April 20, 2014, 08:18:52 PM

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 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 34
436
Canon General / Re: Ultrafast wide angles
« on: April 16, 2011, 04:39:49 PM »
Soon as the sun sets or you go inside, that extra stop makes all of the difference in the world. The 17-40 is a great lens, though. I had one and sold it after getting the 16-35mm. And I can guarantee if Canon or Nikon came out with a 2.0 or 1.8 16-35 at three or even four times the price, there's be plenty of people in line to buy it since even 2.8 can come up short.

Canon has the 24 1.4, and the 35 1.4 for low light work. Both awesome lenses. a 16-35 2.0 would be enormous and heavy. I'd pass on that zoom and go for the primes anyway, and they'd still have a full stop advantage.

437
Canon General / Re: Ultrafast wide angles
« on: April 16, 2011, 04:33:24 PM »
The DOF is determined by aperture, focal length, and focal distance.

...and circle of confusion, which is why sensor size has an effect on DoF.  At the same aperture, focal length, and focal distance, a FF sensor will have deeper DoF than a 1.6x crop sensor.
Yes, but the same aperture, focal distance, and equivalent focal length will yield a shallower DOP with a FF sensor.  Big distinction, since in your example would yield two different pictures in composition.

Exactly ... Photographers compose a photograph. In order to get the same photograph on the 5DII and the 7D, you either need to change the focal length or the focal distance (get closer with the 5DII).

The following all give the same sized subject in the frame of the camera:

5DII, 80mm, f1.4, 10 feet away   DOF = 0.39 feet

7D,   80mm, f1.4, 16 feet away    DOF = 0.64 feet

7D,   50mm, f1.4 10 feet away     DOF = 0.65 feet

In all cases the 5DII gives about 1.3 stops equivalent shallower depth of field for the same composition and f stop in comparison to APS-C. The important consideration is that no matter what gear is in his hands, a photographer seeks to compose a certain shot. With a crop camera he either has to move backwards (increasing DOF in the process), or use a shorter focal length (also increasing DOF in the process).

438
Canon General / Re: Ultrafast wide angles
« on: April 16, 2011, 11:38:52 AM »
"At 16mm f/2.8 focused at 10 feet, everything from 5 feet to infinity is within the DoF, and you get twice the light of f/4.  "

...

The DOF is determined by aperture, focal length, and focal distance.

If you frame the same shot with two lenses of different focal lengths, using the same aperture you will observe the same DOF. In order to frame the same shot using a 40mm vs a 20 mm lens, you need to stand half as far away, the shots will have the same DOF, but very different looks of course.

Ex. This is an extreme example, but using a 5dmkII, both of these will make the main subject about the same size in the frame, and yield about the same DOF:

40mm lens at f 1.4 with focal distance 10 feet yields DOF = 1.61 feet
and a 20mm lens at f 1.4 with focal distance 5 feet yields DOF = 1.64 feet

see . http://dofmaster.com/dofjs.html (make sure to click calculate)

439
Canon General / Re: Camera Gear Costs More Right Now
« on: April 16, 2011, 12:03:34 AM »
Honestly this was brought up in another forum, but the American dollar has taken a beating as well. Bodies are cheaper here in Canada then they are in the United States, but lenses are cheaper in the United States then in Canada.

I just don't like the attitude of some people, some people even asked if the equipment would be contaminated with Radiation!

Lenses and bodies are cheaper in the states, if when the dollar is at par.

440
Canon General / Re: Camera Gear Costs More Right Now
« on: April 15, 2011, 06:10:57 PM »
So they're making more profit but more money isn't going to Canon?

 >:(

Price gouging is rampant.

Before this all happened I was going to pick up an 85/1.8, was $419, now $599+.  Big box retailers (BestBuy, etc.), followed closely by Canon direct have become the cheapest option for anything they have in stock.

Still $419 at B&H and $414 at Adorama

441
EOS Bodies / Re: 1D & 1Ds Rumors [CR1]
« on: April 08, 2011, 03:56:33 PM »
I'm all for 24 MP 5DIII with 7FPS
Add better AF, reduced moire, improved high ISO, AF during video, pixel binning with crop options and I'd be a happy camper.

442
Software & Accessories / Re: Video, Flash, NAB & More
« on: April 02, 2011, 01:15:10 PM »
"I apparently have to remind a few folks that Canon Rumors does not think new camera stuff is more important than the tragedy in Japan. I wish the country the best recovery possible."

No reminder is necessary. Keep up the good work!

The sooner that all Japanese companies are up and running full-speed, the more resources they will have to rebuild. It is definitely not disrespectful or inconsiderate to maintain the interest and excitement for Japanese products, like the awesome Canon line-up, alive amongst the enthusiasts.

No one is minimizing the tragedy by expressing interest and desire for Canon products.

443
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3, 1D5 and 1Ds4 Timeline [CR1]
« on: March 29, 2011, 11:19:49 AM »
One of the biggest issues I have with high MP count cameras is the problem with lenses which are far from perfect.  While centre resolution might be quite capable of high performance, corners and borders certainly aren't, and the higher the MP count the worse the effect appears.  It's not such an issue with longer lenses or primes with fast apertures which blur this area deliberately.  Wide angle is the worst with lenses like the 17 - 40mm L having almost no resolution in the corners.

For me low light performance isn't such an issue, and when it is a bit dark there's always the option of flash, it's very rare for me not to have the option.  If you do need low light performace then perhaps the 5D MKII/I is not the right camera for you?

Low light performance really means good high ISO performance. The 5DII is Canon's best high ISO, and I don't think Canon will let Nikon continue to walk away with the high ISO award.

High ISO is important for many things: low light use, ability to shoot at small apertures in moderate light, when very fast shutter speed is required like sports in indoor arenas. I can't think of why anyone would object to good high ISO performance. There is a trade off between pixel count and high ISO, and I hope the 5DIII achieves a good balance. Personally I don't need more pixels, so I favor improvements in ISO performance. Of course in a perfect world I'd get both in one Camera.

444
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.

445
EOS Bodies / Re: 3 More DSLR's in 2011? [CR1]
« on: March 28, 2011, 11:09:30 AM »
Quote
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.

446
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.

447
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

448
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.

449
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.

450
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.

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 34