April 18, 2014, 01:36:59 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 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 18
166
Lenses / Re: Upgrade from Sigma 18-200
« on: September 21, 2012, 09:39:14 AM »
I think 24-105 is fine on my 60D but it really depends on your style of shooting. I find it to be a bit tight (and slow) indoors, but outside it's fine, for the most part.

167
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: A positive feedback for 6D
« on: September 20, 2012, 10:16:24 PM »


I think the 6D would be an excellent travel camera.  With a FF sensor, you can just bring a pancake and you are good to go, even in low light situations.  The -3EV AF is a terrific feature.

That's exactly what I'm thinking here. I already have the 24-105, slap that on and that's the travel pack right there. The high ISO would be perfect for no-flash places & evening excursions, the wider view fine for landscape and tourist shots, and the sealing good for unexpected weather conditions. Not that the 60D wouldn't do a fine job in that regard- it would- but eventually, when it's possible to take that next step, this might be an option.

Still, the price must come down several hundred dollars first. I'm also interested in that new EOS M camera (different reason - might get good use in areas where DSLRs are too bulky/attention-grabbing/suspicious/etc.) so (after reviews) might spring for that and then see what next year brings.

168
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: A positive feedback for 6D
« on: September 20, 2012, 06:58:22 PM »
I'd be interested in the answer to that question as well. As a 60D owner I'm actually surprised at how similar the two cameras seem to be...
I recently upgraded from the 60D to the 5DII.  They seem very similar in most of the ways that I shoot.  A couple ergonomic issues are different, but largely they are the same.  For example, the AF seems identical.  The metering on my 5DII seems a little more accurate.  The key differentiator is the ISO speed and cleaner noise at higher ISOs, which benefits the 5DII (and 6D) substantially.  Regardless of how the 6D performance shakes out, you should consider a 5DII upgrade path because the ISO performance is a real upgrade.

Thanks for the insight...interesting. I really do like the 60D- it even exceeded my expectations when I shot some action last week- for having "only 9" AF points I got quite a few keepers. :) My only complaint about it, and it's not really a complaint per se as it's a wish - I would like better high ISO performance. There are times that I'm feeling the limits of ISO 3200 (yes, even with an f2.8 lens) and would like to go higher but can't due to the excessive noise levels. Hoping the new 7D II has this, and I can keep the crop factor for my long lenses.

To clarify, any use for a FF camera like the 6D would be mostly travel, walkaround and events. If I chose to go this route, I would almost certainly keep the 60D to get maximum reach out of my telephotos (70-200 2.8 and 70-300). Lens-wise, I have mostly EFs anyway - the only EF-S I have is the 17-55 (but it's one of my most used ones).

I'd like to see how the 6D's AF performs in practice, and whether it is at least on par with the 60D, because it sounds like at least on paper, with the exception of the low-light rating, it's somewhat of a downgrade. Plus, if it's true that FF cameras require more accurate focusing due to more limited DOF, this would seem even more critical...?

169
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: A positive feedback for 6D
« on: September 20, 2012, 09:33:10 AM »
Hmmm if, in real life, the autofocus works better than the 5D mkii and the image quality turns out to be at least as good if not better I might well start getting excited about this camera as a potential 60D upgrade!

I'm in the same boat.  I want to go full frame.  When I shoot weddings, I use the company's 5D mk2/mk3 so I don't really NEED one.  I'd like to have a FF body for personal use for less than the price of a mk3.  If the AF is good, I'd be much closer to a final decision.  My 60D has 9 AF points and all 9 are cross type but I typically just use the center and recompose anyway.

I wish it had AF during video. When I'm shooting videos, I usually like to focus manually and was looking forward to having a DSLR that had AF during video if I wanted to shoot a 2nd angle on a tripod and just let it run while I manually focus with the other camera but alas, I might have to get a T4i just for that purpose.

Does anyone who's actually played with the 6D know if the AF on the 6D works BETTER than the 60D? any thoughts or input would be welcome.

I'd be interested in the answer to that question as well. As a 60D owner I'm actually surprised at how similar the two cameras seem to be. The 6D is not a total "upgrade" though since IIRC the 60D can do 1/8000s, slightly faster flash sync and at least on paper, AF seems to be more well-rounded. (I want to see reviews of the 6D AF in practice before passing judgment, unlike several others here it seems)

BUT, the 6D does have the low ISO 50 option which sort of compensates for the lower 1/4000s max speed I suppose, which the 60D does not have.

170
EOS Bodies / Re: At what price point will you consider buying the Canon 6D?
« on: September 18, 2012, 12:56:42 PM »
Thought process will go like this, assuming it happens within a year (and there is no 7D replacement on the horizon)

At $1700 I'll start thinking about it

At $1600 I'll take a look at it

At $1500 I'll consider it.

At $1400 I'll probably pick one up. :)

171
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Announces the Canon EOS 6D DSLR
« on: September 17, 2012, 12:52:36 PM »
So much negativity - and there hasn't even been a review or image gallery yet.

To me, this could potentially be an interesting camera. But not at the current asking price. If this comes down a few hundred dollars over the next few months, it may actually be worth a look *IF* the image quality and high ISO performance match that of the 5D III.

As someone who prefers the reach of a "crop" 1.6x camera, if the image quality of FF is truly a step up- it may be something to think about...whether I could potentially have both. But FF cameras are just too expensive...even the most basic ones as we see here today.

172
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« on: September 15, 2012, 02:43:18 PM »
went to an ice-skating show last weekend...not much of an action/sports photographer, but wanted to take a crack at it since I had the chance.

All pics shot with a 60D


more here http://www.flickr.com/photos/8440248@N08/sets/72157631538518705/with/7987248991/



173
Sports / Re: Shooting the Olympics - what separates us from the pros
« on: September 15, 2012, 01:55:55 PM »
Impressive. Thanks for sharing.

Yes, carrying a huge camera certainly is a bear...but in the end, I always think it is worth it once you see the finished product.

174
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Arrived
« on: September 14, 2012, 07:22:05 PM »
About the IS thing - it "IS" really nice to have for events, though, because I like to try to use slower shutter speeds when people are posing- this lets in as much light as possible and 1) keeps ISO as low as possible or 2) keeps the backgrounds from getting too dark if I'm using flash. Of course, when people are moving about, shutter speeds need to be reasonable anyway, so IS is not so important in that regard.

The 17-55 is my perfect lens for this type of work for that reason. I just wish it were more durable/weather sealed, kinda flimsy considering its price. I would have been interested in an IS version of the 24-70...sounds like this is a good one, though.

175
Lenses / Re: Considering the 70-200 f4 is for my next lens
« on: September 03, 2012, 11:08:11 AM »
I used to have 70-200 f/4 IS, but honestly it didn't fit me well. Specially if you taking a lot of candid and portrait, I would say use 70-200 f/2.8 will serve your need much better. Now I use 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II, and I love this lens (except for the weight, after I carrying it around for a while :P)

I took the same route. I had the 70-200 f4 before- great lens, but I was pushing it to its limits for indoor events when I needed longer reach, so I saved up and bought the f2.8 version. It opened up many shots for me that just were not possible with the f4 lens- but at the same time, the extra size and weight is a bear.

It depends on what you shoot though. The OP mentioned tracking kids- I suppose with the FF 5D3 you could push the ISO upwards of 6400 without taking too much of a hit in quality, so the f4 version shouldn't be a problem. There's the (much!) lighter weight and $$ savings to consider. Since I have a 1.6x 60D, I needed the 2.8 since I can't reasonably push ISO higher than 3200 on it.

176
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Black specks on 5D Mark III
« on: September 02, 2012, 12:43:14 PM »
I've got a couple specks on my 60D viewfinder and tried cleaning the eyepiece to no avail. Must have gotten inside...oh well. It's mainly only visible in bright light (outside sun) but at least it doesn't show up in pics. Still, if anyone knows an easy way to clean, I'd be all ears...

177
Quote
I kind of feel like we're seeing a consensus here on a few issues - that being learning and gaining experience trumps gear when judging image quality.  Gear gives you more options, but those options are really only available to you if you spend that time learning the gear.

you nailed it, that's exactly the way I feel.

Also, it helps to get the right "gear" for the type of photography you do, rather than just fancy gear that makes you look cool. I mean, I think the 5D Mark III is a great camera...killer AF & high ISO...but despite being able to afford one, I will pass. Why? Prefer the reach of a 1.6x camera, and the 1.6x suits the type of photography I like to do. Would I like better high ISO performance or more AF points than what my 60D offers? Would love it, actually, but not willing to give up reach (or spend crazy $) for them. Fairly happy with the 60D...just wish it were able to adjust for slight focus errors in lenses so I don't need to send them back if AF is off a little.

178
Well, HAVE they? :P

I dunno. I mean, I've been interested in photography for a very long time- once the transition to digital happened, I basically stuck with P&S compacts while mulling upgrading to a DSLR for the longest time...the breaking point however happened when I got to go to this really great (indoor) Q&A event...I took pics...got back and EVERY SINGLE FLASH PHOTO with a person in it had red-eye...and every non-flash shot was grainy and blurry. I just got sick and tired of not being able to get decent shots indoors (or in non-"sunny, blue sky" lighting)...so then the Rebel T2i came out and I got myself one right away. I had the impression that getting a DSLR would improve my photos overnight. Well, shocker- it didn't. I found out rather quickly that if I was going to get the pictures I wanted, I needed to learn to use this thing...and also get a better lens as the kit lens quality was DEFINITELY not $800 better than my Canon Elph.

The main issue was that I had rather high expectations. I guess I was expecting closer to professional-quality photos since I now had what laypeople seem to refer to as a "professional" camera. My point is, I suppose, it wasn't the camera itself so much as it was my working to fulfill this new, higher expectation I had from it that ended up having the biggest impact on my photos. It involved several trips to the camera store, several hours/days/weeks reading about photography basics and talking to people, thousands of shutter clicks and, of course, thousands of dollars spent on the type of lenses required to meet my IQ expectations. And it's a learning process that I'm still going through right now.

I guess, now I can pick up my iPhone or Elph and under the right conditions, get somewhat better shots than I used to, but having the right camera REALLY helps. Makes things so much easier...BUT- there IS a learning curve that has to be overcome before you get the desired results.

179
EOS Bodies / Re: Anyone else preorder the EOS M yet?
« on: August 24, 2012, 05:30:12 PM »
Oh man. Just had a chance to play around with the T4i live view mode. There were times I had to wait up to FIVE (!!!) seconds for the camera to lock focus. I'd think Canon would at least try to speed things up a bit for a camera system purely dependent on this focus scheme...because otherwise I'm not sure how useful this camera would be (if at all).

180
EOS Bodies / Re: Anyone else preorder the EOS M yet?
« on: August 23, 2012, 08:00:51 PM »
I've been looking at this camera as a potential replacement for my SD950IS camera, and as a backup/travel camera to supplement my 60D. While I'm excited about it and its potential, I might wait for at least 1-2 reviews on a final version of the product before I pull the trigger.

OTOH, I've already started considering possible lenses for use with it, since just about every lens I have would be impractical for a camera that small. With the exception of the 40 2.8, that is.

- The stock 18-55 zoom appears to be junk. Sorry if I offend anyone, but after looking at Canon's sample images taken with that lens...it appears to be no better than the DSLR version of the 18-55 (kit lens). So...I've been eyeing another general walkaround zoom that can be comfortably used with that camera. I've settled for the (now discontinued) 24-85mm 3.5-4.5 lens, probably the most compact zoom Canon makes. It's apparently the size of the EF-S 60 Macro (I'll find out in just a moment). And while it's no 24-105 4 or 24-70 2.8, it's definitely a step up in quality from the 18-55 from what I've read. And believe it or not, a 24-85 used + the EF adapter only comes out to be a little more than what they're asking for the 18-55 M. Only downside is no IS, but I think I can deal with that.

- The 50mm 1.8 I think would be perfect for a camera like this. I was thinking of the 40mm 2.8, but the extra 1+ stop of the 50 might come in handy. Until they come out with an M-mount version of the 50 that can match or surpass the SLR version in quality, this is a good (and inexpensive) solution to get DSLR-level quality in a compact package.

- And, of course, there is the stock 22mm lens that comes with the camera. Makes the camera small and pocketable (?), which is nice, and it would make the M a great 2nd camera to stuff in my DSLR camera bag. However, I'd like to have a little more reach by default.


But all this might be moot if they don't fix some big issues. The slow AF reports are concerning.

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 18