April 20, 2014, 09:39:27 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 - EOBeav

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 27
301
Any reason you need IS for that 70-200 f/4? I don't have it on mine, and I haven't missed it. Then again, 90% of my images use a tripod.

If you hand hold (event shooter), then the IS is priceless. Especially at the longer focal lengths! Will also help negate (to some degree) the slower apperature by allowing one to use slower shutter speeds.

But...but...If you use IS, then you're going to be able to reduce/eliminate camera-shake blur, but not necessarily motion blur. You might get away with handholding at 1/15 sec., but you're still going to capture any movement within that time.

I recently shot an indoor play with my 70-200mm f/4 (non-IS), and I don't think I would have come out with better images had I utilized IS. Just something else to think about, I guess. I'm coming to realize that there are growing numbers in both IS camps: One swears by it, and the other believes it to be almost gimmicky.

302
Any reason you need IS for that 70-200 f/4? I don't have it on mine, and I haven't missed it. Then again, 90% of my images use a tripod.

303
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]
« on: May 21, 2012, 04:00:13 PM »
Knowing canons pricing system, expect 2000$ and up.  >:(

You're probably not far off the mark. Although, still a 1.6 crop, it would be vastly superior to the FF 5DmkII that is going for ~$2200USD right now. With the 5DmkIII at ~$3500USD, there is plenty of price point head room for the latest gen 7D.

304
Lenses / Re: Your dream 50mm f/1.4
« on: May 18, 2012, 03:47:50 PM »
But if you want to "speed up" the aperture, then you need to make it bigger. My original post was to re-design the 50 f/1.4, not turn it into a 50 f/1.x, where x is <4. I understood what the guy meant...in that context it just didn't make sense. Of course, it could have been a language issue, as I understand that CR attracts readers from all over the globe.

The comment was a facetious observation that the title of the thread says f/14, not f/1.4.

Move along folks.

+1  Didn't even see the mistake! Fixing it now.

305
Lenses / Re: Your dream 50mm f/14
« on: May 18, 2012, 10:26:14 AM »
My dream 50mm f/14 has a faster aperture...

I guess I don't understand this statement. Aperture is a size, not a speed...

You are "technically" correct in saying  that aperture is a size, not a speed. But colloquially a "larger" aperture lens (or which is colloquially known as "glass") is addressed as a "faster" lens. So "faster" aperture means "larger" aperture. But I am not really clear why "faster" is used. May be because it allows for (relatively) faster shutter speeds at the maximum aperture or may be for some other reason.

But if you want to "speed up" the aperture, then you need to make it bigger. My original post was to re-design the 50 f/1.4, not turn it into a 50 f/1.x, where x is <4. I understood what the guy meant...in that context it just didn't make sense. Of course, it could have been a language issue, as I understand that CR attracts readers from all over the globe.

306
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T4i/650D Specs [CR2.5]
« on: May 17, 2012, 11:02:41 PM »
I don't think Canon encourages users to move from a xxxD to another xxxD. They'd like you to move up to the xxD and xD's.

BOOOOOOORRRRRRIIIIINNNNNG.

im not very tempted to update my second body, a 550D, to this.
i would like to have a new crop body.. but i guess it´s the old sensor and i don´t need video enhancements.

307
Lenses / Re: 50mm 1.2
« on: May 17, 2012, 09:56:49 AM »
I don't think I have ever even considered using any of my fast primes, except the 24 and 17 at apertures narrower than 2,0. 5,6 comparison? Not why you buy 1,2 lens.

I guess it depends on what else you've got in the stable. If you ONLY shoot your prime wide open, then you're probably not taking advantage of the versatility of a 50mm, which is one of the main reasons why they're so popular. Personally, if I want 50mm, regardless of aperture, I need to go with my 50mm f/1.4. My other zooms don't go through the 50mm range.

But if you bought a 50mm to only shoot at extremely wide apertures, and have other lenses to cover that focal range, then more power to you.

308
Lenses / Re: 50mm 1.2
« on: May 16, 2012, 06:27:57 PM »
I wanted to purchase a 50mm 1.2 but wanted to know if a new 50mm will be coming out soon. Putting budget aside, would you get a 50mm 1.2 or a 1.4?

If you've got the bucks, go for it. I love spending other people's money. But as I've said in previous comments on here, the difference in IQ between the two are negligible at f/2.0-ish and lower. I would say only get the f/1.2 if you really depend on bokeh quality to pay your bills. Otherwise, get the f/1.4 and another lens for about a grand.

309
Lenses / Re: 4K to spend and I don't know what to do with it!!!
« on: May 15, 2012, 07:01:42 PM »
let it all ride on black and then start a post about having 8k to spend and not know what to do with it.

:)

+1  ;D

310
Lenses / Re: 4K to spend and I don't know what to do with it!!!
« on: May 15, 2012, 11:17:34 AM »
You've got your focal ranges covered, along with a 50 prime, although I have no idea what IQ you're getting with that 18-135.  Having a 2nd body at the event would be a must.

Personally, I'd go with a 7D body, and then look to boost your lighting by quite a bit. You should be able to get a couple of bigger setups along with some triggers/power for that kind of change, but that is some unexplored territory for me.

311
So it seems that I need to be deciding between the 50 1.2L and 85 1.2L. What do  you guys think about the 50 1.4? Is the difference between the 1.2 and 1.4 that much significant to justify the additional $1100?

For my money, there's not a lot of difference. If you like to shoot wide open, and have high standards when it comes to your bokeh, you might consider splurging for the 50mm f/1.2.  However, at f/2.0 and smaller, the difference in IQ from both lens is negligible. You could get a nice lens for the difference in prices of the two.

312
Lenses / Re: Suggestions for making my gear uglier
« on: May 14, 2012, 06:31:20 PM »
Conversation that a camera thief has with himself:
Quote
Hey, a camera! Oh, it's just a Rebel with a 75-300mm f/5.6. Clarity and chromatic aberration are both notably poor on this glass. I guess I'll just leave it alone.

Or how about this one?
Quote
Hey a camera! And it's a 5DmkIII with a 70-200mm f/2.8 L, non-IS.  Exceptional IQ, and the bokeh quality is to die for. I'd better grab it before somebody else does.

313
If you've got the bucks for a 50mm f/1.2 L, then go for it. However, you won't be disappointed with the f/1.4 version, and you'll have some money left over to spend on a different lens. At apertures starting at f/2.0 and smaller, the IQ difference is marginal at best. If you can't create some nice photos with one, you sure won't be able to with the other.

314
Lenses / Re: Your dream 50mm f/14
« on: May 13, 2012, 01:43:39 PM »
Ha ha...One of the best responses I've ever seen in this forum!

My dream 50mm f/1.4... hmm.

It should have better sharpness wide open, a proper ultrasonic motor and should be able to destroy a small planet around the size of Alderaan. It should be fully operational within 3 months of its announcement.



315
Lenses / Re: Your dream 50mm f/14
« on: May 13, 2012, 01:42:45 PM »
My dream 50mm f/14 has a faster aperture...

I guess I don't understand this statement. Aperture is a size, not a speed...

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 27