February 26, 2015, 11:32:02 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 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 27
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Please advice on my next camera
« on: April 27, 2012, 12:15:37 PM »
Option 3. And you can thank me in the morning.

Lenses / Re: Confusion In buying Canon Camera. Help!
« on: April 27, 2012, 01:11:01 AM »
I am confused in buying SX220 and SX40. I am getting more than 20% discounts on dealaboo.com in both the Canon cameras. I am a newspaper journalist and need a clear results for the front page images. any recommendations should be highly appreciated.

Let's see: You're a "journalist", you're looking at point-and-shoots, and you just happen to mention the discounts at a specific dealer. Oh, and this is your very first post on CRF.

Hey Admins, we got anudder! ::)

Lenses / Re: 5dmkii upgrade question
« on: April 26, 2012, 01:58:43 PM »
I love to spend other people's money.  :)  But in the end, only you know the budget you have to live within right now.

I'm not sure I understand your question though. You're giving a figure of 2900 and another for 3700, but I'm not understanding what's included in both.

Lenses / Re: Canon 50 1.4 worth the upgrade?
« on: April 26, 2012, 10:11:25 AM »
Moving to a FF Camera, you will want to look at the 85mm f1.8 to to use in place of your 50mm; it will provide a similar field of view that the 50mm did on your Crop Body. More here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-85mm-f-1.8-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

On the FF, your 50mm should be providing about the same field of view as the 35mm did on your Crop Body.

That's only if you want the field of view to be the same. I stuck with my 50mm f/1.4 when I recently moved to a full frame, and I actually prefer this FoV on the 50 over what I had on the 1.6 crop.

Lenses / Re: Canon 50 1.4 worth the upgrade?
« on: April 22, 2012, 04:36:30 PM »
Yes, go with the Canon 50mm f/1.4. The difference in sharpness and overall IQ is well worth what you'll be paying. The AF issues are well documented, but there are some tricks to getting more consistently in focus shots.

Landscape / Two from Eastern Oregon
« on: April 21, 2012, 11:17:17 AM »

Lenses / Re: First dSLR, lens recommendations
« on: April 17, 2012, 12:55:58 PM »
I completely disagree with putting a 50/1.4 on a camera and using it exclusively.  Whatever you do, don't do that.

Nobody said anything about using it "exclusively." My advice was to get a 50mm and use it while you're learning the craft of photography. Huge difference. And lest you think this was my own original idea, it's practice that has been bantered around by many others before me, both here and other sites as well.

I stand by my original suggestion: Using a 50mm prime while you're learning will help you become a better photographer.  The composition in my own images have been suffering somewhat lately, so I'll be using my own 50mm again in the near future.

Lenses / Re: Canon 50mm f/1.4 and AF Reliability
« on: April 16, 2012, 03:45:28 PM »
All lenses have inconsistent autofocus, and the lower cost ones are the worst. 

In a round-about way, that was probably the point I was getting at. I know enough about my lens flaws to be able to capitalize on it's strong features.

Extreme care is needed to make sure that movement or vibration is not affecting the results, just someone walking on a wooden house floor will cause noticible AF issues.

Another excellent point. Whenever I see a focusing issue, I try to determine whether it's not sharp where I aimed it (misplaced focal point), or not sharp anywhere (movement/vibration).  After 1000's of images taken between my two dslr's, I've finally figured out the difference.  :)

Its a good idea to take several shots when you can, about one in 3 or 5 can be out enough to where its really bad.

Yes, "when you can." When I shoot small children, that plan goes out the window.  :)

Maybe we've come to expect too much of AF?

Lenses / Re: Canon 50mm f/1.4 and AF Reliability
« on: April 14, 2012, 08:10:35 PM »
Been there, done that.  :)

I've done a lot of tests, so at this point I'm ruling out technique. I definitely ruled out focus-and-recompose awhile back. I've learned better than to do that.  I did utilize some microfocusing adjustments in my 5DmkII by about 3 steps. Even during that process, I pulled out a few stinkers.

I probably led you (and others) to believe that I was getting poor focusing results every single time. That's not the case. Out of every 10 shots wider than f/2.2 or so, 2-4 would show up with a misplaced focal point. Enough to where I couldn't say with 100% certainty that I was going to nail every shot. But when I manually focus and use live view, my keeper ratio jumps up dramatically.

Lenses / Canon 50mm f/1.4 and AF Reliability
« on: April 14, 2012, 05:39:00 PM »
Although I'm not in the market for a 5DmkIII, I've been reading with interest about the recent issues with light leaks and that body. That got me thinking about my 50mm f/1.4, a lens that I bought fairly soon after getting my first DSLR a few years ago. At the time, I was perplexed why I would carefully aim the AF, but at wide apertures, the area in focus was slightly different than where I had placed that little red dot.  Not always, but sometimes.  I thought I was doing something wrong. So, my remedy at the time was to take 10-12 clicks of the same exact comp whenever I was shooting that wide, particularly portraits of my two boys.  I found that I was able to get some keepers in there somewhere.

Fast forward to 2012. Now that I have my 5DmkII, and have vastly improved my knowledge of the problem,  I'm able to remedy the situation. And not with microfocusing, either. The problem I've come across in this lens isn't inaccurate AF, but inconsistently accurate AF. Had I the knowledge that I do now back when it was still under warranty, I might have sent it back asking for a different one. That may or may not have made a difference; what I'm reading is that this problem is likely model wide.  How I've remedied the situation is to turn off the AF, turn on the image preview, and zoom in where I was to focus. From there, I can just spin that little black ring into position. The last time I did kid portraits, the results were amazing. I didn't have one shot where I said, "Dang, that's a nice pose. Too bad I can't use it because his eyes are out of focus." And this was a fairly active 4 y/o boy. It's not a perfect solution, but one that works for me.

So, all of that to say, these companies sometimes put out really good products that either have quirks or design flaws. I guess it's up to you to decide which one yours is. I've learned to live with the problems in my 50mm f/1.4. It is otherwise outstanding glass, especially when you consider the price. Since I can't return it, and I'm not willing to fork out money for a 50mm f/1.2 L, I've decided to just stick with it.  It's become a lens I have on there all the time when I'm just out shooting. Like anything else, you have to know your gear, with all of the strengths and limitations it might have.

Lenses / Re: First dSLR, lens recommendations
« on: April 12, 2012, 11:31:46 PM »
Congratulations on your decision to get a dslr. It sounds like you recognize that you're ready for the next step. I think we all remember the day we made that decision.  :D

One thing that helped me when I first got started: I bought a 50mm f/1.4 and just stuck with that on my Rebel for a long time. It helped me really get a handle on composition and forced me to recompose with my feet, instead of just zooming in/out. I believe I became a better photographer because of it. You can get a Canon 50mm f/1.8 for like $130, probably the best lens anywhere for the money. After that, you can start deciding how to add to your stable.

I'm waiting for the 5DmkIV to come out in 2015 with a burr grinder. I don't think they're going to include it as a firmware update before then.

Yeah, a wide angle is fine, but bring something along to zoom in close with, too. You'll need it for Undine Falls in the north end of the park:

Undine Falls by Rick.Scheibner, on Flickr

My 2/5 of a nickel: The new FF they are speaking of will be a 7DmkII with Digic 5-ish and ~$1999USD.  After that point, I see the Rebel and xxD lines being merged into one. There might not be a point anymore to have both. Only time will tell.

I picked up my 5DmkII over the holidays when it was <~$2kUSD and came included with a couple of nice freebies. I don't know how many of those were sold, but my guess is that, like me, many people were waiting for that price point.

Lenses / Re: Canon 50mm 1.4 AF problem?
« on: March 20, 2012, 09:25:13 PM »
The 50 f/1.4 is a pretty crappy lens. The USM motor and focusing ring aren't made very well. Invest in some L lenses and don't look back.

No. I'm guessing you made this comment to see what kind of reaction you would get. Yes, the motor and focusing ring aren't what I would consider top-notch, but that lens can hardly be considered 'crappy'.  The images it produces--by far the most important consideration of a lens--is virtually indistinguishable from the 50mm f/1.2 L, which costs about 3x more.

Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 27