Messages

46

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Spec List [CR2]

« on: February 19, 2013, 06:18:17 PM »

This is what will get my check book out:
1. Low noise at low ISO, high ISO capable sensor

Check

2. Same or higher frame rate

Check

3. Same or higher MP- but only if point 1 is satisfied

Check

4. Two CF card slots

Check (well two slots, anyway)

5. Same or better AF (5DIII level?)

Check

6. Same or better build quality

Most probably...

Ok, so I am ready with the check...

47

Lenses / Re: What's the best deal you've ever gotten on a lens?

« on: February 18, 2013, 02:20:58 AM »

Bought the 70-200 IS v1 + B+W F-Pro filter for 1200; few months later sold it (minus filter) for 1400, and bought the v2 for 1700 (like-new with box and accessories).

48

EOS Bodies / Re: What if the rumored 5Dx is actually a 4D?

« on: February 17, 2013, 08:08:07 PM »

Seems strange to me that Nikon didn't offer a mRAW and/or sRAW on their D800. To me it suggests they're slightly out of touch with what people actually want

I can only speculate on what drives the purchasing decisions of other people.  From my experience of owning alll the 5D series of Canon cameras as well as most of the xxD series as well as a Nikon D800 and D800E, I have never needed to use a small raw format ever.  However I do find that the various cropping sizes on the D800 are very useful.  The most useful is that I can use full frame or aps-c lenses on the same camera.  This would be revolutionary for Canon.  But what Canon could do is to allow DX (aps-c) crop mode on an full frame camera.

Where do I use it.  Let us say I'm using my 300mm for a landscape shot accross a bay and then I spot an some wildlife where I need a longer reach.  I can quickly go into crop mode and choose the amount of crop by choosing the image area thereby saving the file in a smaller raw file as well as having a faster FPS.  Canon could do this but so far they haven't because their full frame cameras don't have enough MP to do the crop and still have enough MP for the frame.  Someday will really high MP, perhaps all cameras will allow a digital crop size so you can get any framing that you want (maybe even square - Nikon D800 has a very pleasant 5x4 format choice that saves some Raw size).

You don't get longer reach you just change you FOV, still the same pixel pitch on your sensor.
I can do the exact same on my PC by cropping.
JohnJ

True but since this response was made at the time we were discussing how to save space on our cards by use sraw and mraw out in the field, the image size options on the D800 certainly save card space, while you are out in the field on a shoot.  Birds in flight are a perfect example.  I've only got a 300mm for my Nikon gear for my longest tele.  A bird is very often just a relatively small part of the frame while in flight.  The image size command draws a visual box around the dx area in the viewfinder.  This allows me to see the bird in the viewfinder before he gets into my DX cropped area to photograph.  Sure I can do it in post but that extra 36 mp shot gets cut down to 15+ mp right there and the surrounding area is one that I would not be able to use anyway.  Just FYI.

I'd think all other things remaining equal, I'd prefer to crop in post as opposed to cropping while shooting since that gives more flexibility. I can choose whether and how to crop.
However as I said a bigger image in the viewfinder is preferable to me- probably the one advantage of a crop sensor (for the same focal length lens).

49

Lenses / Re: Starting Lens Recommendation

« on: February 16, 2013, 04:06:23 AM »

One caution, the 28-105 does not have IS.
If you are a student of photography (instead of merely a student interested in photography) then I'd recommend getting a 35mm prime.
Among your choices no. 4 seems the most versatile to me (for me the aperture ranges provide more versatility than the focal length ranges of a zoom). Personally, on my own crop sensor I'd be happiest if I could have a fast 24mm lens.

Oops typo there. Should have been 28-135. Sorry about that. And, yes, I am taking photography course at my high school now (used the old Pentax K1000 last semester). Thanks about advice. But adding another prime would be out of my budget... I guess using the kit lens with f/8 setting would work for that...

I'm a traditionalist with this kind of question and others will disagree. I would always get a 50mm focal length and stick to that for a while. On your crop body the equivalent would be any 35mm lens. Any of them will do. The faster (=wider aperture) the better but that's a matter of budget also. The basic Canon 35 2.0 (non IS) should be fine. Any of the Sigma lenses are nice as well. The 30mm 1.4 is a steal for instance.
And then there is always the Canon 40mm 2.8 pancake lens.

Once you're getting good results with any of those you can then make a more educated decision as to what else you need and what your style of photography is.

If I had to chose one of the combos above I'd personally go with #4.

So prime is the way to go I guess. But I cannot buy more lens nor it wouldn't be wise to replace any. Maybe i can replace 100mm with 35mm but that would leave me no telephoto lens...Thanks for help anyway.

Y no Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC? Alright, it's a bit above your limit, but probably of the best affordable standard zoom.

Uh, that's quite a bit above my budget... thanks for advice though!

I would say that the EF 28-135 is a good, affordable alternative to the 24-105L but the L is a MUCH better lens, combinded with the EF 100mm macro (non-L) with the 70-300 IS USM (non-L) you would end up with 3 affordable lenses that are outstanding for the cost and would cover about 99.9% of all of your shooting needs. I have used/still use each of these lenses to this day.

D

So you are suggesting range coverage over the aperture...I think they'd be nice for traveling as well! But 28mm on a crop sensor would be about 45mm on full frame so the only way for me to shoot wide angle is to shoot with my father's film camera. Thanks for help though.


Thanks for advice everyone! So I guess I'll go with the primes. But let me ask just one additional question. In terms of photos' quality, are the primes comparable with the 24-105L?

The 24 2.8 is better at 24mm than the L zoom @f/4. 50 1.8 is very sharp above f/2.8, although the zoom is quite strong at this focal length especially stopped down to 5.6. I haven't personally used the 100mm but I have only heard good things about it.
Couple of other things to chew on:
A very good advice someone gave- you don't need to buy all at once. Buy one and then expand slowly.
A 35mm might replace 50mm depending on your preferences. Or the 40 2.8 instead of the 50 1.8.
In case you reconsider zooms the Tamron 17-50 is a very good lens for crop sensors and costs about $ 300.

50

Lenses / Re: Starting Lens Recommendation

« on: February 16, 2013, 12:55:40 AM »

I believe a fixed 50mm on FF will teach someone much more than any zoom lens ever could. Composition.

+1

51

Lighting / Re: YN-622 Reviews?

« on: February 16, 2013, 12:53:52 AM »

Not so much:
Locking mechanism (spoiled by the quick lock)

I'd prefer the quick lock too but if Canon would built this they would add that for $200 extra
(and would limit it to 1/500 or something.. ) so I'm fine with it

No kidding

52

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D - Worth Buying ???

« on: February 16, 2013, 12:50:08 AM »

Neuro always points that you don't need APS-C for the extra "reach" if you won't print big, because you can crop images from, say, your 5D3.

Will not print large but
I am bit skeptical on this part " you can crop images from, say, your 5D3."

I didn't believe Neuro either.... so I did a comparison a year ago with a 5DII and found that it was a tossup depending on lens quality and lighting... and I found differences in "reach" to be marginal and in good light you had to pixel peep to tell the difference. In poor light, there was no comparison.... the 5D2 was immediatly visually superior on uncropped images.

Since then, the 5DIII has come out and by all reports works better than the 5DII.

One point though: Cropped (zoomed in) view on your viewfinder is sometimes more useful for accurate focusing. The 7D VF isn't as big as the 5DIII, but still (100% of 1.0x APS-C vs 100% of .71x FF).

53

Lighting / Re: YN-622 Reviews?

« on: February 15, 2013, 12:46:35 AM »

Got mine today as promised  .
Ran a quick check on E-TTL to see it works fine. Lights up like a Christmas tree!
First impressions:

Like:

Build quality
Metal foot and hotshoe
AF assist
Takes AA batteries

Not so much:
Switches on the side are easily pressed
Locking mechanism (spoiled by the quick lock)

Now I need to find a case for these cuties. Ideas?

54

Lenses / Re: Starting Lens Recommendation

« on: February 14, 2013, 11:19:16 AM »

So here are some lens I've looked up. They are about or under $850 second hand.
1. EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM
2. EF 17-40 f/4L + EF 50 f/1.8 II
3. EF 24 f/2.8 + EF 28-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM
4. EF 24 f/2.8 + EF 50 f/1.8 II + EF 100 f/2 USM

One caution, the 28-105 does not have IS.
If you are a student of photography (instead of merely a student interested in photography) then I'd recommend getting a 35mm prime.
Among your choices no. 4 seems the most versatile to me (for me the aperture ranges provide more versatility than the focal length ranges of a zoom). Personally, on my own crop sensor I'd be happiest if I could have a fast 24mm lens.

55

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D - Worth Buying ???

« on: February 14, 2013, 11:13:31 AM »

How about a 5D II? You can pick one up now for £1200 at some places, and the rest of the money you were going to spend on 5D III you can get yourself a nice lens.

I love my 7D, I dont have a problem with noise performance. i think that problem manifests itself with people who try to crop images down to 1/4 frame and expect it to be noise free.

Actually if I am going Full frame  then I will try to go all the way    --- As I mentioned in my last reply if every thing goes as per plan I can afford 5d MK3 (even 1DX) + good lens by 2013 2nd half   --- 
So I think it will be wise to pass on the MK2

I wouldn't let great be the enemy of good. IMO, it would make far more sense to invest in the cheapest FF you can buy since that will:
1. Be a huge improvement in IQ over the 600D
2. Be more appropriate for fashion and product photography as well as landscapes
3. Will give you enough practice with relearning the focal lengths by the time you get your 1Dx or 5DIII.
My 2 cents.

56

EOS Bodies / Re: What if the rumored 5Dx is actually a 4D?

« on: February 14, 2013, 10:27:54 AM »

Honestly, I think a 2013/2014 update to the 5DIII is pretty unlikely.  Rather, we'll see the high MP FF sensor as a new or split line.  They might re-split the 1-series (1Ds X), or they may call it a 4D, 2D, or split the 5-series line (5Ds).  Either way, high MP will mean low fps.

I don't know if a 5DIII update is that unlikely, though. They have apparently come out with new sensor tech, and to implement that in only an APS-C (7DII?) and a high-megapixel niche FF (4D? 5Dx?) seems to shut out the largest selling FFs from new sensor tech for a good few years. All that when competitors will be coming with their newer sensors.
Edit: It bothers me how much conjecture I included in the above paragraph. Let's rephrase: When a company comes out with a new technology that is very likely to be popular among consumers, it makes sound business sense to implement it in their most popular products. In this case, these are the new sensor and the 5D-series body respectively. My 2 cents.

57

Lenses / Re: Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II "Fix"

« on: February 12, 2013, 02:58:23 PM »

Shurtape P-672 on the way!

58

Lighting / Re: YN-622 Reviews?

« on: February 12, 2013, 12:08:29 AM »

Mine's in the mail- I can post a quick review once I get them. Anything in particular you're curious about?
Bought in on Amazon BTW, $ 85 with free shipping. Plus, will arrive in 5 days

Do you have the amazon link handy? I thought amazon.com did not ship to canada, had to use .ca
Keep me informed if you do receive it in 5days, and if they arrived in new/sealed boxes and working condition.
Many thanks.

Here it is, but they seem to have raised the price in the last 2 days.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009EJSWJE/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00
USPS tracking shows expected delivery by 14th, so that works out to 5 days all right (ordered it pretty late on the 9th). Ships from Vermont I believe- so it might reach Canada quicker

59

Lighting / Re: YN-622 Reviews?

« on: February 11, 2013, 07:12:09 PM »

Mine's in the mail- I can post a quick review once I get them. Anything in particular you're curious about?
Bought in on Amazon BTW, $ 85 with free shipping. Plus, will arrive in 5 days

60

EOS Bodies / Re: Need seasoned advice - keep 5D Mark II or NO?

« on: February 09, 2013, 11:29:05 AM »

Hey All,

I'm new to the forums here, so greetings. Ive enjoyed the discussions here quite a bit and wanted to toss this question out to the group.

I was able to pick up a 5D Mark II + 24-105 bundle when Fry's was clearing them out ($2100).

To this point, I shoot crop (T4i, 17-55), and I do have some lenses that are compatible with FF, so lenses are not a factor. I shoot family, kids, street/photojounalism, and a bit of landscape. No birding, no high speed sports. I post-process in Lightroom.

However, I'm grappling with the debate of whether to 1) keep the 5D II as an introduction to FF, or 2) return it and go 6D, OR 3) return it, wait a while, and then go 5D III.

I understand the spec differences between all three bodies, and the capabilities and limitations of all.

What are your thoughts? Will the 5DII provide an IQ experience different from my T4i? (notwithstanding focal differences, which I understand).

Would you, in this situation, be disappointed in the limitations of the 5DII?

Is the cost of investment in the 5DII at this time better leveraged with the 6D/5D III?

Thanks for reading. I'm well within my return period, so I just want ensure I'm making the most rational decisions of whether to keep or change my strategy.

It's not a question of photography but one of Psychology.
5DII for all purposes will be more than sufficient for a long, long time.
However, the fact that you settled for it and didn't go for the 6D will gnaw at the back of your head for almost as long. Every time you shoot in low light you'd wonder how the 6D would have been great here, and will hamper your focus as the 5DII's AF tries to do its job.
So return it while you can, and get the 6D. You'll forget the price difference much sooner than you'd have forgotten the (perceived) difference in capabilities of the two cameras.