April 21, 2014, 05:39:03 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 - Zv

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 70
136
It all depends on the price of both the Sigma and Canon (if we ever see the Canon that is!). I got rid off my 50 1.8 a while ago and have missed having something relatively small and light to use as a walk around lens. The Sigma looks like it might be a bit on the heavy side, prob better suited to studio work than hiking and outdoor activities. For that kinda thing a 50 IS would make more sense. I really love IS, it's a life saver. I don't want to carry a tripod all day for the small possibility that i might need it for one or two low light shots in the evening. Just want a well built 50 that has reliable AF.

I can see both the Canon and Sigma being around the same price, a bit like the 35s.

Canon, the time to announce your 50 1.8 IS is now!

137
I'm glad you like the EOS M Surapon! It's nice to hear about positive experiences with the M instead of all the bashing it seems to get. For the price of a decent point and shoot you get a heck of a lot of camera.

I've started using it a lot more now and recently on vacation I had the same thoughts as you Surapon - if someone robs me I'll only be down a few hundred bucks but if someone takes my 5D2 I am well and truly f$$$'d. I can't afford to replace it. I am seriously thinking about leaving my 5D2 at home next holiday and just taking the little guy!

Luckily as I live in Japan I can easily buy the EF-M 11-22mm lens (waiting for the price to come down). I think that would do me nicely as I really only shoot landscapes and buildings when on holiday. Would be nice to see Canon make a small telephoto prime to round off the kit. Currently my tele option is an old FD 50mm f/1.4 via adapter. The combo is surprisingly small and has a nice weight. Manual focus only but Magic Lantern helps with that. I also have the FD 100mm f/2.8 but haven't used it yet.

Another great advantage is that you don't need a large, expensive, carbon fibre tripod to support it. That means you can do all the long exposure stuff, possibly star fields etc, with a much smaller tripod. I tried it with my Gorillapod hybrid and it works just fine! Great for group shots in restaurants etc.

138
I think small mirrorless bodies with wifi have potential for travelers. When you're traveling having something relatively small is a big help. If your camera fits in your pocket or a space in your backpack you're more likely to use it. I'm finding DSLRs very cumbersome on holiday. Also, when taking pics of yourself at famous locations and taking group pics with you also in the shot wifi is a blessing. (No more selfie stick!)

So, a camera that is smaller than a dslr and has wifi plus option to change lenses maybe. I think Canon are heading in the right direction with the EOS M2. Shame Canon US don't seem to think so.

If you remove compact P&S and you remove MILC then all you would have is smartphones and DSLRs. There needs to be something in between. What would replace it? That lens with sensor thing Sony made that attaches to your smartphone? Hmmm, I can't see MILC market dying just yet.

Anyone who's used an EOS M can testify to this - they're just plain fun to use! Can't wait for the future of these things, with faster AF and better IQ. Still early days for the M in my opinion.


139
Lenses / Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]
« on: January 05, 2014, 09:22:09 PM »
I find the 50mm focal length quite boring. I'd rather shoot wider or longer. Canon please skip the 50mm IS and just make a 40mm F/1 IS cupcake (because f/1 wont fit into a pancake)

See, that statement makes no sense to me - how can a focal length be "boring"? That means you must not know how to use it properly if all you get are boring shots. You can use a 50 to get some very nice close portraits with shallow dof. You can do product shots, you can shoot landscapes, street, groups of people etc. the list of subject matter is endless really. Now if all you shoot is pics of you cat then I guess that's a different story ...  :P

140
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon abandoned EOS M?
« on: January 04, 2014, 08:53:09 PM »
Sonyalpharumors.com has recently posted a link to the top-selling mirrorless and DSLR cameras in Japan http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/2013-sales-sony-nex-5r-is-the-most-sold-mirrorless-camera-in-japan/

According to this link, Canon EOS-M is the second top-selling mirrorless camera in Japan. I know it's not worldwide but anyway, it seems that Japanese like it.

Another interesting thing is that EOS Kiss X5 (T3i) is the top-selling DSLR in Japan.

Actually the Japanese consumer market has different preferences of most countries. ??? I wondered if the price of EOS M also plummeted in Japan, boosting sales. ::) Another surprise is the fact T3i (Kiss X5) is the biggest selling SLR in Japan. :o


Yes it did. The price dropped to the same as the US. I got mine for ¥31,000 and a few days later on amazon.jp it dropped another thousand making it very close to $300. It's gone back up slightly now but still relatively cheap.

Also I see rebel XXXD series cameras everywhere I go. Everyone and their auntie seemed to have one around their neck when I was in Malaysia, all tourists of course. I saw the odd Nikon camera.

In Japan I see a fair amount of both Nikon and Canon at festivals and events.

In all my travels I think I saw two EOS M cameras. I don't know anyone else that has one which is a shame really as I think this little guy is amazing. For places where my 5D2 & 24-105 was too obvious (night market, streets, crowded spaces etc) the M was a blessing. I'm getting used to it now and I'm even considering to take only the M on my next trip. It sucks carrying several Kg of camara gear around airports, buses, taxis and hotels. No matter how strong you are it's a hassle. And then you've got to keep it safe from thieves!

I had my iPad and although I could upload pics via a cable I would have pref wifi. I think the M2 is exactly the kind of camera I need (though I'm gonna wait) to make my travel and share workflow stress free and fun. The only other option would be to use my iPhone, takes great pics but lacks useability and features. I love that the M has full DSLR features. Been doing some long exposure stuff at night and it's s lot of fun. You can quicky move location and view and no one takes much notice. This thing rocks and what Canon need to do is market it better. 

141
Lenses / Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]
« on: January 04, 2014, 01:14:25 PM »
Exactly, I agree with that summary. More dof in moderate to dim light is more important to me than shallow dof in low light. It makes perfect sense why Canon made the newer IS primes slower. I can't recall the last time I actually wanted to use f/1.4 for any reason.

If I had to choose one or the other, sure, but I'd rather have an f/1.2 or f/1.4 IS so that I have the stabilization with the wider DoF for 95% of the shots, and also can dial in that great subject isolation of a fast lens for the other 5%.

I'll readily admit that I've never owned or used a lens quite that fast—the closest I have is a full-manual 58mm f/2.0 lens—but I'd like to.  I just can't justify spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on a lens that I can't use for day-to-day shooting because of the lack of IS.

Yeah that's true both are desireable in a lens really.

I tend to get most of my subject isolation shots using a telephoto lens. Even at f/4 you can get lovely background blur at 200mm. It becomes harder to get that look I guess with the wider focal lengths so you would need f1.4 in that case. It would be awesome to have a 50 1.4 with IS but I don't think that will happen.

There is one point I also hadn't considered and that's APS-C users. I think for those users fast lenses still play an important role since high ISO stinks and the crop factor takes away the really shallow dof capability. My f/4 zooms are fairly limiting on the 7D.

The only fast I have now is the 135L which on crop really needs IS! You have to use it at at least 1/250s if you want any chance of avoiding camera shake. And with flash sync at 1/250s on the 7D options get real limited quickly.

142
Lenses / Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]
« on: January 02, 2014, 10:15:13 PM »
I have the 14LII, 24LII, 35L, 50L, 85LII and 180L and reckon all of them need IS.

My personal opinion is anyone who claims fast primes don't need IS has (fortunately) not had to push their lenses into service in truly low light situations.

The amount of times I have had to contend with camera shake because of using the 85L at 1/20, 1/30 etc. is very frustrating.

Agree 100%.  I'm a handheld, available light shooter who often ends up in the ISO 3200 - 6400 range on my 5D3.  I'll take IS on everything.

In low light / non-moving subject scenes, IS simply buys you speed and options.  IS lets you either bring the ISO down to something more reasonable or lets you stop the lens down to gain more DOF and sharpness. 

Remember, a huge aperture lens like an F/1.4 might seem a creative opportunity, but lack of IS on it will make that F/1.4 a light-driven necessity that punishes you when you don't want a small DOF.   Put differently, an F/1.4 lens might seem better than (say) an F/2.8 IS lens, but if you always have to slam the F/1.4 wide open to net a long enough shutter, your shots will be soft and have a limited DOF.   Stopping the F/2.8 down to F/4 will net sharper shots with more working DOF, so in low light, and for what I shoot, I'd choose the F/2.8 IS over the F/1.4 every time.

- A

Exactly, I agree with that summary. More dof in moderate to dim light is more important to me than shallow dof in low light. It makes perfect sense why Canon made the newer IS primes slower. I can't recall the last time I actually wanted to use f/1.4 for any reason. I find myself shooting at f/8 and f/11 more to get sharpness front to back. When you're walking about in the evening pics look really nice with more dof as it is "unusual" and not expected. I also don't want to carry an extra 2 or 3Kg of weight in the shape of a tripod when I'm traveling around South East Asia. There's no room for tripods on those narrow, broken dusty streets anyway!

IS is my most loved fearure of all. Can't wait for the 50 IS!

143
Canon General / Re: Review - Canon EF 85mm f/1.8
« on: January 01, 2014, 09:39:50 AM »
What's all this talk of CAs ? You guys don't know your DxO. In their wonderfully condensed measurement rankings the 85 f1.8 has less CAs that all the rest.

OK so they test in the dark, but hey so what !? It's a 1.8 lens.
More specifically I meant purple fringing, and from the sound of it, I must've had a really lousy copy.

Not just you, the copy I had was the same. F/2.8 and above was better.

I was poking fun at DxO. Everyone knows that the 85 1.8 as really bad CAs wide open in bright light, yet on the DxO lens 'scores' it has one of the least CA of any lens. In fact for a long time the 85 1.8 was the highest placed of  any Canon lenses !!!

However those CAs are the result of the lens's smooth brokeh - which is also why it isn't a critically pin sharp lens ( in theory - it is in practice ). Nowadays the lens manufactures seem to be able to give good brokeh without too much CA and loss of resolution, so maybe an series two version will be interesting - but it will be more expensive too.

Also neither the review or anyone else has mentioned what I suspect is a big failing of the lens. I'm not at all sure that the focusing mechanics of this lens is able to keep up with the very shallow DoF when at a moderate distance at f1.8. In this area the 135L is definitely more reliable.

That's an interesting point you've hit upon. Yeah the 85 1.8 had some really creamy bokeh and according to Canon it was designed with that purpose in mind. Wide open it wasn't pin sharp but still acceptable IMO. I guess if you want sharpness and low CA, you have to pay for it. (Or do you?? 135L was my solution).

Also I agree with what you said about the focusing issue too. I tried in vain to AFMA it. A pointless exercise as the lens seemed to front focus wide open then back focus when stopped down. Focused fast though I'll give it that. Maybe the fastest focusing lens I think I've ever owned. Makes for an excellent street lens on a 7D btw. You can get nice tight shots quickly without anyone noticing. For that purpose this lens excels!



144
Canon General / Re: Review - Canon EF 85mm f/1.8
« on: December 31, 2013, 11:19:42 AM »
What's all this talk of CAs ? You guys don't know your DxO. In their wonderfully condensed measurement rankings the 85 f1.8 has less CAs that all the rest.

OK so they test in the dark, but hey so what !? It's a 1.8 lens.
More specifically I meant purple fringing, and from the sound of it, I must've had a really lousy copy.

Not just you, the copy I had was the same. F/2.8 and above was better.

145
I use a Lastolite EZBalance and do a custom in-camera white balance.  During golden hour, the color of the ambient light is changing constantly so I will rebalance the in-camera setting every 10 minutes or so, or any time we move from one lighting condition to another.  My goal is to get a raw image with a neutral WB.

Now, in most cases we expect "golden  hour" photos to have more warmth in them.  And in PP I will adjust the color temp accordingly to get the finished effect I want.  But I always want to start those adjustment with a neutral image.

You do a custom WB every 10mins? And you shoot RAW? And you adjust it anyway in post?

Why? Your reason makes no sense. Why does it have to be neutral to begin with? You could set it to Tungsten and it wouldn't matter. You're gonna change it to whatever you like later.

I feel like we've been over this!!! Come on people it's RAW ffs!!!

146
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What a waste of 1-serie camera
« on: December 22, 2013, 07:57:51 PM »
I expected more resistance from the lens mount on a magnesium body which eventually supports lenses that weigh several pounds. :o In practical use, a 6D with Samyang 14mm would be more appropriate to stand behind the goal. 8)

Guess you never played football. The player in question gave it quite a whack.
Also, a 6D wouldn't make any sense ... you need the fps that the 1D bodies offer to shoot a fast game like football.
I'm from Brazil, so I played a lot of football in school. Actually I was goalie and has suffered a few strokes of the ball, but fortunately none in sensitive parts. ::) 6D is obviously not suitable for the hardness of sports photography, but can be a "disposable" body to stay in a place with high risk of total loss along with Samyang 14mm. I would not put 1DX + EF14mm L behind the goal, unless the equipment belonged to a newspaper and had insurance. In addition, WI-FI capability can serve for monitoring and remote release. After all, nobody wants to get in the way of the ball, is not it? :P

Interesting. You could potentially have two or three 6D cameras and be trigerring them remotely via wifi and smartphones to increase the chance of getting the shot.

147
Also in post you want to see and control the amount of color shift as the sun sinks. For example in shot no 1. lets say you correct WB to 5000k and then sync all. Great but now shot 100 is the wrong color because by that point the sun went down and things got cooler and you wanted to preserve that look. Auto is too inconsistent and you'd have to muck about fixing a lot more shots then resyncing. With a fixed value you know how much or how less you need to move it by.
Sorry for removing most of the comments to reply I just wanted to avoid another tunnel thread (there was one where we ended up making fun  :) ).
I do not disagree in concept too much I think. I just believe it is the same with ACR +1 step.
You just mention an example of a 5000K temperature applied to all via sync. Isn't the same if you have it all at 5000K at the time of shooting?
In both cases you would do either:
1. minor tweeks to some and/or
2. preserve the look of some.

Either starting from 5500K (or 5000) at the time of shooting or from a set temperature from ACR which by the way may also be the same (say 5500K or 5000)...

So I believe it is just a step difference either way  (always talking about raw files)

Now, I have observed that my 5D2 and 5D3 are way off (too warm) at tungsten lighting (as was my 40D). In that case a preset value in K would give better results from the start (which seems to be around 2700K at least for many of my latest interior shooting cases). Still it is not big deal to apply at post and I have the advantage of not forgetting the camera to that value.

It is just the freedom that raw files give us. I believe both ways are acceptable and it actually comes down to personal preference.

Ah yes I see what you're saying now. It's just an extra step to level all images in post to the same value. Hmmm yeah I guess that is essentially the same idea. Fair enough.

Btw what ever happened to that tunnel thread? Did it break the forum? CR was a bit wonky the last few days!

148
Shot to shot consistency! That's the words I was trying to say but totally spaced out on!

149
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony A7R shutter vibration problem?
« on: December 22, 2013, 11:36:31 AM »
Just when many of us were celebrating the end of the mirror slap. :( Moving parts shutter weigh far less than the mirror, and shake is more noticeable?. :-\

No just as CR guy says - because the camera is much lighter than your typical FF DSLR and with a longer lens attached via lens collar and foot, the camera is just hanging in mid air. Normally thats cool on a rock solid 1DX or whatever but somehow on the A7R it's floppin about when the shutter moves. Even the tiniest vibration can muck up a shot with a tele lens.

Mirror slap is not an issue with DSLRs on a tripod due to mirror lock option.

150
My general approach is to set WB at a predetermined value, I use 5,500ºK, this takes one inconsistency out of the equation. If you use Auto WB you have to adjust for the cameras idea as well as the actual light, in post processing I find it easier to adjust everything by the same amount than try to even out the inconsistencies Auto WB introduces, then just tweak in groups as the light changed.


+1. For several years I used AWB but found I was spending a lot of time in LR micro adjusting the WB of each shot from a set to compensate for the white balance the camera selected for individual pictures.  Keeping the WB set for Daylight or 5500K alleviates those PP issues.
I can't see how that helps if the light for exterior shooting changes. 5500K will be wrong and you will still have to make changes. Unless you take a lot of pictures at the same external place at exactly the same conditions of course where the changes if any will be applied to more than one photos at the same time.

I think that's the point, you already know the exact k with out having to look it up, make the work flow slightly faster
Even with WB set to auto, you can always correct the WB in ACR for one picture, select it first, then select more in Adobe ACR and synchronize WB. It is simple and fast.

Yeah but if you use flash worst thing in the world is Auto WB. Knowing what temp you are shooting at has it's advantages in camera. I think it helps understand color temp better too.

Also in post you want to see and control the amount of color shift as the sun sinks. For example in shot no 1. lets say you correct WB to 5000k and then sync all. Great but now shot 100 is the wrong color because by that point the sun went down and things got cooler and you wanted to preserve that look. Auto is too inconsistent and you'd have to muck about fixing a lot more shots then resyncing. With a fixed value you know how much or how less you need to move it by.

It's hard to explain but it does help your workflow by shooting at a constant temp. Auto can be cool one shot and then warm the next. Then you gotta figure out "was it really cool or was it warm at that point?" With Daylight you know exactly how it was!

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 70