April 25, 2014, 02:35:22 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 - hendrik-sg

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Lenses / Re: New TS-E Lenses for Photokina [CR2]
« on: April 21, 2014, 09:49:30 AM »
Unique feature?

Maybe a uniquely high price?

EOS Bodies / Re: New DSLR and PowerShots in May [CR2]
« on: April 02, 2014, 12:26:50 PM »
maybe there will be a software upgrade announcement for the current 7d. Maybe this amazing upgrade will cost 300$ and give us the security, that no 3rd party batteries are used.... as a special goody it may contain a lens correction profile for the 18-55 STM lens

The higly anticipated lens announcement may be an 18-55 ii STM lens, which optically matches the layout of the software upgrade, with a perfectly weather sealed AF swich, printed on the lens in premium white and cant be switched unwanted

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon 11-24mm f/4 Lens
« on: January 25, 2014, 04:06:24 PM »
compared with the 17mm TS 11mm FF seems possible. if the image from the TS would be compresst to normal FF Image circle, there would result a 11mm 2.8 lens. Considering, that this patant is a zoom 11mm f 4.0 seems believable

comparing the angle of view mentioned in the patent with the calculator linked here, it seems to be a Full Frame lens. Not clear is, why the image high is less than 24mm, wich would be the hight of a FF sensor.

Lenses / Re: 7D user - advice on my best option for a 'go to' lens?
« on: January 19, 2014, 09:10:20 AM »
If you have 1000$ to spend, you can get a 17-55 or a 24-105 and use them for your 7d.

Or you could sell the 7d and buy a 6d & 24-105 kit for more less the same price.

Only advantages of your 7d are speed and better AF. Your current 17-85 is f5.6 at the long end, and the new lens is f4.0. A 6d gives you about 1.5 stops of low light capability and shallow depth of field, and the lens gives you another one at the long end.

if you want to change your 50 1.8 you can replace it by a 85 1.8 for about the same Price, and this one is said to be really good (i dont own it).

EOS Bodies / Re: Announcement Talk Begins
« on: January 03, 2014, 11:35:21 AM »
we are used to announcements from other companies only.

So maybe we will se an exiting price increase announceemnt, this will immediately push the sales of "classic" canon products. ;D

Technical Support / Re: Best Possible IQ
« on: December 11, 2013, 05:27:42 AM »
I dont want to offend you, but.....

If i would need (and pay for) this shot i wouldnt give the order to someone woh has to ask in a forum about equipment.

If i take my skills/equipment as a comparision, i would say most bad pics are bad as a result of lacking skill not because of bad equipment.

but anyway two thoughts:

- are the demands so high because the customer knows that a normal FF Shot is not enough, or is this your first order and you want to do your best?
- if there are trees, water, boats or anything other that might move, stitching might be difficult if there is any wind at all.
- maybe do testshot (of anything else) and practise the workflow with the guy who does the PP, costs less than renting MF equipment

For me using unknown equipment (recommended by forum useres) would be a no go, if you do any mistakes, bad settings etc, the results may be worse than with your normal equipment. Example: give a 85ii 1.2 and a 5diii to a rebel shooter who shoots with kit zoom in automatic mode and ask him to take portraits/party pics in low light. I would bet hard money that he will get not even one sharp shot.

Third Party Lenses (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) / Re: Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC
« on: December 10, 2013, 04:21:44 AM »
The amount of detail this lens renders is stunning:

Lots of detail, but I wanted to see a larger version!

Sorry - this one has commercial value, so I don't give away the big ones.

I'm the same way with most of mine.

Don't blame you.  I've managed to make photography somewhat profitable in a day where photography has been cheapened, but it is a fight.

Well you're ahead of me there obviously, but I hope to learn more how to go about it.  Because I have some amazing prints ready to sell right now...at least in my opinion and lots of folks who saw them, but chose to buy hand made jewelry and the like, instead!

At one point I decided not to worry about the commercial side of things and simply enjoy my photography. To me it is strictly a hobby and fortunately my job pays well enough to be a little bit creative on the equipment side of things as well, but I'm keeping it reasonable ;) I admire those who can make a profit out of photography, especially in these timen. Seems like a lot of hard work to me.

Is your regular job not hard work?  If I was making 6 or 7 figures from other types of work, I would still try to sell my photography.  I'd also like to get into film production.  But yes, photography itself has been radically cheapened and diluted in this day and age, and basically the world has 6 billion "photographers".  Almost seems like a billion of them are better than I am, or at least sell more of their work than I do!

My regular job is hard work, so I like to spend my free time not worrying about making money. If there were an easy way to make money from my photography, I might consider it but looking back at the time I was a student (and heavily into mountainbiking), working part-time in a bikeshop killed a lot of the enthusiasm I had for bicycle gear and in the end, cycling itself.

That's a shame, however maybe your chances of getting testicular cancer are less because of it?

There's no relation between cycling and testicular cancer.

Lance Armstrong would beg to differ.

Haha we're straying far off topic, but if this were true, then a lot more people would have it.

Not necessarily.  Anyway I think I'd like to buy a mountain bike after I sell my dirtbike!  I don't foresee buying another dirtbike any time soon, but would still like to ride on two wheels offroad, while trying to stay in shape.  I would not ride it all the time, though.  Also don't want to spend a lot of money.

Can't we go ONE day without talking about testicular cancer......

To make this interesting thread a little mor interesting: no we can't, at least not today. But to be on  topic, its a luck we can't get testicle cancer from buying cycling (or camera) gear, otherwise this forum would have to die. So lets buy something nice for christmas, and enjoy not to carry a to heavy wallet :)

Canon General / Re: TEN YEARS FROM NOW.
« on: December 02, 2013, 06:32:38 AM »
sensors are near their theoretical limit for efficiency,

Would love to educate myself on this. Pls can you guide me where I can read up on this statement. Thx.

There have been a number of articles posted on the subject.  ideally, a photosite that could read out the charge of one photon would be perfect, if it weren't for several other limits that also apply.

ISO is basically limited by sensor noise, and there is noise even in light itself.

Here is one article, its a bit involved, because its not a simple subject.


Here is a fairly technical paper about sensor noise, which is the limiting factor in high ISO low light photography.

As I said, there are technologies that sidestep the limits by combining multiple images and averaging out noise, but they do not increase the basic sensor limits.


Low light and low iso capabilities are sometimes mixed up in this forum. As far as low light is concerned, the paper mentioned above is a really complete and well founded explanation of whats possible and what not. the theoretical limit of information contained in a photo, is to count all photons and detect their color. This perfect image will be noisy as hell. This perfect image will be limeted by lenses, diffraction, sensor efficency, and by additional noise added anywhere between the incoming light and the photo arriving on the chip card (readout noise).

where sony/nikon are better than canon at the moment is low iso area, where canon is limited by readout or other noise. the way to better IQ would be to have lower native iso capabilities, but i dont know where the actual limitation near 100 is coming from.

maybe there will be more progress in postprozessing, to get the best out of an existing raw file, example here may be astronomics, where not only bigger instruments are build but also better results are obtained from existing instruments.

and the biggest limitation was forgottenuntil now.... most of my bad pictures are bad because of bad composition, to slow camera handling (missed opportunity), or just undone pics, because the camera was at home. But the existing equipment at least allows me to practise my skills, until the really good camera is out, which will compensate for my failures as far as possible....

Lenses / Re: More Mentions of 2014 Being the Year of the Lens [CR1]
« on: November 19, 2013, 11:39:39 AM »
wider than 12mm?

the widest fiel of view gives the 17 TSE f4 which has a image circle of 67mm instead of 43mm of a normal lens.

by attaching a hypothetical wide angel converter with x=0.64 this would compress the resulting picture to a 10.9mm f 2.6 view. Allready this is a bit wider than 12 or 14mm, and this converter would give this amazing lens additional possibilities (just with no sense in using the movements anymore, or only on crop).

but to be on topic again, a similar design like this lens would give the possibility of a much wider lens than the existing 14mm, and would even be nearly free of distortion.

Now to be hypothetical: by sacrifying some fastness it should be possible to design a even wider field of view, without sacrifying image quality to much.

Next question may be answered by the marketing compartment, but how many leneses with a 11mm 2.8 or hypothetical 9-10mm and 4 or 5.6 fastness would sell for a price between 2000$ - 4000$ ?

I am not sure, if for such a specialised lens a zoom is needed, assuming it would sacrify either focal lenght, brightness or image quality.

a 5d classic is far outdated by now, where a Nikon 7100 (or 5200, 3200) is state of the art. The Nikon 24MP Sensor has twice the resolution in good light and in bad light has even better per pixel performance than the outdated sensor of the 5d classic. you can compare this here:


The only advantage of the 5d may be a thiner field of view (if you like this), on the other side the Nikon has much better autofocus, faster frame rate, video and numerous additional fetures etc.

For crop cameras there are numerous good and affordable wide angel lenses, where for FF most options are more expensive, that if you wantwider than 18mm crop.

If you are on a budget, the Nikon 5200 and 3200 have the same sensor (means the same image quality) and are less expensive.

i am to deeply invested in canon glass so i will stay with canon, but for a new start i would consider nikon at the moment

Canon General / Re: What's Next for Canon?
« on: October 18, 2013, 05:01:22 AM »
Whats next: maybe a price increase. A more expensive product is better and more desirable, isnt it?

Canon General / Re: More Medium Format Talk [CR1]
« on: August 15, 2013, 06:41:06 AM »
According to dxo comparisions the MF sensors are quite behind the best FF and APS sensors, so there would be a chance to put the best technology form FF Cameras into a new MF syste, including Low Light and AF Performance, maybe on the cost of Frame rate.

If one of the major players in Imaging, maybe Sony or Canon this camera could avoid many of the current MF disadvantages, a way the Leica S&Pentax 645 go. But with more funds of the big companies even more should be possible.

But don't expect this would be a affordable system, i would expect this in the top range of MF systems. So almost all of us dreamerd would stay outside. So i think in forseeable future FF will stay the limit for most  hobbyists

Lenses / Re: Buy 50mm f1.2L now or wait for the II?
« on: July 28, 2013, 06:59:24 PM »
i used FF primes on crop and went FF in the meantime. The difference in focal lengh (more precise: Field of View) and dept of focus is so significant, that i wouldnt buy primes for FF and use them on Crop for undefined time.

For example a 500d with 50L gives you about the same Picture like a 5d3 with 85 1.8, but in much better Quality. 

As you have a (less expensive) lens linup which is suitable for FF i would buy the camera first, a 5d3 is a wonderful camera. By using it with your current lenses you will see what you want to Change in which priority.

Lenses / Re: EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Review from TDP
« on: June 24, 2013, 10:14:08 AM »
Its funny how much is raved about this undoubtly fine lens.

Compare the price of a 300 4.0 and 300 2.8 or (50-)500 5.6 and 500 4.0. Its about a factor 5 at least.

if one stop of aperture doesnt matter, then no fast primes would be sold. for me, i would hardly trade one stop of light for a 2x zoom, better pair a 300 2.8 with a 2nd body with a 70-200 2.8, or trade another stop (if trade 1 why not trade 2) for even mor flexibility and weight and price (100-400).

400 4.0 vs 300 2.8 may look like less reach, but one stop ISO to compensate for the less opening reduces detail as well and may compensate for some cropping.

Lenses / Re: Canon 100mm macro L or Zeiss 50mm makro?
« on: June 17, 2013, 03:58:08 AM »
maybe you want the 24-70 4.0 is lens, it gives you 1:1.4 magnification and replaces the zoom. if you dont need 105mm often, maybe 70mm is enough.

a fast 50mm costs nearly nothing, and for a fast lens AF is really helpfull.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4