Messages

106

EOS Bodies / Re: I have my hands on a 5D III and 1Dx tomorrow. Questions?

« on: March 05, 2012, 02:27:59 PM »

There's a 3200 ISO shot of a girl in a wedding dress on the Canon site. Seemed pretty good to me, and significantly better than I could hope for from a 5d2. But yeah, we'll have to see. Jeff Ascough loves the high ISO performance... but maybe he's too much in love with Canon generally

107

EOS Bodies / Re: I have my hands on a 5D III and 1Dx tomorrow. Questions?

« on: March 05, 2012, 02:04:56 PM »

Interesting that staff like video crop, which is available on 2 rebels, 60D, Nikon's D4 and D800, is not available on the 5D III ? As far as I know, Canon was first to release this, Nikon added this feature on it's new top end cameras, and Canon ??

Could the lack of video crop have something to do with the new pixel binning thing? If you start to crop into the sensor might this introduce stuff like moire, which they have obviously tried so hard to eliminate?

108

EOS Bodies / Re: Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price

« on: March 03, 2012, 07:20:07 PM »

I even stopped taking photos due to 5d2, which i really don't like.

The 5D2 is such a bad camera it made you quit photography?! LOL that's hilarious, and stupid.

109

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Announced

« on: February 06, 2012, 05:19:14 PM »

I hope Sigma makes a 24-70 OS lens. Prefer the Sigma build quality, my Tamron 28-75 is not good in that department. For video, I especially want the focus ring on all my lenses to work in the same direction (clockwise for closer focus) and the Tamron is opposite (like Nikon), whereas Sigma does it like Canon.

110

PowerShot / Re: "Best compact camera" - DxO review G1X

« on: February 01, 2012, 12:32:40 PM »

This camera is the definition of compromise. Too big for a compact, lens is too slow for portraits. The sensor is great for low light, but the lens is not. If I wanted a rebel with a kit lens, I'd buy one.

111

Software & Accessories / Re: Audio Recording Device

« on: December 13, 2011, 09:21:58 PM »

you'll want to get their remote control (unfortunately a wired one)

Just curious, why do you think the remote is so essential?

112

Lenses / Re: EF 35 f/1.4L II & EF 24-70 f/2.8L II on January 3, 2012? [CR2]

« on: December 11, 2011, 03:29:33 PM »

Perhaps what Canon really needs is a new category of lens, tailored to that particular industry, so "L" lenses would be for photographers and "C" would be for cinema....

Ummm...like this, perhaps?  http://usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/lenses/cinema_lenses

Ha, yeah I guess so. Although those lenses will be silly money I expect. They're also fully manual and lack IS, right? So not ideal for everyone. I personally use AF a lot for video on my 5D2 so I can start shooting with minimal delay, although if the 5D2 had a higher resolution screen or EVF reliably nailing focus manually would be easier. Of course, you can zoom in but that takes away valuable seconds from the shot.

113

Lenses / Re: EF 35 f/1.4L II & EF 24-70 f/2.8L II on January 3, 2012? [CR2]

« on: December 11, 2011, 01:37:04 PM »

As an FYI IS makes images even at a shutter speed of 1 divided by your focal length noticeably sharper. It's also nessesary for hand held video without a rig. I think for almost any photographer IS would be a selling point.

Thank you. I wish people would quit ignoring the video side.

Perhaps what Canon really needs is a new category of lens, tailored to that particular industry, so "L" lenses would be for photographers and "C" would be for cinema, with IS and no focus breathing.

114

Lenses / Re: EF 35 f/1.4L II & EF 24-70 f/2.8L II on January 3, 2012? [CR2]

« on: December 11, 2011, 01:16:46 PM »

I really wish Canon would ad 5mm to the top end of the 24-70.
It just doesn't have enough reach on a full frame body.

I use the Tamron 28-75 and wish they would make a 24-75 as well.

I do find it amusing when Tamron 28-75 users say the Canon 24-70 just doesn't have that extra 5mm on the long end that they need.

FYI - The Canon 24-70 L has MORE REACH at the 70mm end than the Tamron 28-75 does at 75mm. I own both and have tested this. The Tamron is a pretty horrible lens, feels like a toy from a christmas cracker, focus ring is a joke, soft @2.8 and that 75mm is misleading.

Having said that, the 24-70 isn't brilliant. Wish I could afford to update it when the new version appears.