 with 10-18.

Can't wait for the EOS-M mark 3

37
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Canon EOS 7D Body $999, Kits From $1099
« on: July 07, 2014, 02:21:26 PM »
The best time to buy a new digital camera is when it's new.

Pass on this, unless it drops to $100

38
Lenses / Re: DigitalRev review of the new 16-35 L IS
« on: July 04, 2014, 10:02:30 AM »
Not bad hand-held timelapse

39
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS in Stock at B&H Photo
« on: June 26, 2014, 09:51:05 AM »
So many things to buy, so little money to buy them with. :'(

40
I think its too soon for 5D3 refresh but this would be my list for me to buy a 5d4.

Stills Side

1. Blinky AF point
2. Linked AF point Spot Metering
3. 1/250th Sync speed bump. (1/500 would be even more sweet)
4. Built in RT transmitter
5. 7 FPS bump and improved buffer for dual card writing. (pitiful if you use the SD card slot currently.)
6. Dual CF or SD, just pick one or the other.
7. Add dual custom buttons like the 1Dx besides the lens mount.
8??. Did anyone notice the second curtain sync C-fn through PC sync missing in the mk3? I was positive this was on my 5Dc or the 5D2...
9. Make the Rate button do something else beside's rate and protect. :/
10. Slight screen bump in resolution/size and/or Touchscreen with optional toggle.
11. Lastly, Any ISO/IQ/Resolution bump is nice but these other features are much more important to me.

Video side.

1. DPAF
2. 4K
3. RAW Video Internally (if possible, Magic lantern will get it anyway.)
4. Peaking
5. Crop Mode 1080P

Thats all I could think of at this moment. Its mostly little stuff and if canon doesn't include the majority of these things, I won't upgrade.

Edit.

12. I would like glowing buttons like on the D4s.

+1 ... nice list, although I like having 1 CF, 1 SD slot . I have a high speed CF, and I use an Eye-fi in the SD slot to transfer Medium sized JPGs

41
Reviews / Re: Is Canon 5d mk 1 still a good camera?
« on: June 22, 2014, 01:19:53 AM »
I've owned the Canon 40D, 5DII,  5DIII, and I've used the T3i, 60D, 5Dc, and 6D quite a lot. I can say the 5DIII is by far the best of all these.

The 5Dc produces beautiful shots up to ISO800, the 40D was a work horse, and the 5DII was great, and the 6D is pretty much the same as the 5DII with a few extra goodies. But the 5DIII is pretty damn good at everything from video to sports to landscape to portraitsl the ergonomics are awesome, and it's built like a tank. It stands out above all in this category. The only better camera to the 5DIII is the 1Dx, but you got to pay and you have to carry a much bigger camera. Overall, I would ditch the 5Dc for either a 5DII, a 6D, or a 5DIII if you can cough up the cash. Then wait for the next generation.

42
EOS Bodies / What do you hope-for MOST from Canon in 2014
« on: June 22, 2014, 12:46:32 AM »
I am hoping that Canon comes out with a killer mirrorless ... either a Pro EOS-M3 or a full frame, either of which should beat the Sony A7 series. Features: fast AF, awesome IQ, amazing low light, excellent video, Video AF with dual pixel, full sensor readout for video with no artifacts (moire, aliasing), excellent ergonomics, built in wifi with livestream to YouTube capability.

What product do you hope-for the most from Canon this year?

43
Great news, although Rokinon has already released multiple native EF-M mount lenses:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=rokinon+ef-m&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=

How about one of these two babies.  40mm f/0.85 :

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1056298-REG/handevision_hvib4085cm_ibelux_40mm_f_0_85_lens.html

Or this bizarre super macro:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/929753-REG/yasuhara_ya24_nan5c_micro_lens_for_canon.html
I was going to mention the Handevision but it's not available yet, and personally, I think it's ridiculously expensive for such a low-priced camera.  I'll be surprised if they sell very many.

I didn't know about the macro lens - that is bizarre!

The Tamron is really intriguing given that IQ isn't my primary concern when I carry the M.

Not to mention, the Handevision weighs a ton!

45
Lenses / Re: EF-M 55-200 4.5-6.3 IS STM Coming Shortly
« on: June 17, 2014, 12:03:38 AM »
Nice.  This and the 22/2 as a walkaround M kit would work for me.

I am warming up to the M. I bought the EF-M 11-22 10 days ago, and I love it, it is so light and handy! Yesterday I went out with EF-M 11-22, 22 f/2, and 24-105 (with adapter), and the light weight is really nice. This 55-200 would eliminate the need for the 24-105 and make the M setup awesome for daytime walk around.

Now I'm hoping that Canon goes all-in with an M3 ... something that would challenge Sony's A7s in video (but APSC). Don't hold back, make it a real contender Canon!

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 40