March 02, 2015, 12:14:32 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 - smithy

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 20
EOS Bodies / Re: Upgrade from 400D to 5D MKII after 5 years, thoughts?
« on: April 15, 2012, 06:24:40 PM »
In terms of focussing in low-light, I'm not sure the Mark II will offer much improvement over the 400D.  It doesn't have an AF-assist light either, which means the subject will need to be illuminated well enough to obtain focus.  I'm not sure why Canon omit the AF-assist feature from their higher end cameras - perhaps to sell more Speedlite flashes?  There's always the manual focus option I suppose.

City portraits do usually look nicer (to me, anyway) with longer exposures rather than high ISO, as long as it's just architecture rather than people.  However, using either method the 5D Mark II will be sure to satisfy your requirements.  It is a big step up in image quality from a 400D (and is almost the same quality as the 1DSIII).  In fact, the whole camera layout and functionality will make you feel like the 400D was little more than a toy.  :)

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk III vs D800/E, is the 5D3 better at anything?
« on: April 15, 2012, 05:14:16 PM »
Canon should have priced the 5D3 the same as the D800.  That would've helped.  By pricing it $500 higher, it creates an automatic impression that it is 'supposed' to be a better camera.  If they are equally as good (which I'd like to believe), they should be closer price-wise.

EOS Bodies / Re: my first video shoot with 5Dmark3 In NYC
« on: April 15, 2012, 08:35:11 AM »
I really liked the colours and brightness.  I wasn't so keen of all of the ultra wide angle shots though.  The 16-35mm made it look fish eyed to me.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk III vs D800/E, is the 5D3 better at anything?
« on: April 15, 2012, 08:27:56 AM »
3.  Or make a choice not bashing one or the other resulting in proffering the ergonomics of one, the processing, and all overall basic results. 

For example on #3, when I shot film there was something that I favored in nikon film cameras, the color was different, i favored it more.  I shot the counterpart canon body and lens and preferred the results form my nikon film camera, it was to my needs.  Now canon fills the need, or i can adjust the need in pp.
Just out of curiosity (and as a film shooter), why do you think the colour was better when shooting film on a Nikon?  The glass?  Or the light meter?  I can't think of anything else that could affect colour, since it's primarily the film's role to determine such things.


WTF.... I would think it's from his site since it's "", but could someone who knows more about websites and hosting confirm if this is his or if someone somehow did this? As much as I dislike the guy, this seems a little juvenile even for his sense of humour. But maybe not.....
Nah, it's gotta be Ken's work.  The page is full of hyperlinks...  ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: Upgrade from 400D to 5D MKII after 5 years, thoughts?
« on: April 15, 2012, 08:02:47 AM »
Maybe I'm a bit 'old school', but traditionally, when shooting in low light situations you don't have to use ISO1600.  You just need a tripod.  But only if your subject is not moving.  :)  Either way, even if you use a 5D II (or III for that matter), there will be some noise at ISO1600.

Going to a full frame body from the 400D will give you more bokeh (the blur from shallow DOF).  You'll also be able to get more from the wide end of your 24-60mm lens, which isn't really a wide angle lens on a 1.6x body.

One of the downsides of going from crop to full frame is that you don't get to enjoy crop factor 'sweet spot' of your lenses.  Most zoom lenses are nice and sharp in the centre, but at the edges they start to blur.  With a crop body, the blurry parts are partially cropped out - but with a full frame body, you might get a bit of a shock to see what it's actually like at the edges.  (Which might make you want to go out and buy more prime lenses!)

Other than that, you won't regret going for the 5D.  If you ever happen to shoot sports or wildlife, you might miss the extra reach of the 1.6x factor, but just keep the 400D and use it for those situations.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark III Recall?
« on: April 12, 2012, 04:20:15 PM »
I heard that they're taking his advice and putting the "better" 9 point AF back in the 5D. They are also increasing the saturation limits within the camera.
;D  Brilliant.

Well, I'm going to sit tight - I was going to purchase a 5D tomorrow, but it's not urgent so I'll wait to see what happens.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MKIII vs 1Ds MKIII
« on: April 11, 2012, 07:07:02 PM »
I think one of the facts that I can't ignore is that a used 1DS3 is cheaper than a new 5D3 (by about $500).  How does that factor into the equation?  For me personally, I'm still likely to purchase the 5D3 just to get the warranty.  I just hope I don't kill it when shooting in the rain.   :-\

It's interesting to see that there are a few of us in the identical situation - the 40D has obviously lasted well.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MKIII vs 1Ds MKIII
« on: April 11, 2012, 04:58:24 AM »
Since I have an ongoing interest in this topic, I was wondering about AF performance.  Would the 1DS3's higher battery voltage (which drives lenses faster) mean that 'overall' it provides better AF performance (think AI servo, etc) than the 5D3?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: best autofocusing bodies and lenses
« on: April 09, 2012, 11:47:31 PM »
If you tend to use teleconverters with lenses that are slower than f/2.8, it's worth noting that the 5D3 and 1DX can only autofocus a f/5.6 and faster lens.  Just thought it was worth mentioning.  It's one of the factors that makes me wonder whether I should buy a used 1DS3 rather than a new 5D3.  Even though I don't own a teleconverter.  Yet.

Lenses / Re: Your Most Used Lens!
« on: April 08, 2012, 09:21:09 AM »
On my 40D, I use the 70-200mm f/4 lens the most.  I really love it.  It's great for capturing action from a distance; sports, family members, etc.

On my 1V, I mostly use the 24-70mm f/2.8.  On this body it's great as a walk-around lens and the aperture helps when using slower film.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5D Mark III Light Leak?
« on: April 07, 2012, 08:08:49 PM »
I've tried this test on my 40D and 1V, and neither has the 'issue'.

The LCD backlight doesn't affect the shutter speed/exposure when on. but why is the exposure fluctuating that much?
You need to take the lens off and just put the cover on the camera body.  Lens caps are designed to protect the lens, not block out 100% of light.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark 3 Queue @ B&H
« on: April 07, 2012, 11:31:35 AM »
Do all Americans call the Easter holiday the 'Passover' holiday?  Or just Jewish people?  No malice, just curious.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MKIII vs 1Ds MKIII
« on: April 07, 2012, 11:15:36 AM »
Thanks - I think I'll buy the 5D Mark III, as recommended by nearly everyone here.  I just wish it had the same build quality as the 1 series cameras (including the top button layout).  Well, I suppose I can always use my 1v when I'm shooting in bad weather!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MKIII vs 1Ds MKIII
« on: April 07, 2012, 12:35:47 AM »
I have the 1ds3, 5d2 and 5d3. The 1ds3 has felt "blah" ever since I got the 5d2. I have to say though that the 5d3 doesn't feel like much of an upgrade from the 2. As someone who mostly uses manual focus, and doesn't venture much above 3200 ISO, it seems a bit gratuitous. Fingers are crossed on the 1dx.
Just out of curiosity, given that you don't go over ISO3200 and only use manual focus, why did you buy the 5d3?  (Seeing that its two biggest features are its new autofocus and high ISO capability).

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 20