September 02, 2014, 12:28:36 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 6 ... 40
46
Lenses / Re: What was your first L lens?
« on: June 10, 2014, 07:22:03 PM »
The 24-105 f/4L IS came in the 5DII kit,
and I bought the 16-35 f/2.8L II at the same time

47
Reviews / Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« on: June 10, 2014, 01:19:58 PM »
This is the third review I read from Dustin Abbott. Great review once again. Very honest.

I was seriously considering the reviewed lens but got caught up by the announcement of the Sigma 50 1.4 Art (not sure I want to buy a 35mm AND a 50mm). Anyway I might end up just buying the 40mm instead, so here comes my

question: how does the 35mm f/2 IS compare to the 40mm f/2.8?

I understand the max aperture small difference, the 300$ price tag gap, and the former being a tad wider, but what in terms of:
- sharpness (@ 2v2.8 and 2.8v2.8)
- distortion
- bokeh rendering
- Dustin's "WOW" effect

Thanks in advance.
O.

I have both the 35 f/2 IS and the pancake 40mm.  I use the 35 quite a bit, and love it!

I hardly ever use the 40. It's not quite wide enough, and the aperture is not quite large enough. I'm not a fan of the focus by wire, which produces a lot of noise in video, and is frustrating for quick manual focus, and you can't retract the focus unless the camera is on.

The 35 is small and light enough to satisfy my desire for light weight walk around, but the 40 fits easily into almost any bag, and the camera is really easy to take out of a bag when the 40 is on it. Some people use the 40 as a camera body cap.

If I was only going to get one, I'd get the 35 f/2 IS. I've taken handheld video interviews at night on the street using this lens that look like they are on a tripod! And the focal length is perfect for street video interviews because you can get up close to the subject which vastly improves the on-camera audio quality (using a Rode VideoMic Pro).

Then again, I bought the 40 2.8 for $150 ... at that price it's a no brainer for me, so wait for a sale and get both!

48
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next for Cinema EOS?
« on: June 09, 2014, 10:58:50 PM »
If they don't get something out at Photokina to compete with the GH4, I suspect most of the low budget indie crowd will consider Canon dead in the water, and start migrating, unless they've already got too much invested in glass and already have a 5D Mk III.

Low budget indie crowd is generally shooting Alexa.

There's low budget, and there's LOWwww budget. My low budget crowd thinks I'm big budget with a 5DIII setup   :)

49
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next for Cinema EOS?
« on: June 09, 2014, 06:03:52 PM »
If they don't get something out at Photokina to compete with the GH4, I suspect most of the low budget indie crowd will consider Canon dead in the water, and start migrating, unless they've already got too much invested in glass and already have a 5D Mk III.

The GH4 is certainly an interesting camera, but not perfect. A lot or most Indies cant afford or handle a full 4K workflow yet, shallow DOF is a challenge on the GH4 since you need much larger aperture lenses to achieve it (think f/1.2 ), XLR is nice, but most people use separate audio and it's not that difficult, some people like Philip Bloom have reported that low light performance is not that great (5D3 is awesome in low light). The GH4 is no longer small and light, and with the Audio option, it's quite large and heavy, and yet still not a good option for ENG ... and it's $4000 . I'm not tempted by the GH4.  The 5D3 footage still has a special beauty to it.

The real threat may come from the Sony A7s ... if reviews confirm the promise. Small, light, full frame, unbelievable low light, and 4K available for a high end production if you really need it. I'd like to see Canon put something head to head with the Sony A7s rather than the GH4

50
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M Vanishes from Canon USA Web Site
« on: May 31, 2014, 03:46:41 PM »
It's mind boggling how brainwashed people are on FF being the god all-mighty form factor. I guess change is scary to a lot of people.

When it comes to sensors, bigger is better.  I guess physics is scary to some people.  ;)

Granted, smaller might be good enough, depending on the application/output.

People over play this card. With current sensors you're not going to see a difference until about ISO 3200. And that's if you print 20". FF is amazing in low light, but the majority of images are not produced there.

There's over 2 stops advantage from FF vs crop for pics. It's closer to 3 stops for video. The 5DIII video is pretty damn good even at ISO 10,000.  The 60D starts to degrade over 1250. The EOS-M video is not very good at 1600, so you have to stay at 800. Magic Lantern can help things there, but larger sensors win almost every comparison, but you have to pay to play

51
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M Vanishes from Canon USA Web Site
« on: May 29, 2014, 04:27:29 PM »

Why stop there? In the future, owning a camera will be a thing of the past, cameras will be completely automated and ubiquitous: in the air, on every street corner, inside cars, outside cars, in you pen, glasses, drinking cup, toothbrush. Professional photogs will just be resellers, upselling images from other services for a commission. Don't like an image, ... click on glamorize and sportify ... turn it into a movie, for $1.99 extra, add music, script, dialog, and sound effects, $2.49, ... $2.99 to put it at the top of social media.

Better sell everything now!

Yes. Except that NOW, is the time where smaller than FF formats are priming to be very attractive alternatives for the mainstream enthusiast. Provided that people can be open minded and try the format and see if it suits themselves. And if smaller than FF format happens to suit your needs, and if you happen to not go over 85mm 99% of the time, instead of waiting for the next EOS-M3, waiting for Canon to expand the EF-M line-up, waiting for a handful of EF-S primes, which Canon will likely botch anyways, Fuji and M4/3 are much better alternatives than Canon.

There are two things I don't want to give up: IQ, and ergonomics.
I have a 5DIII and an EOS-M (I also have a Samsung EX-F2, and some other cameras that I don't use much) ... I use my 5DIII most of the time. I like the EOS-M, but it is not as easy to use as the 5DIII, and the IQ drops in low light while the 5DIII continues to shine.

I think the 5DIII could stand to lose some weight and size, but not too much, because then you'll lose buttons and ergonomics start to suffer. Ergonomics really matter when you have to respond quickly before the moment is gone forever.

The Sony A7s looks promising, but I'll definitely wait for reviews. The A7 DPR review was not that great, A7r was better, but still video is compromised. And some people report that they find the small size frustrating at times.

There's never going to be an ultimate do everything format, but Full Frame will continue to outperform small sensors in pretty much every way. Phillip Bloom has already complained about low light video performance of the GH4, and it's the pinnacle of m4/3.

The future is difficult to predict, other than to say it will be exiting for photography and video. I wish I was 30 years younger because this party is just getting started!

52
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M Vanishes from Canon USA Web Site
« on: May 29, 2014, 02:21:23 PM »
Full Frame and Optical Viewfinders are the past. APS-C/DX, M4/3 and One Inch cameras with EVF are the future.

In the not-to-distant-past Full Frame 35mm cameras where called Miniature Cameras, and most professionals didn't use them. In the not-to-distant-future only hobbyists will use Full Frame, and pros will have moved-on to smaller formats.

Did I hear someone whining about bokeh?? Bokeh will be handled by the camera, sorta like custom white balance is today -- just dial in how little or how much you want.

Time marches on!

Why stop there? In the future, owning a camera will be a thing of the past, cameras will be completely automated and ubiquitous: in the air, on every street corner, inside cars, outside cars, in you pen, glasses, drinking cup, toothbrush. Professional photogs will just be resellers, upselling images from other services for a commission. Don't like an image, ... click on glamorize and sportify ... turn it into a movie, for $1.99 extra, add music, script, dialog, and sound effects, $2.49, ... $2.99 to put it at the top of social media.

Better sell everything now!

53
EOS Bodies / Re: New Full Frame Camera in Testing? [CR1]
« on: May 28, 2014, 02:10:44 PM »
I welcome any and all new developments and improvements in cameras (even non-Canon brands  :o). Most of all, I welcome the ones I can afford. Unfortunately, my GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome) has limited my ability to make future purchases unless I sell some of my current under-utilized stuff  :(

And I'd really like a lightweight FF that can do top notch video (better than my 5DIII), mirrorless or otherwise.

54
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M Vanishes from Canon USA Web Site
« on: May 27, 2014, 12:23:15 PM »
Hi,
   IMHO, the only advantage of mirrorless camera is the smaller size. By decreasing the price of entry level DSLR, the entry level lenses, entry level full frame DSLR, making smaller DSLR and lenses and making good high end compact camera (G16 and G1X Mk2), I think Canon had successfully "limit" the grow of mirrorless market share... only those who want a mirrorless camera or those who really need a small interchangeable camera will go for the mirrorless camera now.

   Just my $0.02.

   Have a nice day.

Small size and weight can be really important, as long as ergonomics and IQ is still good.
In fact, size and weight are the only reasons I'm interested in mirrorless.

55
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M Vanishes from Canon USA Web Site
« on: May 27, 2014, 12:10:39 PM »
I could go for a mirrorless FF, even with EF mount. There are already some nice little lenses: 24 2.8 IS, 28 2.8 IS, 35 f/2 IS, 40 2.8 pancake, 50 1.4, 85 1.8

OR bring on an EOS-M Pro , but don't compromise. Make it the best you can deliver, and price it accordingly

56
I may be one of the few cinema line enthusiasts that frequent this forum...

In any case, I wonder if they will release a 7DC too?

Lets give the stills people what they want... and also have another camera for the video peeps.
So far in the line up of cinema cameras, there is only one DSLR style cam i.e. the 1DC, and 3 camcorder style cams i.e. CX00 cameras... it would be nice to have another more affordable cinema DSLR.

Agree... but a 7Dc would be at least $4000 if the 1Dc is any indication  on pricing

57
Lenses / Re: The Next \
« on: May 20, 2014, 05:58:33 PM »
 
... a 150-500L would be better though.

58
Lenses / Re: The Next \
« on: May 20, 2014, 05:57:00 PM »
This is a much anticipated lens , and a really popular focal range. If Canon nails this, which they should, and keeps it reasonably priced they'll sell boat-loads of them and make a ton. I'll buy one if it's around US$2000, like the 70-200 f/2.8L II IS

59
Lenses / Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM Image Samples
« on: May 19, 2014, 09:52:08 AM »
The best UWA for APS-C is still the Tokina 11-16 2.8. It's a narrow range, but you get lots of light and it's sharp.  Why settle for lower image quality, and less light?  YMMV

60
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS Sample Images
« on: May 19, 2014, 09:33:14 AM »
F/4 is fine for almost all users.  I'm probably one of the few who actually use f/2.8 on a regular basis, just because of the lack of light in theaters.  Now that I have my 24-70 MK II, I do not use wider very often.

I'd say this is one of the new family of Video optimized lenses with IS that Canon is developing.  They see video as a big selling point, so we are going to see more video features.  Who knows, if they get good enough for me to use, I might take up video again.  I did do it on Super 8mm film in 1968 for a few years, then again in the lete 1980's and early 1990's on SVHS.  Using the video editors with my Panasonic Industrial recorders was time consuming to a extreme.  Programming the controllers, black-bursting tapes - YUK! 

I've also done it more recently using computers to edit, and even with my DSLR's, but I'm not happy with the results, and not willing to invest time and $$ into video, at least for now.

If you have a 5D3 install ML and then you'll be more than happy with the results (so long as you don't require 4k to be happy). The video quality on 5D3 for 1080p using ML RAW video is really pretty awesome.

ML Raw video ... how many minutes of video do you get on a 32GB card?
And how onerous is the post processing?

thx

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 40