December 18, 2014, 01:39:40 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 - Act444

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 23
Honestly, in my experience I find that it's technique first, lens second, camera third.

If you want good pics of any sport, the right technique is the key...also, understanding the sport you are shooting so you can get the timing down I've found to be key.

Second, the lens is a much more limiting factor than the body. A 70-200 (f4 if shooting day games, f2.8 if shooting evening or night) should be sufficient IF you are close to the action (on sidelines/first 5 rows).

Third, if the camera body has a decent AF system you may get more keepers. But without the right technique and/or lens, even the fanciest body won't give you the shots you want.

EOS-M / Re: EOS M Firmware Coming Soon
« on: February 11, 2013, 07:00:21 PM »
This would definitely be welcome by me. Having used it in a few "real-world" situations (not just firing test shots in my room), I do find myself occasionally missing shots because the camera didn't focus fast enough (or at all).

The lack of sharpness on the 24-70 at 50mm (compared to the 24-105) jumped out at me when I looked at the TDP resolution it wasn't just my imagination then- something is going on there.

Perhaps that's the compromise they had to make optically in order to squeeze in the macro function- who knows. Still would have expected more at that price point.

Reviews / Re: Any thoughts yet on the Canon 24-70 f/4 IS
« on: January 12, 2013, 12:16:31 PM »

So, not a copy variation issue; likely a design characteristics of the lens.

That's the first thing that came to my mind...but then again, it depends on where the three samples came from. Were they taken from the same "batch"? Or different ones? When there's a defect, it usually manifests itself in a particular batch, rather than being "randomly spread out".

I'd like to see him test a 4th one a month or so from now. Still, you'd probably have to (randomly) test 50 or 100 of these lenses to make such a determination...

Reviews / Re: Any thoughts yet on the Canon 24-70 f/4 IS
« on: January 11, 2013, 08:35:01 PM »

Notice, however, that with all 3 copies of the 24-70, it is weakest at 50mm? The 24-105 beats it handily at 50mm (as does the 24-70 2.8 ), and distortion aside, the performance of the 24-70 at 50 ~ 24-105 at 24.

ETA: I dunno, if this is supposed to be the 24-105 replacement/upgrade, to be giving up the 71-105mm range and pay 2x the price I would have expected big improvement across the ENTIRE 24-70mm range. Unless one needs the macro and shoots exclusively at 24mm, may as well stick with the 24-105 (or save a few bucks and get the 24-105)

EOS-M / Re: My First EOS-M Review
« on: November 22, 2012, 08:07:37 PM »
I took some test shots with the 18-55 at my camera store (was looking to get one soon), put them on my card to evaluate...I was underwhelmed.

Build quality is MUCH better than the DSLR version, but IQ seems to be about the same, unfortunately. Images lacked sharpness and pop, even shooting in RAW. The 22mm is noticeably better. (I don't know if I was given a bum sample or what...I see people saying it's sharp but I cannot agree, unfortunately)

On the positive side, though- it feels nice and solid. Not cheap and plasticky like the EF-S version.

EOS-M / Re: My First EOS-M Review
« on: November 18, 2012, 12:32:43 PM »
FINALLY got to use the EOS M in the real world (a show I went to a couple of days ago, would not have gotten in with a 5D3). I just have to give a +1 to the incredible image quality out of this cam - I was pleasantly surprised, even in the low light. It's perfectly fine as an eventual replacement for my SD950IS - finally, a compact camera that can provide decent IQ!

Its weak point, as everyone has already said, is the AF. It's usually quick enough but on occasion it will hunt (go in and out) when it was in focus already- not sure why/how that happens, the SD950IS never did that- but hopefully that's something that can be tweaked/fixed in firmware. (Didn't stop me from getting a few cool action shots though  ;D )

I made use of the continuous shooting mode several times. It's actually quite responsive and coupled with the manual control allowed me to get shots I likely would not have captured with the SD950IS.

The 22mm lens was a bit wider than I would have liked for many shots (provided a good perspective when the action was close, though)...I would really like to see a ~50mm fast prime lens that's either the same size as or just a little larger than the 22.

But comparing to the SD950IS - completely blows it out of the water in IQ, color reproduction and resolution. Plus I can shoot RAW and my workflow is the same as when I shoot with the DSLR. I still carried the SD950IS with me and used it when I wanted to get a little closer...comparing the pics, you can EASILY tell which camera took which shot.

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Help me decide: 270EXII vs 90EX
« on: November 12, 2012, 05:37:32 PM »
When I got the EOS M, I faced a similar choice. For me, it was easy- the 270 gives me a much more powerful strobe, tilt/bounce capability, is not all that much larger (still fits in a medium-size pocket!)- and it gives it to me FOR THE SAME PRICE. Plus, it doubles as a great pocket flash for the 5DIII since that one lacks a built-in.

My one criticism of it- and it can be a major one, a dealbreaker even- is start-up time. While the 600EX RT is ready very quickly (assuming fresh batteries), the 270EX II can take 15 sec + to charge up. If you just want to pop this thing on and take a quick shot, you may miss it. I'm not sure about the 90EX- it may (or may not) be faster.

EOS-M / Re: My First EOS-M Review
« on: November 09, 2012, 08:10:43 PM »
I did not.

To be honest I'm really not a fan of "touch to shoot". Harder to steady the camera that, to me it feels unnatural, at least when hand-holding it.

Maybe it would make more sense when tripod-shooting?

EOS-M / Re: My First EOS-M Review
« on: November 09, 2012, 03:11:19 PM »
Just tried the M with the adapter and my old 24-85mm lens. My goodness...focus is makes the 22mm seem lightning quick in comparison. Average time seemed to be about 2-3 seconds to confirm! (On my 60D, it's quick, within a split second as is usual with USM front focuses though)

Anyone else with the adapter + EF lenses getting focus times that slow?

Lenses / Re: Choosing a kit thinking long term
« on: November 08, 2012, 03:39:31 PM »
I would go with the 35L. Very natural FOV on the 60D and other 1.6x cameras.

The 70-200 2.8 is an excellent lens but in my opinion, it would seem way too obvious for street candids (it's big, it's white, it's heavy, it's attention-grabbing!)

Another option is to grab the 40mm 2.8 (excellent lens for the price) and then hold out for the new 6D (will come out to ~same price as 70-200). The 6D is supposed to be able to focus in lower light than any of the current Canon cameras currently out at the moment.

Thanks for the explanation. Even though I'm not the OP, I had the same question and was wondering the same thing.

That's a bummer, really. I think it's the only weather-sealed 50mm lens for the Canon system?

EOS-M / Re: My First EOS-M Review
« on: November 07, 2012, 02:08:06 AM »
I tend to agree that I probably would have to think hard (and also get more hands-on time with the camera) before recommending it as an ONLY camera. A major reason I can deal with its shortcomings is because the DSLR I already have compensates for them- and that played into my decision as well. For someone without a DSLR, the decision gets tougher. And at that price point you can have a DSLR, too. I guess it just comes down to whether you value portability or functionality more.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 60D Microfocus Adjustment on FoCal
« on: November 06, 2012, 06:33:19 PM »
Wow, that would be awesome....I'm not much of a "hacker", but given that I have a couple lenses that could use adjustment, if they do manage to figure it out, it might be worth it...

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Would I benefit from going full frame?
« on: November 06, 2012, 05:49:18 PM »
It really depends on what you enjoy shooting. For me, I made the move because I found myself shooting a lot of indoor events, and I prefer to use ambient lighting over flash. I wanted better high ISO performance than what I was getting from my 60D/17-55 and I had some $ saved up so I decided to go for the 5DIII and 24-70.

The real benefit of FF is at the high ISOs - 1600 and higher. While I almost never pushed the 60D beyond 3200, I have the 5D's auto ISO set up to 6400 and even 12,800 is usable.

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 23