October 01, 2014, 11:20:40 PM

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 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 84
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 25, 2014, 08:44:12 AM »
Hi everybody  :)

So as I move into my 3rd year of photography, I find my 500D isn't able to help my take my photography to the next level and its beginning to feel like my L series lenses are begging to shoot on a full frame body.

I've never had the chance to shoot full frame so most of what I know is pure theory derived from reading reviews etc online.

With South Africa's economy in a bit of trouble, I can get a hardly used 5D mkii for a reasonable price so I'm considering taking that.

Just what can I expect in terms of image quality and noise performance? Is the IQ of a full frame substantially better than a crops? Will I be able to take relatively noise free images at say ISO 3200?

The reviews seem to indicate that the native system for L series glass is full frame. Does this mean that I will experience a dramatic improvement in IQ?

The more I read, it seems that crop bodies have a singular advantage over full frame and that is the increase in focal length.

Can you guys chip in and throw some opinions and facts my way please?

Thanks in advance everybody.

You will love full frame cameras, but you won't like how much the lenses cost.

There are some value ef lenses... but if you get a nice body, it is just a waste to put on mediocre lenses. 

Even then... if you just go with primes like the 40mm, 35 f2 is, 100 f2... you can get by.

Sure, but you'll want to add at least one pricey one.

lol. I do have some pricy (for me) lenses.

Canon 100mm macro L, Canon 400mm f/5.6 L, Canon 70-200 f/4.0 L, Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L mkii.
Then also have the EF-S 10-22 & 50 f/1.8.

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


Take the argument to the extreme and consider something like and iphone 5s. It has a tiny sensor so everything is always in focus. But it still has an f2 lens in terms of light transition. So sometimes I can get a better macro shot in low light on my 5s than I could on my 5d mk iii. Because to get an equivalent depth of field I'd have to stop down to f18 which would push up the ISO to extreme.

I think you have to factor in the difference in sensor size and light gathering capabilities of both. I don't know the exact factor but I would say that the FF sensor would gather a lot more light than the iPhone sensor at the exact same exposure settings. Well that part is obvious but then you see, when you stop the FF / lens aperture down a few stops to match the amount of light you have essentially "bought" yourself a few stops of ISO too. Then another feature of the FF is that even at ultra high ISO it will be relatively noise free and have more detail.

I've never tried macro with an iPhone using only ambient light. I'd imagine you'd need a lot of light. It would be interesting to see a side by side comparison with a 5D3.

EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 08:41:41 AM »
What you see on the LCD is the JPEG preview anyway, regardless of what file type you shoot. Therefore you could argue that you are always shooting JPEG in a sense. We should always try and get it right in camera and one way to do that is to use the info from the histogram and LCD. Though it's bloody hard on a 3" screen and usually things look fine until you look at it on the big screen!

As Neuro said there is no real benefit to the photographer by limiting the file type. You might as well shoot RAW, get it right in camera and then just convert to JPEG if required. You always have the option of not processing the image.

That said I think the challenge is interesting in a way. I think I'd spend more time composing my shots and getting the light just perfect rather than getting it close enough. Could be useful someday if a client wants images on demand during a shoot. I prob rely too heavily on fixing it later. The thought of handing over unprocessed shots makes me very uncomfortable!

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon DSLR Announcement in March? [CR1]
« on: February 23, 2014, 01:46:25 AM »
I think one of the problems with Canon's DSLR lineup is that they have too many models on the market. It is not really economical to support future development of all of them.

I've been saying that for a long time.  Ignoring the mirrorless segment for the moment, the right number of DSLR models is 4:

  • Consumer crop-body DSLR (based on the 70D)
  • Pro crop-body DSLR (7DMk2)
  • Consumer full-frame DSLR (6D)
  • Pro full-frame DSLR (1D-???)

I could possibly accept 5, but only if it's because they continue to sell one older model of consumer crop-body cameras to hit a price point.  Any more models than that, and your products are cannibalizing each other's market share way too badly.

What this means is that they need to merge the 1D and 5D lines and price them where the 5D line is currently.  They also need to kill the Rebel line and rebrand the 70D as the Rebel T6i.  There really is no good reason to have two consumer crop body lines that are barely differentiated, much less two professional full-frame body lines that each have some features and not others.

Also, the high-end model should always be a strict superset of the low-end model.  Having features in the 6D and 70D that the 7D, 5D, and 1D don't have is absurd.

Hmmmm .... I disagree with what you said about 2 FF bodies. The current system is pretty good in my opinion. One low cost, one mid level and one high end. By merging the 1D and 5D I presume the body would be 1D shape? That would annoy a lot of journalists and wedding togs for sure. The 5D range is the bread and butter for a lot of folk. The 6D is targeted for a different kind of photographer. It seems more travel and casual stuff. Maybe first time FF buyers etc. also a one camera does it all top end model would be very pricey. The jump between 6D and 1D is really high.

Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: February 22, 2014, 04:17:34 AM »
I need help! Spring is in the air and I am coming down with GAS, I am spending to much time looking at lens reviews....how can I rid myself of this affliction?..? ;) ;)

Good. The first step is admitting to yourself that you have GAS.

The next step is to give in to it and let it take over your life. Resistance is futile!


Enjoy your rapidly depleting bank account balance!!

Regardless of Matt's errors at least we get to see the lens in comparison to the 35 1.4 which is what I was wondering. It gives me an idea of how it will look on a 5D.

Why is it in black and white though??

Sigma 50 1.4 815 grams official weight. My 24-105 Sigma is heavy as well but worth every gram.

We're getting to the point that equipment size and weight is increasing so much that practicality is at stake. More bulk means less space remains in the bag for other lenses. It's good to limit the stuff you carry but can be good to have a little extra space for contingency lenses. This is why I keep the old 35 f/2 and 50 f/1.8 which sacrifice a little in image quality but are very compact which is great especially for travel. note that I always limit myself to the minimum I think I will need, and my lowepro minitrekker AW is the measure for the maximum volume I want to carry.

So it weighs about as much as the 24-70 f/2.8LII (805g). That's a lot for a 50 prime. I like my primes small and light. I think Sigma are just going all out here to create the best lens they can optically. Weight be damned. The old Sig 50 has a nice weight and balances well. I'm hoping Canon makes their new 50 compact like the 24/28/35s. You can chuck all three of those in a small backpack and still have plenty of room for your lunch! We togs gotta eat on the go!

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon DSLR Announcement in March? [CR1]
« on: February 20, 2014, 09:59:19 AM »
Where I live a 70D body costs about $1250. On initial release a Rebel Txi usually costs around $1100 with its crappy kit lens (they cost a lot less at the moment, but that is because the T5i is relatively old now). If what you say is correct, and they released a T6i with marginal improvements over the T5i, then it is going to have a tough time competing with the 70D. Who in their right mind would buy a T6i when for a little bit more they could get a much better camera in the 70D? I think one of the problems with Canon's DSLR lineup is that they have too many models on the market. It is not really economical to support future development of all of them.

It is much simpler for Canon to reduce the price of the 70D one or two hundred dollars than it is to start producing a new camera.

So what you're saying is Canon should cut the price of the 70D by about $200 or more and not release a new T6i?

Great. Now they're selling the 70D close to break even thus losing profit and to top it off they have no income at all from what used to be a best seller.

Development costs for their rebel line are quite low. You said yourself "... with marginal improvements". How much development do you think is going on in these rebels?! The developing has already been done. The cameras use tech filtered down from the older high end models. A little spit and polish, add a few new creative filters and increase the model number accordingly and voila! A T6i is born! Sit back and enjoy as profits go up!

People will buy it simply because it's newer. Others will wait until the price drops. Either way it will sell.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon DSLR Announcement in March? [CR1]
« on: February 20, 2014, 02:23:35 AM »
Yes, it's likely that the next camera is launched T6i. I just hope it has the same sensor 70D.

Canon is shrewd when it comes to milking profits from sensors.  Consider that the T5i/700D did not get the latest version of the 18 MP APS-C sensor.  The T5i's sensor has Hybrid CMOS AF (same sensor as the T4i and the EOS M), whereas the sensor used in the SL1/100D and the EOS M2 has Hybrid CMOS II AF (where the phase AF area covers 80% of the frame vs. just the central portion).  That allows Canon to release another T#i-series body with a 'new' (to the line) sensor (but not the 70D's sensor).  Put Digic 6 in there, and they're good to go with the T6i/750D.

I doubt it. A 70D body already costs barely more than the current rebel when it is released. What is more likely to happen is that the rebel line will not be updated and the 70D will take that place in the lineup, since it is about the same price point. The top end APS-C will be taken by the new 7D2 (or whatever they call it), and will probably have advanced video features that would allow it to compete in the same space as the GH4. The last of the three speculated DSLRs would then be a full frame camera, replacing either the 6D or 5D3 (probably they would do the 6D first). Full frame cameras have not been updated for some time and are due, if they are to remain competitive.

Canon is in the business of making money, they need their revenue stream flowing and the way to do that is to convince people that it is time to update their bodies. An iterative update will not cut it in that regard, so we can expect something substantial in higher end cameras. Since they have already said that they are going to be focussing on video, what will probably happen are a set of new cameras will incremental upgrades in still capabilities and large upgrades in video capabilities. That is where the growth potential is, and (unless they are stupid) they will capitalize on the current interest in 4K and high quality output to drive that process. While the average Joe might not care about 4K and video quality, the target group that buys their high end cameras most certainly is.

So, at the low end the new Rebel T5 will provide good quality stills for the average Joe (who doesn't care that much about video quality). The 70D will fill the spot in the lineup previously occupied by the Rebel Txi series, with a price drop of 200-300 dollars to get it in the sweet spot. The high end of the consumer market will be targeted by the 7D2 which will have excellent APS-C stills capability and high quality camcorder like capabilities for 1080p video. The prosumer market will be targeted by something like a 6D2/5D4 which will provide excellent full frame stills and high quality 4K capabilities (similar to the GH4). That way they could revamp the entire line and provide something for each of the four main market segments to drive growth.

At the professional level they introduce the new cinema EOS models to address the dedicated film makers. There will be a high end model (8-10K range) for the real professionals, and a lower end model (3-4K range) for the wannabe amateurs.

In addition, in the camcorder segment there will be new 4K camcorders, a semi professional model similar to the HA 20/25 and a consumer model similar to the Vixia HFG30. One or two professional big bucks camcorders will be introduced to address that market segment as well.

If they do this over the course of the next 9-12 months they will revamp pretty much every market segment and keep them competitive, particularly with respect to the changes that video is currently undergoing.

That is my prediction of what will happen.

Where does the SL1 fit into this model?

I don't know about you but the 70D is way more expensive than any rebel I've ever seen, even when newly released, where I live. Also they are targeted at two different types of photographers. I think the rebel / txi line will continue on. It's a big seller for Canon. It's very much their bread and butter camera. The T5 is aimed at the budget conscious and IMO doesn't replace a rebel. It's a great camera though for the price. The SL1 fills the handbag and compact travel needs. Neither of those are a good replacement for a solid, full functional mid sized DSLR for the beginner looking to get into photography. The 70D probably seems too advanced to some of those types of people. That would be a tough choice - a very low budget DSLR, or a $1000 semi pro model. As a newbie or casual shooter I'd want something in between.

The rebel has always been that perfect balance of awesome features and performance at a reasonable price level. I doubt Canon would disturb that strategy.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon DSLR Announcement in March? [CR1]
« on: February 19, 2014, 11:39:11 PM »
I can understand Canon "reusing" the 18mp sensor over and over again as Nikon has done the same with their 16mp sensor and now new 24mp sensor. It makes good marketing sense, in a way. I just think that it has been more noticeable with Canon as the last 5 years and 9 camera bodies have been 18mp even though there have been some small changes between certain sensor designs. Noise levels have not gotten noticeably better either, so naturally, people have become frustrated.

The 7D is 5 years old and I still think it is one hell of a camera body that is very capable. All crop sensors have noise so if your job demands noise free images, you are not looking at crop bodies anyway, you are shooting full frame.

I think the last couple great cameras from Canon were the 5D3 and 1DX and other than that nothing has been released (in MO) from Canon that is ground-breaking or anything that would make me want to give up my 7D and 40D backup. I still use my 40D and the images are stellar, I will never give up my 40D!

Hopefully, IF Canon makes a 7D replacement, it will show the "world" what a great crop body can do!


I agree the 7D is still a great camera, capable of taking amazing pictures in good light. It suffers a bit in low light though. I think a 7D replacement isn't out of the question but I am starting to doubt if it will be this year.

If Canon put in a completely new sensor, dual Digic 5, with DPAF, perhaps wifi and and touchscreen plus a higher burst rate and 4K video a lot of folk will be happy. Even without the 4K video (which I think is a stretch) this would be a great camera. Improvements to ISO noise are prob not going to be groundbreaking but hopefully better than what it is now.

Also, I think the 6D should be in the category of something great released recently. For the price you are getting superb IQ and features. It pretty much brought FF to the masses. Before that the only cheap options were the dated 5D cameras. For the same price as the 5D2 used you get a similar spec'd camera but more modern and with insane high ISO usability. Four years ago that was unheard of at that price point.

Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS
« on: February 17, 2014, 07:08:42 PM »
I experienced some Sigma focus shift today in fact. I was a bit perplexed when I was using LV to manually focus the 50mm at f/4, and when I took the shot it was slightly off. The 24-105L didn't have this issue. Is this due to the fact that when focusing the aperture is wide open at f/1.4 on the Siggy and f/4 on the Canon? That is kinda useless then if using LV. Makes AF accuracy even more important.

It has to do with the lens design, not the max aperture (although when focus shift affects a lens, it's usually more evident with a faster lens).  AF is always done wide open - the thing about focus shift is that the lens is the shift occurs when the lens is stopped down, which happens after AF is complete.  It doesn't matter if focus is live view or phase detect, the problem is there.  In live view, you can hold the DoF preview button and focus manually to avoid the issue.

Ah, thanks I'll try the Dof preview button next time.

Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS
« on: February 17, 2014, 10:53:04 AM »
Ugg. Focus shift.
Yeah, there's a term for that right? "Non-parfocal" but neither is the Canon... for what that's worth.

No, they are two different things. 

Parfocal means a lens maintains focus while being zoomed, it's a very useful feature for shooting video (whereas with stills, it's generally easy to refocus after zooming).  The Canon 24-105L is not parfocal (the 17-40, 16-35, and 70-200/2.8 non-IS are parfocal).  Not sure on the Sigma, but I'd guess it's not parfocal.

Focus shift means the focus changes when the lens is stopped down.  No problem shooting wide open, but if you stop the lens down to f/5.6 or f/8 with a close subject, that subject will likely not be in crisp focus with the Sigma 24-105.  With more distant subjects, the effect is masked by the deeper DoF.  The 50/1.2L is notorious for focus shift (people call it a 'backfocus problem' usually because of a lack of understanding the real issue).

I experienced some Sigma focus shift today in fact. I was a bit perplexed when I was using LV to manually focus the 50mm at f/4, and when I took the shot it was slightly off. The 24-105L didn't have this issue. Is this due to the fact that when focusing the aperture is wide open at f/1.4 on the Siggy and f/4 on the Canon? That is kinda useless then if using LV. Makes AF accuracy even more important.

Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS
« on: February 17, 2014, 10:06:32 AM »
For me the lens is just too heavy. I'm sure it would make an ideal lens for a lot of people though its just not really a travel lens, is it?

I also don't like the way it zooms, it looks weird.

I've only had my 24-105L for less than a year but it's already my most used lens. Yeah it has it's faults but damn that thing is just so useful. Kudos to Sigma for making a cracking lens though.

OK, I got the Sigma 50mm 1.4 non Art version today and had a short muck around with it. After a +7 AFMA it seems to be behaving a bit better and though not as accurate as I would like for the larger apertures, the hit rate seems to be much better than before. At MFD or close it is really badly front focusing at like +15. Might run it through Focal when I have more time.

Overall IQ is actually pretty good even at f/1.4 with plenty of detail. A bit more CA and fringing than the 24-105L at f/4 but nothing too distracting. Not bad for the price, might hang on to this until the new Sigma and Canon 50s come out and then go head to head.

A sample at f/1.4 with only the Lens Correction Profile applied ...

I gave up waiting. Going to try the old Sigma 50 1.4 for now and see how it goes. Might upgrade to the new one later this year after the price settles and there are a stack of good reviews.

i'm also getting impatient, but will continue to wait for the soggy 50 art.  i've read to many negative reviews on the original sig 50 1.4...I'd stick with the canon 50 1.4 IMO

I had the 50mm 1.8 II for a while and it was OK for the price. The Canon 50 1.4 seemed like the logical choice but from what I can tell there are some issues with it that concern me such as the AF motor and it's durability. Then I also compared f1.4 from Sigma and Canon using TDP image comparison tool and the Sigma looked nicer. Bokeh is also reportedly nicer on the Sigma. Plus the Sigma is a newer design compared to the ancient Canon version. I'm not going to buy anymore ancient non L lenses - the 85 1.8 was a disappointment.

Finally the Sigma worked out slightly cheaper and takes 77mm filters that I already own.

I can live with a little wonky AF as long as overall IQ is good from f1.4 to around f/2.8. 

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 84