April 16, 2014, 03:43:35 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 - danski0224

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 30
166
Free 4x6 and/or 8.5x11 glossy photo paper packs *and* free shipping with qualifying ink purchases through Canon USA.

Not sure how long the promo lasts, but I needed some ink anyways, and the price was the same as elsewhere.

I purchased 3 ink tanks at $15 each and was eligible for both photo papers and the shipping deal.

167
EOS Bodies / Re: German Canon Event
« on: October 04, 2013, 07:09:56 AM »
Maybe Canon is releasing a 1DV.XS...

Interchangeable APS H and FF sensors.

 ;)

168
Software & Accessories / Re: good shoulder bag?
« on: October 04, 2013, 07:01:15 AM »
Reminded me that I'm still looking for the "Tardis" bag – bigger on the inside than on the outside.

I had one, but it kept getting lost and I eventually misplaced it...

169
I've seen rumors that Nikon is working on cameras that can have an interchangeable sensor. I found it interesting and also clever marketwise. At this moment the cameras ar covering pretty well the photographers needs, and it can become interesting to start to sell specific sensor for the diverse kind of shooting (high iso specific sensor, a low clean one and so on). ithink that there is a chance to sell many of them.
Now, I found really strange that Canon, that's producing both Camera and Sensors is not working on something similar.
Canon il the market leader and could set a standard for all the companies, no?

I can't see this being economical, not to mention practical.

I can't install a Sandy Bridge processor into a Pentium socket. I do not get the full benefits of current SATA drives with IDE ports, cables and adapters.

Apple is worse with their OS "upgrades".

The latest versions of Android do not work on older phones.

At some point, the ability to upgrade a sensor while retaining the supporting electronics would become impossible. I know someone that bought an "upgradeable" high end audio/video preamp and within three years, the only upgrade was all of the stuff inside the chassis.

I have no idea what the cost is for the sensor in a quality digital camera. I do think it would be very cool to be able to buy specialized sensors, maybe one just for IR or one just for B&W, but if those are $1k+ USD apiece for a swappable module, the number of people actually willing to pay for the option just got smaller.

170
EOS Bodies / Re: 3.5\
« on: September 29, 2013, 08:05:26 AM »
What is the rumored DR of this rumored screen update?

:)

171
Lenses / Re: Canon IS BINOCULARS
« on: September 28, 2013, 02:27:21 PM »
I've never tried stabilized binoculars.  How well do they work?

Purdy darn nifty.

Pretty much takes out the shake.

The pair I tried has a little button that you have to keep pressing to engage the IS- that was the only minor complaint.

172
Lenses / Re: Canon IS BINOCULARS
« on: September 28, 2013, 09:07:02 AM »
I am considering buying a pair of Image Stabilizer binoculars. I have been on various web sites looking at the specifications but none of the sites mention i f these binoculars have Diopter eye adjustments. There aren't any shops within 50 miles so am unable to looks before I buy. Hopeful that someone can help. Many thanks


Check out the Canon web page.

Given USA product, the 12 x 36 model is the lowest price entry with diopter called out in the specs.

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/binoculars/image_stabilizer/12_x_36_is_ii#Specifications

173
Macro / Re: Denizens of the Forest Floor
« on: September 22, 2013, 11:53:16 PM »
Growing on a fallen tree


174
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 2 5d3's or 1d x
« on: September 21, 2013, 07:28:17 AM »

BTW, this is my late cat, taken early this year at ISO 51k. ;-)


Cute cat.

What camera did you use to take the pictures?


175
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 2 5d3's or 1d x
« on: September 20, 2013, 10:56:34 AM »
I am getting my camera (5d3) replaced and have the opportunity to sell the replacement and get factory refurbed 1d x for $3900 or spend $1600 more to have 2 5d3's so I will have a backup. Just not sure if I should jump on the 1d x since I have lived this long with 1 body or get the 2 5d3's. My main want is stop better iso performance, customizable ae adjustments, more accurate metering. Just looking for people who have both to give some insight. I do like the smaller size, silent shutter, lower weight but want a tool thats best for the job. So far events and portraits are all I have done. Also landscapes and macro.

There are lots of threads here and elsewhere on this.

What I have found, of importance to me, is this:

At/below 1600 ISO, 5D3 = 1DX. Above 1600 ISO, 1DX > 5D3

Metering: 1DX > 5D3

f/2.8 AF Points: 1DX > 5D3

Viewfinder face detection: 1DX

Numerous comments about the superior quality of 1DX files and the ability to manipulate them in post.

At low ISO's, given a properly executed image, the 5D3 seems to have more detail due to more MP.

The quieter shutter (not even in silent mode) of the 5D3 should not be underestimated for things like weddings. This comes up again and again.

Not an easy choice. It isn't just build quality.

176
Lenses / Re: Canon 16-35 II f/2.8L AND/OR Canon 14mm II f/2.8
« on: September 20, 2013, 09:37:22 AM »
Please explain.  Physically, the 14mm gives you around +/- 3 deg FOV on a FF.  Is the difference in IQ worth having both?  Since you are so bold in your statement, do you own both?

Yes, I have both.

The 16-35II was first. About a year or so later, I got the 14.

There is a difference between the two. If you want to go that little bit wider or can't step back any further, that leaves the 14, unless you like a fisheye. I am not a pixel peeper , nor do I judge simply based on corner sharpness.

However, I do find the 16-35 to be more useful. I happen to like that range.

Renting the 14 to check it out isn't a bad idea. 

177
Lenses / Re: Canon 16-35 II f/2.8L AND/OR Canon 14mm II f/2.8
« on: September 20, 2013, 09:13:51 AM »
There's a big difference between 14 and 16 mm.

178
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 2 5d3's or 1d x
« on: September 20, 2013, 07:49:25 AM »
Please, do tell where the factory refurb 1DX for $3900.00 is available.

179
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Full Frame or faster lens?
« on: September 18, 2013, 10:17:53 AM »
I had a 7D and didn't use it much once a 5DII showed up. Too much of a readily apparent difference in quality and framing. I grew up on 35mm film, and the difference is readily apparent.

But, the loss of the 1.6x teleconverter (APS-C) kinda sucked for some instances.

Adding even a 1.4x TC can significantly impact focus speed, and it steals light. I tried the TC on a 300mm f/4 and wasn't happy with the change in AF speed. This was on a 5D series, not 1D series.

Then, you are limited to certain AF points based on the lens (lens groups) and apeture. 

If the Sigma reports properly (and it probably does), you should get access to the f/2.8 focus points. That changes with the 1.4x teleconverter.

If it is at all possible to rent it, I'd try that before buying one. Maybe even rent a 5DIII at the same time. I know LensRentals has a partnership with Super Digital City for some of the Sigma lenses they have for rent and you get most of the rental as credit towards a purchase. This is from a USA customer perspective.

If you are willing to shell out the funds for a 5DIII, I'd suggest sourcing a nice used 1DIV instead. Given that "wildlife" is listed first in your interests, and you have no wide angle lenses listed, you will probably be disappointed in the loss of 1.6x. Lots of AF points and FPS in the 1DIV too.

The 5DIII has spot AF with any lens and the 1DIV does not, unless you are using one of the supertelephoto lenses with the buttons.

Yes, there are numerous tests here and elsewhere about cropping FF images to the same FOV of APS-C and APS-C cameras and being able to retain details. The technical stuff is over my head, but it seems to hold water only if the FF image is tack sharp.

If my math is right (ha!), the 300mm on your 7D becomes 187mm on the 5D series and 230mm on the 1DIV. I suppose you could mess with your 100-300 on a static subject and compare, or at least get a feel for the differences. Might be worth a shot. Essentially, a 400mm lens would be needed on the 5D to match the "reach" of the 7D.

Up to you to try it before buying more stuff.

There is no clear cut or easy answer. Canon seems to be segmenting their product line.

ISO 6400 on the 5DIII is useable, no problems, without doing anything extra in my eyes. One day I'll take the time to learn how to use either DPP or Adobe products more effectively.

Good Luck.

180
Software & Accessories / Re: Macro Photography
« on: September 12, 2013, 02:35:21 PM »
I have to admit that I have never done any true macro (at least 1:1) photography in my close to sixty years of practicing this hobby.  But I have been thinking I might have some fun with it.  Currently I own no prime lenses (loaned my 50mm 1.8 to grand-daughter, doubtful I will see it again).  I have an EFS 17-55 2.8 (which I love), a 70-200 2.8L II, a 100-400L, and several other lesser quality mid-range zooms (between the wife and I we have three bodies, 30D-hers, 40D and 7D-mine).  Due to a lengthy fall vacation (I'm retired, what am I vacationing from?) where we will visit four National Parks and one National Monument plus a day trip into Canada and a planned mission trip in November to a third world nation, my budget is a little strained. 

Finally to the question.  What do I need?  Would it be wiser to wait until I could afford something like the 100 2.8L Macro ( or other lens suggestion) or should I pop for a set of extension tubes such as the Canon extension tubes (or should I go for something cheaper in the tubes).

Thanks for any advice from those much wiser than I.

The 60mm EF-S Macro is a nice lens, works out to ~96mm equivalent. It is made for your cameras.

A longer lens, like the 100mm L Macro allows a bit more distance, which can come in handy for bugs or bigger flowers. That is ~160mm on your cameras. The IS helps for handheld shots.

The 180mm macro is also a nice lens, but sometimes it is too much. I found that I like ~150mm on a 5D series camera.

As previously mentioned, lighting can be an issue, especially if you stop down the lens for a greater depth of field and it isn't daylight. Proper and even illumination in macro shots is a whole subject by itself. There is a "post your set-up" in the Macro section of FM Forums.

Extension tubes also steal light.

Close-up lenses like the Canon 500D do not steal light and may give you some limited macro use from your 70-200.

Renting a dedicated macro lens or two may help.


Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 30