October 02, 2014, 11:36:04 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 - c.d.embrey

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 32
331
Lenses / Re: New Lenses Coming [CR3]
« on: February 22, 2012, 05:42:04 PM »

So your comment to Ricku was completely out of line and he had a valid counter to what you said.


Here's the original post from Ricku.

Looks like f/2.8 is the NEW f/1.8 for Canon. With higher ISOs being "grainless", f/1.8 lenses may not be necessary for general photography.
Not if you don't like good bokeh.

Why is he attacking my Original post ??? Did I say that there was anything wrong with people who like Shallow DOF ??? No I just said for many people f/2.8 would work fine. Canon seems to think so too, because they are releasing many NEW f/2.8 lenses. So "Looks like f/2.8 is the NEW f/1.8 for Canon." is a true statement. What has bokeh got to do with it ???

332
Lenses / Re: New Lenses Coming [CR3]
« on: February 22, 2012, 05:21:56 PM »

Well, heck, then...let's all just get point-n-shoots for "general photography".

Terry Richardson and Juergen Teller built their Fashion Photography reputations with P&S Film cameras. Juergen Teller is still shooting Ads and Fashion Editorial with his Film P&S Contax G2.

The problem with Digital P&S cameras is you push-the-button and several seconds later the camera fires. :(

333
Lenses / Re: New Lenses Coming [CR3]
« on: February 22, 2012, 05:06:22 PM »

Well, maybe I don't know what you mean by your term "general photography" but no matter my camera's ISO performance I'll take the shallower depth of field any day. What you say most people don't "give a flying eff" about is one of my primary concerns.

Didn't you see "Pulitzer Prize winning News Photos" A PJs work isn't gauged by Creamy Bokeh, but by how his work connects with the audience. Would Nick Ut's Pulitzer winning Burning Girl photo  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Ut  been improved by Paper-Thin-DOF ???

Me, I shoot advertising at f/5.6 to f/16. Sometimes I need a Tilt-and-Shift lens to INCREASE my DOF. I once shot an ad with a EF-S 10-22mm lens at f/16. So, yes I'd buy a 24mm f/2.8. YMMV

Architecture Photographers use Wide Angle Tilt-and-Shift lenses for increased DOF, because that's what their clients want/need.

What about Landscape Photographers ???

Yes, there are many photographers who don't give a Flying Eff about shallow DOF.



 

334
Lenses / Re: New Lenses Coming [CR3]
« on: February 22, 2012, 03:52:03 PM »
Not if you don't like good bokeh.

It may surprise you to learn that most people don't give a Flying Eff about bokeh.  Didn't you see the words "general photography" . When was the last time you heard people raving about the creamy bokeh off a Pulitzer Prize winning News Photo. Or heard "Oh WOW, that paper-thin-DOF really makes those Birthday Party shots ROCK!!!"




335
Lenses / Re: New Lenses Coming [CR3]
« on: February 22, 2012, 03:30:23 PM »
Looks like f/2.8 is the NEW f/1.8 for Canon. With higher ISOs being "grainless", f/1.8 lenses may not be necessary for general photography. The introduction of Kodak Ektapress 400 and Fuji Press 400 changed things for Pjs and later for birthday-party-photographers. The EF 24mm f/2.8 would make a great lens for a 4Ti (or maybe a Digital EOS IX :) ).

336
Lenses / Re: New Lenses Coming [CR3]
« on: February 22, 2012, 03:18:24 PM »


A small, flat, inconspicuous lens released with a bulky and far-from-inconspicuous dSLR.  Ummm...why?


Maybe this means that the Canon Mirrorless will be a Digital EOS IX. I'd buy one :) or maybe two :)  :)

For those not familiar with the APS Film EOS IX  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_IX

337
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 18-45 f/3.5-5.6 Kit Lens for APS-C Mirrorless Patent
« on: February 20, 2012, 03:17:50 PM »
My fear is that Canon will treat their CSC cameras as a step-up from P&S, instead of a step-up from a 7D. With modern technology there is no reason for not building a Pro Quality CSC and Pro Quality Primes.

Please. please. please don't give us Rebel quality CSCs with effing-kit-zoomz :(  :(

338
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 18-45 f/3.5-5.6 Kit Lens for APS-C Mirrorless Patent
« on: February 20, 2012, 03:03:02 PM »

I agree.  I am worried it will look like the Sony NEX system.  Sure the body is small, but the lenses are still large because of the sensor.  Not sure how miniaturizing the body helps when the lenses are still large.  Just makes working with the body harder as it is small and has fewer external controls.

The small/light Sony NEX makes photography fun again. Until recently my big/bulky/heavy Canon DSLRs were used for paying jobs or test shooting, my walk-around-camera was an iPod Touch 4G. Now I'm using a NEX for walk-around AND some paying jobs. It's so light you hardly know your carrying it :)  :)

339
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 18-45 f/3.5-5.6 Kit Lens for APS-C Mirrorless Patent
« on: February 20, 2012, 02:38:18 PM »

I'm not so sure what the outcome will be but I think Canon seems to have pulled all the stops in miniaturizing the lens design. Typical back focus for EF lenses are in the range of 40-70mm range. But this one apparently has a "0.5mm" back focus. Which means an extremely rear plane ! Typically, a lens with a very close rear plane can be made smaller to cover the same image circle.   

I wonder how this compares to other mirrorless systems or maybe even the Leica M system ?   Anyone has any clues what are the back focus of other mirrorless systems like the NEX  ?

18mm for the NEX. Here's a list of ALL lens mounts  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_mount

340
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 18-45 f/3.5-5.6 Kit Lens for APS-C Mirrorless Patent
« on: February 20, 2012, 02:20:03 PM »
Gimme an EF compatible body and a pancake prime for taking on vacation and I'll be a happy happy man.

You'd buy a bulky/over-sized camera like a Pentax K-01 ?  http://pentaximaging.com/hybrid/K-01  A Canon CSC with an EF mount would have to be the size of a T3i without the Penta-mirror :(  :(

341
Lenses / Re: A Lens Roadmap? [CR1]
« on: February 11, 2012, 08:13:26 PM »

One odd thought occurred to me though – could the EF-S list be referring to full-frame equivalents? For example an EF-S lens that is the equivalent of a full frame 20-65mm would make some sense.


No-one in the real world talks about equivalents. When was the last time you heard a Hasselblad owner say that his 80mm lens was equivalent to a Full Frame 50mm ???   ;)  ;)


342
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Information [CR1]
« on: January 18, 2012, 10:40:58 PM »
Quote
... but lots of people have fond memories of the eye controlled AF of the EOS-3.

And at the time enough people hated it that Canon killed "eye control."

343
EOS Bodies / Re: C300 Dealers & Price Announced in the USA
« on: January 18, 2012, 10:26:43 PM »
The big thing that the C300 has going for it is SIZE! It is a much smaller camera than either the Sony FS100 or F3. And SIZE MATTERS, if you are shooting on location, SMALLER IS BETTER.

A lot of Pixel Peepers have seen the Specs and proclaimed the C300 a POS. Many Union DPs have tested and seen the results on a big screen, and they don't have a problem with the C300. So who you gonna trust, Professtional Pixel Peepers :( or Professional DPs :)

344
EOS Bodies / Re: C300 Dealers & Price Announced in the USA
« on: January 17, 2012, 03:23:02 PM »
I like Film Tools, good people who know what they are talking about. I buy camera, expendables, and grip equipment from them.

345
This solves the last problem  to migrating to the NEX 7 from Canon. Now I'll be able to use the EF 90mm f2.8 TS-E for product shots  :)  :)  A side benefit is I'll be able to use the EF 86mm f1.8 USM while waiting for a E-mount Zeiss 85mm.

Guess it also means that I'll keep my Canon Elan 7n film camera  :)

Come on Canon, it's past time for you to build a Pro Quality Third Generation camera. What are you waiting for  :(

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 32