March 04, 2015, 10:39:43 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 - Act444

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 26
1
At first it seems tempting - not so much for the 50MP but for the cropping potential...but I would like to see firsthand how much effort is needed to get full detail. It took me enough time to be able to take advantage of 20MP resolution with my style of shooting...I suspect 50MP is going to be that learning curve all over again.

This does not seem to be a camera that can replace a 5D3 (at least for me) - I still need that high ISO performance on many occasions.

2
Lenses / Re: Canon ef-s 17-55mm 2.8 is usm GONE
« on: March 02, 2015, 12:34:26 PM »
Canon should solve the dust problem in this lens, it´s  slowly time for that.

Canon should make a true 2.8 equivalent lens (Like the Sigma 1.8 zoom)

this lens is actually a f/4.4 lens! And so are all other "2.8" lenses used on crop bodies.

But it IS a 2.8, isn't it? If you put a 24-70 2.8 on a crop it's the same.

Aperture and DOF, although related, are not the same (from what I understand)...

3
Lenses / Re: True reach of 100-400 L II
« on: February 27, 2015, 08:25:07 PM »
To me, as long as it puts out ~100mm more reach compared to the 70-300, I'm good with that. That's what I bought it for - 100mm extra reach. Regardless of whether it's a true 400 or not - I definitely know the 70-300 wasn't a true 300 at the long end, especially near MFD.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Smartphones Already Won -- Laforet
« on: February 26, 2015, 09:50:22 PM »

But there always comes a time when people take photographs and then compare their efforts to what a professional or highly skilled amateur can do.  There is a difference in what they see.  And then they start to ask questions, like why are their photographs so much better?  At that point they suddenly become disenchanted with their mobile phone camera.  It seems like an inferior machine.  The photographs that were once great are now embarrassing.  Hello, DSLR.

That's certainly what I did - and how I got started!  :o

(except it wasn't with my phone, it was with my P&S)

5
Lenses / Re: EF 50 1.8 STM
« on: February 26, 2015, 01:17:57 PM »
For anyone planning to get one of the new 5Ds - one option that opens up is that the 35 f2 IS can be turned into a 46mm f2 IS in the 1.3x crop mode (30 MP). That's pretty close to 50. And you keep USM. Also, you get rid of the corners which can appear hazy at 2.8 and below.

But for the rest of us, it would be nice to have newer 50mm options.

6
EOS-M / Re: Hands-on with the Canon EOS M3
« on: February 26, 2015, 10:50:54 AM »
The SL1/55-250 combo is great and has served me well when a larger setup wasn't practical. However, I recently handled the M with the EF-M 55-200 and the size difference is significant. In fact, the M/55-200 can even be crammed into my small belt bag while I still need a regular size camera bag for the SL1 and 55-250. Also, while the 55-250 is not a big white lens, I've still had it draw (some) attention on occasion. Strongly considering swapping it out for the M/55-200...of course when I want to go all out there is the big white lens that is the 100-400 ;)

7
EOS Bodies / Re: 5DS(R) details on CPN
« on: February 24, 2015, 08:50:48 PM »
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/technical/inside_the_eos_5ds_and_eos_5ds_r.do

More details given. For instance: "This can be combined with Auto Exposure Bracketing (AEB) to capture two, three, five or seven-shot sequences at different exposures".

Edit: I believe that we were expecting just 3...

Also:

"JPEG images are captured at the selected crop setting while RAW files are captured full-frame with the crop shown in DPP, allowing for fine adjustment afterwards".

Maybe the reason for max 5fps.

Ah, I see now. Nice to have it confirmed.

Although it would have been nice to give the user the choice to capture fully-cropped RAW at a smaller filesize TBH.

8
EOS-M / Re: Hands-on with the Canon EOS M3
« on: February 21, 2015, 05:13:27 PM »
I got a chance to play around with the M3 and EVF today...

Hello shunsai, thank you for your feedback, it's greatly appreciated!

One thing I have wondered is whether the new M3 (or older M/M2) make any "shutter" sound or other noise when taking a photo?
Personally I'd love a camera that's completely quiet for discrete street photography in public places, without the annoying clicking my SL1 makes - even in quiet mode.

That can just ruin the whole atmosphere when you take pictures of someone completely oblivious, or skittish animals...

thanks

Can't speak for the M2 or M3 as I don't have them, but the original M definitely has a shutter sound - and it's certainly audible in a quiet room (during a presentation, while I took photos for the event, the shutter sounds had a couple people turning back towards me briefly).

I will say, though, that it is quieter than the SL1. Noticeably so.

9
Lenses / Re: Which Lens to buy for Portraits
« on: February 20, 2015, 10:58:02 PM »
The 85 1.8 seems like a good choice.

I had that lens and it was excellent. And if you're shooting primarily about f5.6 there's no need to even think about the pricey 1.2 version. At f5.6 one probably won't be able to tell much difference. The 100 f2 is great as well, but think you will find it a tad long on crop.

Frankly, same with the 70-200 series, if that interests you - the f4 version is significantly lighter, cheaper and for all intents and purposes, JUST AS SHARP as the 2.8 II version. I know; I have both. At f4 the 2.8 will have brighter corners on FF but at 5.6, little to no difference.

10
Lenses / Re: 16-35F4 L IS, Any good?
« on: February 19, 2015, 07:25:39 PM »
I was never truly satisfied with the 16-35 2.8 II, but the f4 version is noticeably better, particularly off-center. Not perfect, still some corner softness at 16mm - but apart from the loss of a stop, it's better in practically every other way. Not to mention the price is quite reasonable (by L standards). Highly recommended.

11
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D Classic Good Enough for Pros?
« on: February 18, 2015, 04:20:15 PM »
I "upgraded" from a 60D to a 7D a couple years ago. Although it was a (significant) upgrade in speed and durability, it was almost a step back in pure IQ - the pics were softer (needed +6 sharpening by default!! I rarely go above +4 on my other cameras) and noisier. And the AF was really a mixed bag. I couldn't wait to replace it with the 7D2...

That said, I'd be lying if I said the 7D didn't give me some awesome shots (as well as the 60D before it). Many were even print-worthy. Even the SL1 has given me some real nice ones - many among my favorites (and also most liked/viewed on Flickr).


If I were truly in it as a pro, I'd likely be much more conservative in what I purchased and what I needed. The 7D still got me good shots, good enough to satisfy the vast majority of people. I'd probably still be using it today. As it is, as a hobbyist and being in this purely for myself, I tend to be much more picky...and that pushes me to get the best that I can afford.

12
The only way I see the 5D3 getting a V2.0 firmware update is if the 5D4 is still at least 1-2 years away.

13
Photography Technique / Re: What is your keeper rate?
« on: February 13, 2015, 11:20:45 AM »
Varies, but typically 1/2. Mostly around 40-60%.

That has typically been the case for a while, but as my skills improve and I upgrade to higher-end cameras, my standards go up (i.e. a photo that would have been good enough two years ago would likely be tossed now).

14
EOS Bodies / Re: DR from 5Ds will be 2 stop better then 7D mk II
« on: February 11, 2015, 12:12:14 PM »
I'll wait for the tests (and until I can try one out myself) before judging anything about this camera's IQ.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: RAW file size of crop mode in 5Ds/5DsR
« on: February 10, 2015, 04:11:58 PM »
And since the file size is unchanged between FF RAW and 1.xx RAW, it can only be assumed that the cropping is done in software, not in camera - meaning you still have the same buffer capacity and massive files as if you were shooting full 50MP RAW...

Furthermore, the mRAW and sRAW modes (which are actually smaller) are only for FF.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 26