April 24, 2014, 11:21:56 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 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 34
46
EOS Bodies / Re: Hybrid Viewfinder Coming To Canon DSLRs? [CR1]
« on: January 15, 2014, 10:44:21 AM »
As always the proof is in the pudding. Looking forward to seeing what this is about.

I wonder whether this hybrid viewfinder would form part of an automated lens microadjustment system.

47
PowerShot / Re: PowerShot G1 X Mark II Specs Emerge? [CR1]
« on: January 15, 2014, 10:20:57 AM »
Interesting, but I wish it had a swivel screen

48
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50 f/1.4 Art Lens Should be Amazing
« on: January 15, 2014, 10:19:17 AM »
I'll definitely watch for the reviews.

49
Lenses / Re: New 35mm f2 IS - Potential mount issue?
« on: January 14, 2014, 04:29:13 PM »
All of my lenses feel a little different in terms of tightness. There's some variation due to engineering tolerances, but if you have to put a lot of pressure to get it on or off, I would send it back. The mount could be out of tolerance and if it's far out then it could damage your cameras mount. A warped camera mount could also warp your other lens mounts.

PS ... I also have the 35 f/2 IS, and the mount is in the range of my other lenses

50
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Grab a Pancake! $129 at B&H Photo
« on: December 19, 2013, 11:28:19 AM »
I own the pancake and hardly ever use it. I always end up with the 35 f/2 IS or or 28 f/2.8 IS instead. If you don't have anything else in this range, then it's a great option for cheap.

51
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Sigma 16-20 f/2 DG Art [CR1]
« on: December 19, 2013, 10:14:38 AM »
Interesting, but I'd rather have a small light 16-24 2.8.
But I'd take a 24 f/2.0

52
Lenses / Re: Another strike against UV filters
« on: December 17, 2013, 10:59:00 PM »
Years ago I used to use them. But one night I was doing city night photography and noticed the lights were being doubled (i.e. reflected) due to bouncing off the inside of the filter. This was with the old 80-200L and a cheap UV filter. Has anyone else experienced this? Anyway, I personally have never used them since (well over ten years) and have had no problems. But I am pretty careful with my stuff and do not often shoot in extreme conditions.

Newer filters have anti-reflective coatings, so you would never see doubled images. I use B&W MRC .

53
Lenses / Re: Another strike against UV filters
« on: December 17, 2013, 10:38:18 PM »
There's a ton of dust and grime in the city, including hot asphalt, painting going on, kids with can's of coke. A filter gives me peace of mind from difficult to remove flying debris as much as anything else. Walking in a crowd or on a trail can risk your lens element brushing against something sharp enough to scratch it. Not to mention zippers: yours or someone else's.

There was hot sticky asphalt smoke in the air when I took this shot. I don't know if I would have taken my lens cap off if it wasn't protected with a filter:



54
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 135mm f/2 DG OS Art Coming? [CR1]
« on: December 16, 2013, 11:58:37 PM »
Sigma has my attention now. Stabilized 135 f/2 ... hell ya!
Please make it compatible with the Canon teleconverters.

55
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
« on: December 12, 2013, 10:09:49 AM »
The article says don't buy from Amazon yet, but the link goes to Amazon. How do you ensure you get the new batteries?

If you click the link, you'll see that the only vendor selling (fulfilling) this battery on Amazon (as of 12/12/2013 at 9:00am CST) is YoKool. And, as Jon says in his review on the same page, "for right now (Dec 2013) you should order directly from YoKool via Amazon to get the updated batteries."

Thanks!

56
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
« on: December 12, 2013, 09:58:10 AM »
The article says don't buy from Amazon yet, but the link goes to Amazon. How do you ensure you get the new batteries?

57
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35 f/1.4L II to Finally Arrive? [CR1]
« on: December 11, 2013, 07:28:06 AM »
I'd look at one, though the 35 f2 IS has me intrigued and at this point I, personally, like the idea of IS in an f2 wide angle more than twice the weight and size and cost, probably four times the cost, in an f1.4 wide angle.

If the 35 f2 IS was a 2.8, like the 28 and 24 then it would be less appealing, two stops is too much loss of dof control, but at only one stop slower the f2 IS is very interesting, and a deal at $550ish at the moment, (shame about the $50 hood! )

Agreed. I picked up the 35 f/2 IS, and it's a great little lens! A pleasure to use, the IS is awesome, it's a good price and light weight. If this lens didn't exist I might have gone for the 1.4, but can't really see it in my future now.

I'd much rather have a 16-35 2.8L mk III, or a 24 f/1.4 mk III, or a 20 f/2.0 (or 2.8). Even a new 50 1.4 or 85 1.8 IS

58
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35 f/1.4L II to Finally Arrive? [CR1]
« on: December 11, 2013, 07:15:04 AM »
still CR1? ... this thing better make good coffee, deliver pizza, and give good B... I better not say that

Bokah?

ummmm, ok,  yeah , ... that's what i meant   ;)

59
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35 f/1.4L II to Finally Arrive? [CR1]
« on: December 10, 2013, 10:31:47 PM »
still CR1? ... this thing better make good coffee, deliver pizza, and give good B... I better not say that

60
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Unthinkable: Swapped out 5D3 for 6D
« on: December 06, 2013, 06:30:14 PM »
I have the 5DIII and have used the 6D.

The only thing I prefer about the 6D is the weight and size. The 5DIII has better ergonomics, better button implementation, better menu structure, better HDR implementation (RAWs + HDR saved), better AF, far superior video performance, ... basically better everything.

Not better everything, but I'll concede most of what you mention.  I prefer the ergonomics of the 6D, myself.  It could use a few more buttons, but definitely the shutter button has a better feel on the 6D, than the 5D3 to me...it's mushy and vague.

However, again...the 6D is now half the cost of a 5D3.  The sheer fact that they're mentioned in the same sentence, says a lot about what you get for the money spent on a 6D.

I agree the 5DIII shutter button feel could be better. I found it odd at first but  I guess I've gotten used to it. No question the 6D can take every bit as good a photo in many situations, especially portrait and landscape. But I use my camera as a general purpose everything machine, including some sports and video.

The 6D video performance is the fatal flaw for me. I hated the moire and aliasing on the 5DII. The 6D performs about the same as the 5DII in video, but on the 5DIII Moire is almost completely absent, and that is a big deal! There's also audio in and headphones out and audio levels while recording, soft shutter, silent mode for video, and quite a few other nice touches.

If I only wanted landscape and portraits I would get the 6D and save some money for sure. But the 5DIII is a pretty awesome general purpose tool, with no major shortcomings.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 34