April 18, 2014, 01:25:50 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 - Hesbehindyou

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
31
Lenses / Re: Nifty 50 or Shorty 40?
« on: June 24, 2013, 05:38:02 PM »
50 1.8 all the way. Gives access to razor thin depth of field, good fun to play with, whereas the 40 2.8 isn't anything special in that regard.

32
Canon General / Re: Random Thoughts
« on: April 12, 2013, 03:58:43 AM »
What do you do when....

A photo lab renders a photo that doesn't match your edit?
A client thinks you are a photoshop guru who can make the photo look totally different from what was present.

Calibrate my monitor or speak to the print shop, learn photoshop. You could always pay someone else to do the photoshopping and pass the cost on

33
Canon General / Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 DG OS HSM
« on: March 31, 2013, 10:06:44 AM »
Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 DG OS HSM

http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/01/sigma-120-300mm-f2-8-dg-os-hsm/

They've had a couple of versions, this is the third one.

34
Lenses / Re: Want to expand my gear?
« on: March 30, 2013, 08:38:50 AM »
Then picking up a 270ex for a lighter travel flash.

You can't bounce this so I'd avoid it; direct flash is horrible.

35
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5Dc a good option?
« on: March 24, 2013, 05:01:45 PM »
I currently have a Canon 450D and I have been looking at going full frame by buying a used 5D Mark ii in time for a wedding in June, but as I have a low budget of around £900, I was wondering if I might be better off with a 5Dc for around £400.

Quote
I do understand that the 5DMark ii is again better than the 5Dc, but I am trying to save money. I am basically asking is going from the 450D to a 5Dc a good option?

I recently got the 5Dc for much the same reason, wanting that FF look for photos that matter (new baby). I'm also on a budget.

It's gonna come down to lenses. If using slower lenses on FF the sharper, more distracting, backgrounds that result may make you wish you went for an option that gave you both the bigger sensor and the faster glass. If you've got, or have already budgeted for, something like a Tamron 28-75 and/or Canon 85 f1.8 / 100 f2 the mk II will be peachy, if you haven't yet got fast glass the cheaper 5Dc and new lenses is the way to go.

36
Lenses / Re: Buy EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II now or wait until September?
« on: February 28, 2013, 12:26:18 PM »
I am going to get the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II. I am not sure if I should just get it now or wait until September to see if an update comes in the mean time. Any suggestions?

Get it now. It's as cheap as it'll be and it's already had a recent update (mainly cosmetic, a few changes to construction that don't affect IQ).

37
Lenses / Re: Super Tele Zoom Lens substitute for a spotting scope?
« on: February 25, 2013, 12:42:25 PM »
I tested a 100-400 Canon prime at max zoom on a 7d body today in full sunlight and it was just capable of accomplishing this at 100, maybe 150yds in better conditions

Try again with Canon 100-400 or similar with 10x zoom on Liveview - that's an effective 4000mm on a screen a whole lot bigger than the viewfinder. Go to 5x if it's a bit shaky.

38
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New body or new lens...
« on: February 14, 2013, 07:47:12 PM »
This is a no-brainer; lenses first. Look at the situation 2 years down the line - the lens will cost the same, the body will either be cheaper or replaced by an even better version.

Two other points; I'd be wary of going full frame unless you're happy you will not be focal length limited and the 500 is a lot of money for not a lot of focal length. I'd be tempted to keep the 100-400 and add the 600.

39
Canon General / Re: Camera advice requested for parents in Africa
« on: December 13, 2012, 05:41:40 PM »
My first thought was a good bridge camera. As long as light is very good the long end of the zoom will still result in decent photos.

When I read your other message re the DSLR my thoughts turned to one of the recent mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras with a 2x crop sensor (as opposed to the 1.5 or 1.6 on APS-C DSLRs). Mirrorless means smaller body, 2x crop means smaller lenses - a 300mm lens gives a similar effective focal lens to a 375mm lens on a crop/APS-C camera (or 600mm on FF) while keeping IQ high.

40
Lenses / Re: New Tilt-Shift Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: December 08, 2012, 11:22:07 AM »
It’s also mentioned that a 5th lens with “special movements” would also be added to the lineup. What would it be? Perhaps some kind of unique new macro.

Mmmm, tilt shift macro would be awesome. Make it a a replacement for the MP-E and you've got an awesome lens (and another one I'd desperately want but would never be able to afford!)

41
Lenses / Re: Don't want to make a rookie mistake
« on: November 26, 2012, 04:04:03 PM »
I have just begun to get hooked on DSLRs over the past yr.  My wife had an XSi that I learned on before purchasing the T4i in June.  I am looking to spend between $800 -$1200 on a new lens.  I currently have the EF-S 55-250 IS, EF-S 18-55 IS and a 40mm STM.  I mostly take pictures at sporting events, choir concerts (indoors with lower lighting), family events (holidays, weddings, graduations, etc.) and city landscapes. 

70-200 f4 is a strong contender, though you'll want to consider the f2.8.  Downside is that it likely won't be quite fast enough for indoor sports; for that I'd get the 100 f2 or 85 f1.8 (assuming you're on a budget).

I've an f4 lens (Sigma 100-300 f4) and it's good but an f2.8 aperture is missed for it's ability to blur distracting backgrounds a little more than the f4 lens and provide very high shutter speeds for sport etc.

I don't find the size of the 100-300 f4 (comparable with the 70-200 f2.8) a problem, especially since the 55-250  can be brought along instead. The 70-200 f4 is a good lens but it's still fairly sizeable & weighty.

I looked at the suggestions to get a 135 f2 for indoor sports. Problem with that is that the 70-200 nails it for all but one of your uses; the 135 nails just indoor sports and means you're compromising with everything else by having the f4 lens; background blur moving from f5.6 to f2.8 is significant, the intermediate step to f4 is not so impressive.

42
Landscape / Re: Help Me Get Better - Crashing Waves - Round 2
« on: November 25, 2012, 05:03:02 AM »
Here is another approach: some Rebel don't remember model with 10-22 lens @10mm, EwaMarine underwater housing, and not being afraid of water. That big blob was smashing in my face and camera just fraction of a second later. Maybe will post later when, I find the one "under" water and sand actually.

Please do post that!  Could you also tell us a little about any post-processing as well?

43
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: 120-400 OS Sigma &7D
« on: November 25, 2012, 04:53:27 AM »
Two really obvious things here:
1. Is it better with manual focus/liveview with contrast detection?
2. We need pictures. Would you post some?

44
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible positive 6D surprise? Should I wait?
« on: November 24, 2012, 12:41:43 PM »
They are right, the 6d will have an edge, for the same reason the 1dx has better iOS, because the pixels are bigger, and gather more "stuff". Look at digital rev's 1dx video on YouTube, you will see what they're talking about.

ah and that is why the D800 IQ is so worse?
when will people stop repeating the same wrong (or lets say simplified)  stuff.

I'm pretty sure the thread and his comments should be read as being about two Canon full frame DSLRs using the same sensor technology (i.e. all things being equal).

He really should have clarified things for those that couldn't keep track of the context of the discussion, but who cares if the beginners are wrong (or let's say simple)  ;)

45
1) Sell T2i with 18-135 kit lens ($600 after Amazon cut)
2) Sell 17-55 f 2.8 ($650 after Amazon cut)
3) Buy Used 5DIII (LensRentals sale) or 6D and 40mm pancake ($2300).
Total cost of coverting: $1050.

I wouldn't want to spend any more money for a zoom (24-70 or 24-105), so the pancake would have to do.

So, what you would you do?

I'd go for a second hand 5dmkII, the 50 1.8 and the Tamron 28-70 f2.8 (cheapest) or the Canon 28-135.

Why have I gone for cheap lenses? Because viewing on a monitor or TV isn't demanding of IQ, while even A3 prints will be fine. They won't allow for aggressive cropping, but you're not likely to do this.

Why do I include a zoom? Because the majority of the photographs will be spontaneous rather than planned out or staged. The flexibility of changing focal length also allows you to eliminate much of the distracting background by standing further back and using a longer focal length.

I suspect you will use the camera a lot, so better lenses would make a lot of sense. The 50 1.8 is awful for manual focus, the 28-70 lacks IS and the 28-135 is a little slower than the 24-105. If budget isn't limiting you then stretch for the better lenses.

Would I recommend the MkIII over the Mk II?  Not if it meant you bought inferior lenses. If you're moving to FF to get shallow depth of field a more expensive body crowding out the fast glass is absolutely the wrong thing to do. Also remember that we're nearing the end of the current generation of Canon's sensor tech. Future stuff will be much better - better than the stop or two between the mk II and III.

disclaimer: I don't shoot as much as I like and find focal length more valuable over depth of field. My budget is also limited. It's crop for me.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6