September 18, 2014, 04:10:25 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 - JohanCruyff

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7
31
EOS-M / Re: Focal Length Reciprocal Rule + mirrorless body
« on: July 28, 2013, 06:11:34 PM »
Thanks.  :)




I'd like to share what I found on Canon Camera Museum: they seem to suggest that using hands and strap increases stability. Increases up to a DSLR level or not?




http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/design/frontline/product/eos_m/page3.html

32
EOS-M / Focal Length Reciprocal Rule + mirrorless body
« on: July 28, 2013, 07:53:44 AM »
Basic rule (FF): without IS, shutter speed should be 1/focal length.

APS-C rule: without IS, shutter speed should be 1/(1.6 * focal length).

What about (APS-C) mirrorless bodies rule, fellow friends from Canonrumors?
I suspect that the shutter spead should be much faster, because the camera body, without viewfinder-eye contact, is less stable than the DSLR's one.

Is there a basic empirical rule/suggestion for mirrorless, for example 1/(3 * focal length)?







Thank you in advance.

33
BREAKING NEWS!
My EOS M arrived today.
 
 
I know my supporters will certainly ask themselves "How did he convince himself to purchase the M?".
The answer is simple: they basically PAID ME to get a M.
 
 
 
Let me explain this.
 
a) I saw an on-line italian shop offering a "full kit" (EOS M + EFM 22mm + EFM 18-55mm + Flash 90EX + Mount Adapter" at an irresistible price: 535€.
b) Then I considered that the same vendor offered:
i. EFM 18-55: 125€
ii. EFM 22mm: 180€
iii. 90EX: 85€
iv. Mount Adapter: 95€.
 
c)So, [535 - (125+180+85+95)]... it was 50€ for the EOS M!!! But 50€ was still a huge  ::)  amount of money for a mirrorless! I couldn't justify paying it.
 
d) Therefore I had to consider that with the EOS M they sent me an original Canon LP-E12 battery, which costs abount 55€.
 
So, basically, they paid me 5€ to buy the EOS M.  8)    ;D 
 
 
If a new "M2" comes out with a better autofocus & viewfinder & battery & GPS & Wifi & Megapixel & S/N & DR, and I decide to upgrade, I won't feel guilty about wasting my money.  ;)
 
 
 
 
[BTW, I immediately ordered two 32GB SD (i.e. about 2,000 pictures in RAW), the lens hood for the 18-55mm and an extra battery... 135€... but I consider them just consumable materials  ::) ]

34
EOS-M / Re: EOS M 22 pancake lens cap
« on: July 19, 2013, 03:27:36 AM »
I knew that the hood is included only in L lenses, but I did'nt imagine that there was no cap for the EF-M kit lenses.  :(
 
Thanks for sharing.   :)

I think you misunderstood - it comes with a lens cap, but the OP didn't like the thickness of the included lens cap for the small camera.

Thank you.  :)

35
EOS-M / Re: EOS M 22 pancake lens cap
« on: July 19, 2013, 03:11:15 AM »
I knew that the hood is included only in L lenses, but I did'nt imagine that there was no cap for the EF-M kit lenses.  :(
 
Thanks for sharing.   :)

36
What about a "Nikon-D7100-like" crop-shooting mode?
 
To me it would make definitely more sense on a FF body: shooting @ 14 MPixel rather than 24 (=APS-H)with much faster FPS and AFpoints covering all the reduced frame.
 

37
The 17-40mm zoom may not be the very best of wide angle choices, but it isn't so bad either. I primarily shoot wide angle primes (14mm L, 17mm TS-E and 24mm L), but sometimes the need for versatility makes me pick up my 17-40mm zoom and no it doesn't kill me to use it, not on a 1D-X nor on a 5D Mark III.

Actually the 17-40mm zoom provides a much nicer zoom range on full frame than it does on crop, so yes, this lens will come into its own on a full frame body. It has not been designed for crop cameras. I expect you will be happy with it despite its flaws. In case you are desperate for better optical quality, you can still follow my route and collect wide angle primes ;) .


When I use my "17-40mm F/4" on my 5Dc as if it was a "20-40mm F/8", most of the concerns about sharpness (and distortion) disappear .
 
BTW, F/8 is not a weird aperture for a mostly-landscape-oriented lens.
 

38
EOS-M / Re: Canon EOS M II
« on: July 11, 2013, 07:07:05 PM »
I personally think that we do not need a new M body that urgent.  What we need is a more comprehensive M system – more lenses and accessories available.  The EOS M should not be only a backup camera for the EOS DSLR.  It is nice that I can put the L lenses to my M body once in a while, but I prefer to use it with more choice of smaller lenses as my daily camera.

+1 on the need for more lenses.  In that regard, Canon USA's decision not to launch the one recently announced lens (11-22mm) completely baffles me.


Is this "to rub salt in the wounds"? The EF-S 10-22 costs twice as much at amazon.it...




A good reason for a trip to Europe!  ;)

39
Lenses / Re: Dxo tests canon/nikon/sony 500mm's
« on: July 11, 2013, 06:47:35 PM »
This comparison of DXO's results is what makes me EXTREMELY SUSPICIOUS of them. The Nikkor 500mm scores 25, when every single trait that factors into that score is worse than the Canon 500mm...which also scores 25. That is just plain wrong. The Canon has zero distortion, higher sharpness, less vignetting, less CA, and the same transmission...on a LOWER RESOLUTION BODY! It should have a higher score than the Nikon.



The hidden row (see my attachment) includes a technical parameter  :o which determines the overall score.



40
An intriguing offer has appeared on an Italian site:
 
EOS M + EFM 18-55mm + EFM 22mm + 90 EX + EF Mount adapter = "Full Kit EOS M" = 565€.
 
The vendor (galaxiastore) does not belong to my "preferred list"  :(  (which includes Amazon.it and two other shops) but other Italian people checked it and were happy about it.
 
http://www.galaxiastore.it/product_info.php/products_id/2310/Vendita-CANON-EOS-M-NERA-18-55mm-22mm-90EX---EF-M---FULL-KIT-EOS-M
 

 
Same store, another sudden price drop.
 
EOS M + EFM 18-55mm IS STM + EFM 22mm  STM + 90 EX + EF Mount adapter = "Full Kit EOS M" = 535€.   :o   :o   :o

 
I must confess that I am tempted now. I'll talk to the Board of Directors (i.e. my wife  ;D ) about it.
 

41
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: July 10, 2013, 10:08:32 AM »
3. As I've said for YEARS: APS-H is dead. Please don't keep resurrecting it.   ::) APS-H is now an unnecessary 'half way house' between APS-C and FF.  The 6D particularly demonstrates that.  Leave it to RIP, please!
 - APS-C for budget sensor, on camera flash, 'reach' (ie pixel density for certain applications - eg birding, some sports), and to make use of the wonderful array of EF-S lenses (many of which are L class in terms of image quality.
 - FF for more depth of field (DOF) control and per pixel sharpness, lower noise, and possibly in the (near) future, an overall much higher resolution photo - already competing with Medium Format.

Maybe you're right, APS-H is an unnecessary compromise between FF and APS-C.
If you're right, we can consider G15 is an unnecessary compromise between standard point&shoot cameras and EOS M.
And maybe APS-C sensor is an unnecessary compromise between P&Ss and FF.
And maybe P&Ss are unnecessary compromises between smartphones and FF.
And ...
 
 
Well, I think that a few compromises deserve to survive.

42
EOS Bodies / Re: How good is 70D AF system compared to 50D?
« on: July 10, 2013, 02:08:44 AM »
Much better at servo tracking. Similar with one shot (too bad the 70D seemingly won't have Spot AF).


Who knows, it could even be better than 7D [CR-100!!!] if we consider that the specs don't tell everything: the non-cross outer AF points of the 6D have been reported to be better than the ones in the 5D2, although the specs were the same.

43
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: July 09, 2013, 01:37:54 PM »
I'm curious about the 2 "pro" bodies - one of will be the high megapixel camera but the other will be?.....


Maybe two high megapixel? 5D3big (3D?) and 1DXbig?
Or will the APS-H surprise us and come back to a new life?

44
An intriguing offer has appeared on an Italian site:
 
EOS M + EFM 18-55mm + EFM 22mm + 90 EX + EF Mount adapter = "Full Kit EOS M" = 565€.
 
The vendor (galaxiastore) does not belong to my "preferred list"  :(  (which includes Amazon.it and two other shops) but other Italian people checked it and were happy about it.
 
http://www.galaxiastore.it/product_info.php/products_id/2310/Vendita-CANON-EOS-M-NERA-18-55mm-22mm-90EX---EF-M---FULL-KIT-EOS-M
 
 
P.S. EOS M + EF-M 22mm sells for 455€; EOS M + EF-M 18-55 + 90 EX = 395€

45
EOS Bodies / Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« on: July 08, 2013, 01:47:13 AM »

"Also in development is a focal length reducer for EF lenses, this will be announced with the 20mp EOS M camera"

That is something you hear about more in astronomy.  But a 0.8 focal reducer that would turn your 10-22 3.5-4.5 into, say, a 8-18 2.8 - 3.6 would be interesting.  A Meade or Celestron focal reducer costs in the neighborhood of $100.  Count on the Canon being $300, maybe.  Because it is Canon, and because it has the EOS electronic connections. 

Let's see -- a .8 reducer would make the 85 1.8 a 68 1.4.  But the efl would still be a bit over 100mm because of the crop factor.   This sounds intriguing, but will probably not be inexpensive.

A reducer factor of 0.63 would restore EF lenses to their full frame optical values. (0.63 = 1/1.6).  I wonder if that's it....

I would expect a factor of .707 (sqrt(2)/2) mainly because it would be an even 1 stop difference, whereas a factor of .63 comes out to a very odd 5/4ths stops.

85/1.8 would become a 60/1.3
24-70/2.8 would become 17-50/2
70-200/4 would become 50-140/2.8

I think that would be enough to make focal lengths that are only so-so on crop (24-anything) quite attractive.


...and the 60/1.3 would become a 85/1.8 equivalent,
the 17-50/2 would become a 24-70/2.8 equivalent,
the 50-140/2.8 would become a 70-200/4 equivalent,
on a crop body.


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7