September 30, 2014, 07:08:49 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 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 84
46
Canon General / Re: Those D'oh moments!
« on: September 08, 2014, 10:08:43 AM »
Damn self timer gets me every time! 10 seconds of beeping and standing around like an idiot. Not cool.

47
Lenses / Re: Input on building a prime lens kit
« on: September 08, 2014, 12:38:01 AM »
For me a the main reason for buying a prime lens is that it allows you to do something that your zoom lens can't. For example - I shoot a lot at 24mm but I don't need a prime at that focal length because I have a 17-40L and 24-105L and I mainly shoot between f/5.6 - f/11. Instead I went for a 14mm f/2.8 because it has a unique perspective and it doubles up as an astro landscape lens (should I ever get into that!). There is a huge difference between 17mm f/4 and 14mm f/2.8 so the decision was an easy one!

But anyway, looking at your primes 35/50/100 isn't a bad combo at all. They all have advantages over your zooms but is there anything you would like to be able to do that you can't using those three, like tilt shift ability? If I had to go out with just three primes I'd choose 14/35/135 but that's because of the way I shoot. I find 35mm to be more useful than 50mm (my EOS M / 22 is my 35) and I find the telephoto look appealing so I'd go with the 135L (also because it's a bargain!).

How about this combo for OP - 17mm (or 24mm) TSE for landscape and interiors, keep the 35 f/2 IS for travel, low light and discreet street photography and also keep the 100mm macro for product and portraits. Either hold on to the 50 1.4 or sell it. Depends how much you use it.

48
Lenses / Re: Is there a need for a 50mm?
« on: September 07, 2014, 10:58:32 AM »
I sold my 50 1.8 II for about $60. Not for the money but just to reduce the amount of unused gear I had. There were definite situations that I could have still used it (prob shoulda kept mine tbh). I ended up replacing it recent(ish)ly with the old Sigma 1.4 which I got used. I actually quite like the Sigma, it's useable wide open and great at f/2. I found the plastic fantastic not so fantastic wide open and it really needed to be stopped down at least to f/2.2 (which makes it kinda pointless when you have an excellent f/2.8 zoom). My zooms are all f/4 which would have made more sense to keep it.

Weird. I miss that lens but I also don't ...

49
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Guessing Game- Canon or Nikon?
« on: September 02, 2014, 12:00:32 PM »
Looks Nikon to me. Based purely on whim and guesswork like most of my photography  :P

Can we have more fun threads and posts like this please?

50
EOS-M / Re: Recommendations for lens to supplement EF-M 22mm?
« on: August 31, 2014, 08:10:11 PM »
+1 for the 18-55M. It will be the most useful and it's cheap. I'd pass on the slow focusing nifty and opt for the 40mm instead.

Also look into getting an FD adaptor (like $10) and search for good manual focus FD glass that will be useful for video where you're most manual focusing anyway. Those old lenses are still quality but go for as low as $100 each for a good copy.

51
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: EOS M w/22mm f/2 STM $249
« on: August 30, 2014, 03:51:30 AM »
Is it M or M2. Is it possible to use my EF-S 55-250 and Sigma 30mm and 17-50mm 2.8 bought for t3i with this.
Can it replace t3i. How does it compare to Sony A6000.
Thinking about moving to mirrorless down the line. Not sure if Sony has comparable lens to Canon EFS STM and other third party lens for reasonable price.

All you need is the right adaptor(s) and you can mount just about any lens you want.

52
Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: August 29, 2014, 12:02:38 PM »
Wow! a new 400/4 with ISII and improved optics surely.

Light in weight so tough competition for the heavier 500/4 and the possibility of a good 560/5.6 - probably much better than the 300/2.8 with 2xTc.

I doubt if it will be much better than a 300 and 2xTC, but it certainly won't be noticeably better, it at all, than the 300 and 1.4 TC (to make 420mm and f4). Now if you like the horrible bokeh the DO can create and don't want a lens as flexible or as high quality as the 300 then have at it.

I cannot see a reason for this other than Canon's refusal to give up on DO, meanwhile there is a good market out there for other premium headline catching lenses, the MkII 100-400 will be a cash cow whatever price it comes in at and a 400 f5.6 with IS would clean the wallets of those scared off by a new 100-400 price point. The 45 and 90 TS-E's are desperately overdue, the 2.8 ultrawide zoom has been a sore point in the Canon lineup since, oh, ever, but they clearly can now make good ultrawides so what's the excuse for this delay? The MkII 800 is a headlining niche lens that is sorely wanted by those that need it, to have your longest lens outperformed by your second longest and a TC is an embarrassment. The 85 f1.2 could do with a spruce up, the 50 f1.4 is crying out for the "slow it down and put IS in it" treatment, it just goes on and on........

Canon's lens strategy gives me more concern than their sensor strategy.

it takes years to design and develop a lens.  I think the last time any of the big two commented on how long was nikon - and they said it takes 7 years from start to finish.

DO is such a tactical advantage to canon - and we don't know if they correct bokeh related issues, and most that have used the later models of the 400DO have found it no wanting.

It depends on what lens, it would take a design team about three hours to design a 50mm f1.8 IS, and considering they have the glass, they have the parts, they have everything, they could probably have a working model just after lunch.

Now the DO dead end has taken 13 years to come up with an update for a lens that will still appeal to about 20 people, which do you think would make Canon more money, selling a handful of 400 f4 DO's that still perform like crap and depreciate like a Syrian bankers domestic property portfolio, or a mass appeal 50 that costs next to nothing to make and can be slotted into the $499 slot?

Canon have stuck with DO because they want to, they want to make that square peg fit in out round lenses, and they will spend countless man hours on keeping it going for no other reason than they want to and they patented the heck out of it so they can. Sure in ten years (weren't we saying that thirteen years ago when the 400 came out) when DPP can "adjust" for the aberrations in post it might work, but seriously, who cares? When DO is ready  for prime time then bring it to market, I am all for it, in the mean time keep the people who pay the bills happy (us customers) with lenses we want, we need, and we can afford.

+1 the last thing anyone wanted to hear / read on CR were the words "diffractive" and "optics" this close to frikkin photokina!

53
Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: August 29, 2014, 11:56:56 AM »
It should be a 24-135 if anything with similar but better build quality to the current 28-135. That would make it mid priced. But again, why not just ship the 7D2 with the already existing 24-105L?? Surely the price difference can't be that much? If I was in the market for a 7D2 I'd want some weather sealed lenses to go with it. Maybe it's for a 6D kit?

Ah well not like I'm gonna buy one. It's nice to hear about new lenses so I guess it's a good thing.

54
Photography Technique / Re: Is RAW worth it?
« on: August 29, 2014, 11:26:37 AM »
RAW is worth it as long as it doesn't make you lazy.

Too many people use RAW as an excuse to be sloppy with lighting and lazy with "automatic" exposure.

These folk must love spending time on a computer fixing their mistakes then. Sounds like a nightmare to me.

Less time in post means more time chilling out in front of the telly with a beer in my hand.

55
Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: August 29, 2014, 11:16:02 AM »
The 24-105 could be a cheaper FF option. Some people were banging on about that here so I guess there might be a demand but seriously? So you fork out $1600 on a FF 6D right? Assuming you went body only. And then you go an pair it with, what I assume will be, a cheap kit lens with compromised IQ? Why? Why not just stick with a rebel and a 18-55 kit lens if you're a cheapo? Having a FF camera means you give a s___ about IQ. This rumor makes no sense.

I currently use the discontinued 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM II for that purpose.  Surprisingly, this is one of the lenses that the 5d3 and 6d have included for Automatic Lens Optimization.  So Canon is obviously aware that there is a need.  If this new one is small, light, and affordable, it will find its way into many bags.  I'm hoping its street price comes in between the 28-135 (~$300) and the 24-70 f/4 (~$1000).  Great for outdoor, walk-around, f/8-and-be-there kind of shooting.

This already exists - it's called an EF 24-105 f/4L IS and costs around $600 if you shop around.

56
Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: August 29, 2014, 09:20:16 AM »
The 40mm pancake turned out to be quite popular so maybe this 24mm one will too .... but wait EF-S? Now that just seems a little bit silly to me. Why restrict it to crop only? And without IS? This thing had better be under $100 because otherwise why would anyone need this? The kit lens does f/3.5 IS at 24mm, right? And if you want a quality 24mm prime there's the ~ $500 EF 24mm f/2.8 IS (which is pretty small already IMO).

The 24-105 could be a cheaper FF option. Some people were banging on about that here so I guess there might be a demand but seriously? So you fork out $1600 on a FF 6D right? Assuming you went body only. And then you go an pair it with, what I assume will be, a cheap kit lens with compromised IQ? Why? Why not just stick with a rebel and a 18-55 kit lens if you're a cheapo? Having a FF camera means you give a s___ about IQ. This rumor makes no sense.

And a 400mm DO version 2?  :o because the the original was so popular right?? Right?

Where is the 100-400 replacement and where is our 50mm IS?

I have a feeling the next rumor will say "Sorry no 7D replacement, just a white powershot with instagram built in".  >:(

57
EOS Bodies / Re: Are you planning to purchase a 7D2
« on: August 27, 2014, 08:30:12 PM »
I'm just curious to see what they'll bring out. I have no intention of ever buying another APS-C sensor DSLR again. I have no business owning a camera that shoots 10fps!

I'm waiting for the 5D IV or 6D II generation for substantial improvements.

58
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Laptop Editing - Best Setup
« on: August 27, 2014, 08:55:35 AM »
Why do you need a new one, if your is 1-yr old and pretty fast?
I'm using a VAIO Z, which is about 3 or may be even 4 years old. It used to be a top-range, so it's pretty competitive now with i7-2660k, 8 gigs of ram and 256Gb SSD drive(RAID0 of two 128GB sticks).

The only thing you need for photography you need is an external display. Get yourself a nice 27" IPS DELL and have fun.

This is very close to what I have too - a 3 yr old Vaio that I upped to Crucial 8Gb RAM and added a Samsung 500Gb SSD. The biggest improvement that came though was when I bought a 22 inch external display! The original 16.4" TN screen is totally unacceptable for photo editing so I can't recommend anything that doesn't have an IPS display. So many headaches were due to the poor screen on my laptop.

My laptop is now my desktop and doesn't move from the desk.  :(

I am going to do the same but don't have a external display picked yet. I work exclusively from a 2010 Macbook Pro. Any suggestions?

I'm prob not the best person here to give advice on displays tbh. I know didly squat about screens. The one I have is an LG 22EA53. I bought it because it was cheap and got pretty good reviews. I calibrated it using Xrite i1 Display Pro. I'm not that fussy about getting things perfect, just wanted something simple but good. Fits the bill.

I would go for the 23" as the price difference isn't much. I got mine last year for just over $100 on amazon. I can't believe I never thought of getting one before. I just asssumed they'd be expensive but then again I put down thousands on camera gear! It's funny how you can justify a lens purchase much easier than other stuff!


59
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Laptop Editing - Best Setup
« on: August 27, 2014, 06:10:40 AM »
Why do you need a new one, if your is 1-yr old and pretty fast?
I'm using a VAIO Z, which is about 3 or may be even 4 years old. It used to be a top-range, so it's pretty competitive now with i7-2660k, 8 gigs of ram and 256Gb SSD drive(RAID0 of two 128GB sticks).

The only thing you need for photography you need is an external display. Get yourself a nice 27" IPS DELL and have fun.

This is very close to what I have too - a 3 yr old Vaio that I upped to Crucial 8Gb RAM and added a Samsung 500Gb SSD. The biggest improvement that came though was when I bought a 22 inch external display! The original 16.4" TN screen is totally unacceptable for photo editing so I can't recommend anything that doesn't have an IPS display. So many headaches were due to the poor screen on my laptop.

My laptop is now my desktop and doesn't move from the desk.  :(

60
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon mirrorless: Status?
« on: August 26, 2014, 02:07:37 AM »
this is the EF-S and EF-M samyang / rokinon 8mm comparison
without even adding in the adapter there is a massive size difference already

Would you be so kind as to upload a wee pic of the EOS M with the EF-M version of the 8mm fisheye attached to it please?

Just want to see it for reference.

sure i'll do it now
here it is with the 18-55 for comparison

Woah thanks! It's very compact, much smaller than I thought it would be! Right then where is that credit card ....

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 84