August 22, 2014, 09:50:04 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 - Zv

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 79
Lenses / Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]
« on: March 15, 2014, 11:44:05 AM »
Canon have always put two main reasons for putting IS in the lens.

First, the IS is custom made for the specific focal length and lens characteristics.

Second, for optical viewfinders lens based IS steadies the view through the viewfinder, this is not the case with IBIS systems with optical viewfinders, it is true for EVF's though.

Thanks for clarifying. I had forgotton about the second point.

So the IS in the lens is designed to compensate for movement in ways that a sensor just couldn't do? I imagine a sensor can only move in certain ways - for example up down left right and maybe tilt? And maybe not all at the same time right? That would be some clever sensor acrobatics if it could!

The in lens is basically a series of small optical elements that move in response to the way light enters the barrel, right? Meaning there is more than just one thing moving. So is in lens IS more acurate too? And what about Hybrid IS? Could a sensor mimic that too or not?

Lenses / Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]
« on: March 14, 2014, 08:26:28 PM »
In Body Image Stabilisation.

Yep and it's not quite as good as an bespoke in lens stabilization...each lens has an optimized IS unit and not a sensor which wobbles

I've been asked which is better but I still can't say for sure because I don't know the mechanism for IBIS. I understand optical IS is better but why exactly? Can anyone help nail it?

EOS Bodies / Re: Calumet Photo Files Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
« on: March 14, 2014, 08:21:30 PM »
From the interview of the rental manager "CE" it seems they just didn't have stock in the end and customers left unhappy.

This happened to me recently in another camera store. I went in to use up a gift card balance. Saw a filter I liked (just a clear bog standard plain normal one) and the guy turns around and says they had no stock. That's bread and butter man! A filter!! Come on!

So what did I do? Bought it off amazon $10 cheaper. Do I wanna go back to the camera store? Nope.

I hope the ex employees find good jobs. I can't even imagine the stress they're under right now.

Lenses / Re: Do you top your pancake with a filter?
« on: March 07, 2014, 02:53:41 AM »
Are we only talking about the 40mm f/2.8 pancake? I recently bought a filter for the EF M 22mm f/2 lens. The lens cap prodrutes out a bit making it not so pocket friendly so I'm trying a filter on it so it's always ready to shoot. It only adds a few mm more. For pancake protection a filter seems the way to go. Keeps the profile low and protects the front element.

Edit - if I had a 40 mcshorty I'd go capless, hoodless and filterless i.e - bare.

Canon General / Re: In need of a "walk around" camera
« on: March 07, 2014, 12:11:13 AM »
My vote is a 7D with a 24-105. You get the durability you need and a comfortable range + a familiar feel and high FPS when needed. The IQ is there provided your not shooting 50% of the time in a dark bar. Put a rapid strap on it and go sans case.

This is an interesting thread in terms of what we think of as a "travel" camera. To me having a 7D and 24-105 I would say that it's not that travel friendly. It's big and heavy plus 24mm isn't wide enough for me. So I'd have to take my 17-40 too. I think there wouldn't be much of a difference in "discreetness" between a 1Dx and 7D. Yes it's smaller but overall they're both bulky. In a dodgy area theives will easily make you out with your 7D. Maybe another DSLR is not the answer. Sounds like OP wants something pocketable.

Either go small or go with what you have. No point in buying something halfway.

Canon General / Re: In need of a "walk around" camera
« on: March 06, 2014, 08:45:59 PM »
To OP - if IQ is priority then you might be only left with a few expensive options such as the Sony A7 / A7r  + 24-70 f/4 lens or a Sony RX1.

Moving down a category into APS-C will give you a lot more options such as the excellent Fuji X series cameras or even the Sony a6000 which is coming soon.

If you are prepared to put up with the slow AF of the EOS M it too can provide a cheaper alternative to the above plus you can use some existing glass via adaptor (though for portability you'll want the native M lenses).

Moving one class lower into RX100 territory could be a solution. Looks like a compact camera. Very discreet. Packs a punch.

Then I guess there's mft such as Olympus Pen.

If it was me and I had that budget it would be between an RX1 or X100s. Very simple fixed lens solution with great IQ.

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 50mm f/1.4
« on: March 06, 2014, 10:49:01 AM »
Despite my "ho hum" review of the 40mm it's kind of grown on me, it's a very capable lens and if you don't have a zoom in that focal range it's a no-brainer as a buy.

I do have the 24-105 f/4 but I don't think I have a single "Wow" picture taken with it. It wasn't till I slapped the 50mm 1.8 on on the 6D and got some "Wow" pictures that I realized how special primes can be. My problem with my 50mm is focus accuracy. It is so unreliable. Bought FoCal Pro and every time I run it with the 1.8, it tells me my predicted adjustment is off the chart. If I force it to continue, I get an adjustment of +16...but I digress.

I am happy to play with and get to know my new 85mm for now but at some point, I really feel the need to replace the my 50mm.

Now you see why they call it the "thrifty fifty"!! At that price there's gotta be some compromise and unfortunately AF accuracy is one of them. Bloody good glass though! It was great on my 550D.

Having recently picked up a used Sigma 50 1.4 I would say it is a great lens for the money but again the AF is a bit of a let down. Nothing even close to a good USM lens. Focus shifts too. But the IQ is very nice. I'm using it for now for non critical stuff and general messing around in the spring.

I would wait a bit before doing any 50 shopping.   

Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: March 03, 2014, 09:55:30 AM »
... so I choose the trusty Canon 100-400 L IS and I also got the EOS 70D to get that little extra reach (also the sales guy made a really good deal) ... so now I feel a bit relieved from the GAS ... but that's only till the Sony a6000 releases.   
Isn't it great? Having sold my 5D2 I bought a second 5D3 and now I feel as if I had a good dinner after being hungry ... ( = GAS relieved  :) ). I found out that for me the solution is to sell old gear (if and when I find a buyer of course) and get a new item. My list of old items has decreased though  ::)
I am embarresed to say this but do I agree with you on the "good dinner after being hungry" comment  :-[ ... Congratulations on the 5D MK III ... when it comes to selling my old gear I am very fortunate to have several colleagues in my office who are eager to buy my used gear ... recently sold the Sigma 150-500 OS, EOS-M, 22mm , 18-55 IS STM, EF-M adapter and a few other accessories, which funded the 100-400 L IS + 70D today. 8)

Selling old or unused gear is almost as satisfying as buying new and shiny gear! I'm currently trying (not very hard I must admit) to sell my 7D. It's the only bit of kit I don't really need. I love it though. Kind of want to keep it just for the heck of it. I think I need to rekindle my love for it by actually taking pictures with it.

The new Sigma Art had been giving me GAS but it's taken so long to release (not really) that I'm getting over the urge. I seem to "look" for things to buy and now want a Samsung 840 EVO SSD to speed up my laptop. GAS cross contamination into PC equipment now!

EOS Bodies / Re: UPDATE: EOS M2 Not Coming to North America
« on: March 01, 2014, 09:42:17 PM »
I don't think it's fair to compare an EOS M to the Sony A7 /A7r. The Sony looks and handles like a DSLR. In the hand it feels solid and well constructed. An expensive piece of engineering.

The M looks and handles like a compact camera. That's what Canon set out to do. It looks simple and small. The opposite of the A7.

Then there's the price difference. Two completely different markets.

It's all down to personal preferences and your workflow. I have mostly 32Gb cards (2 are Sandisk Extreme Pro and one Transcend - which doesn't work with my CF reader). They allow me to shoot over 1000 RAW images in a day. For weddings, and other events I don't want to be fumbling about with cards. However I also have one 16Gb Sandisk Extreme Pro CF card that I bought first when starting out with CF cards (damn they were expensive!). It gets used now as a back up or ready to shoot card while the others are full and uploading to the PC. The 16Gb is a good size too, gives me just over 500 shots. I could make do with a bunch of 16s but I prefer to keep things simple.

There is always the risk of a card failure but also a risk of just straight up losing / misplacing a card. At my friends wedding the second shooter lost an SD card. All pics lost. Frequently swapping out cards could potentially lead to losing one. I prefer to just have one in camera all times. I upload and back up as soon as possible. Safest place for a card is in your camera - unless you format it by accident! That was my greatest fear when shooting my first wedding!

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS M2 Coming to North America & Europe?
« on: February 28, 2014, 10:45:54 PM »

Will be posting a youtube review online soon, including showing differences between M, M2 and Sony A7. =)

Very interested to see the focus speeds between the M and M2.  I love everything about the M except for the slow focus.  My 60D gets almost no play time now.

I had a play about with the M and M2 side by side at a camera store. The M2 AF speed is much faster than the M, it locks instantly. The M has about a half second delay where you hear the AF motor buzz and hunt but on the M2 the beep is heard right after you press the button. Much more snappier and decisive. I also had a play about with an a7r and of course the AF on that was super fast but for most general subject matter the M2 would suffice.

I'm seriously thinking of upgrading to the M2. Maybe once the price comes down a bit more.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS M2 Coming to North America & Europe?
« on: February 28, 2014, 10:22:22 AM »
Read the interview and also the link to the technical AF question, answered by Chuck Westfall. This blew my mind a bit. Thought I'd share it.

"On the other hand, because AF precision is proportional to maximum aperture with Dual Pixel CMOS AF, it scales itself automatically and dynamically according to the supported EF or EF-S lens in use. For example, Dual Pixel CMOS AF achieves a longer baseline for AF precision with an f/4 lens compared to an f/5.6 lens, and so on all the way down the line to f/1.0. At the other end of the scale, Dual Pixel CMOS AF supports autofocusing with maximum apertures as small as f/11, a full two stops smaller than is possible with the 70D's TTL-SIR-AF system. And because the AF data is measured directly from the imaging sensor, there is no need for AF Microadjustment."

I kinda want to try a 70D out for the day.

EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 27, 2014, 08:02:00 AM »
I don't begrudge people the whole field of view argument with crop v. full because a 50mm is indeed like an 85mm... and I'm not sure why, but with full frame, depth of field is greater, though with comparable framing, the full frame's depth of field is thinner...

I've heard the argument about the f/2.8 is comparable to f/4.5 (or whatever), but I didn't bother to ask what they meant.

So if I'm shooting with a 135L f/2 in moderate light and at iso 800 I'm shooting at 1/2000 of a second... that should still be the same achieved shutter speed regardless of crop or full.

And if you keep the same distance between, the depth of field should be comparable.  So why is f/1.4 now f/2.2?

Ok, but I choose quality over quantity. I don't need to "cover the range" and it is only one L lens less for FF, really. What you'd get from your list on APSC is:
Tokina 18-26/4.5
Canon 38-112/4.5
Sigma 56/2.2
Canon 80/2.2
A 160/4.5 IS
A 216/3.5
A 112-320/6.3 IS

If the light is constant and you compare an image from a crop sensor and FF. both shot in M mode, at the same aperture and SS you'll notice the FF image to be brighter. I think it's like 2/3 of a stop. Could be more. However, in Av mode both cameras should spit out the same as the camera adjusts the SS accordingly. I did this experiment with my 5D2 and 7D. The FF gathers more light. So in low light it does make a difference. In bright sunlight that wouldn't be an issue as your SS can be whatever.

What I also like about FF is that f/4 is now a quite shallow dof at 50mm and above. The slow zooms that I had on my 7D become a lot more useful.

Separate argument about the upgrade path - I agree that FF needs good lenses and if someone asked me to upgrade lens or body first I'd say lens. However, if someone already owns decent primes I think they'll benefit more from going t2i - 5D3 rather than change the already good prime to L prime.

I wish I had just bought a 5D2 + 24-105L from day one tbh. All beginner advice be dammed. I just ended up at the same place 3 yrs later anyway and slightly poorer having sold off cameras at a loss. My advice to myself would have been buy the best camera you can afford that will last you at least 5 yrs then build up your lens collection.

What I don't get is the contradiction between those who claim IQ is their no1 priority and have the best L lenses, because they were told lenses are more important than camera and are using only a crop sensor body with those L lenses. Obviously not counting sports shooters and other people who have reason to (in which case IQ is not their priority anymore it's making money!). I'm talking the rebel t1i with 200mm f/2.


Sorry, I may have been wrong. Never mind. I'll edit the post. Today I learned .....

EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 27, 2014, 12:39:40 AM »

If the light is constant and you compare an image from a crop sensor and FF. both shot in M mode, at the same aperture and SS you'll notice the FF image to be brighter. I think it's like 2/3 of a stop. Could be more. However, in Av mode both cameras should spit out the same as the camera adjusts the SS accordingly. I did this experiment with my 5D2 and 7D. The FF gathers more light. So in low light it does make a difference. In bright sunlight that wouldn't be an issue as your SS can be whatever.

Only if your camera is faulty, exposure has nothing to do with sensor size. Absolutely nothing.

I see. Could it be due to the larger pixels then?

Edit - I am talking like a crazy person, please ignore my stupidity.

EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 25, 2014, 07:03:04 PM »

Nice glass shame about the body! Did you just forget to upgrade your camera when you were acquiring your L lens collection??


The philosophy down here is buy better glass before upgrading the body.

Roger Machin, head of Canon South Africa gave me that advise.

Finding the right camera is just as important as having a great lens to go with it. Cheap camera great lens is just the better of the two other situations. I agree better glass is important but after a while it just becomes silly when you are prepared to lay down 2k for a top of the line L lens and ignore what it's attached to.

It's like you bought the Armani suit but are still rockin the old New Balance trainers to go with it!

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 79