Messages

286

Lenses / Re: 35mm L vs. 135mm L. IQ?

« on: January 13, 2012, 04:30:12 PM »

If he's into macro, there's always this argument: Canon MP-E 65mm 1-5x Macro Lens


But for me, the original reason I went to Canon many years ago still holds true today. Ergonomics. The general shape, the buttons placement, rear dial .etc made more sense to my hands and brain. So I don't know how much experience he has with handling Canon cameras but you could try to use the MIGHTY REAR DIAL as a selling point.

287

Lenses / Re: 35mm L vs. 135mm L. IQ?

« on: January 13, 2012, 02:36:21 AM »

For a resolution comparison, take a look here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=121&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=108&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Basically it's a wash in the center, with the 35 perhaps having a slight edge at some apertures. Only at 1.4 it gets noticeably "softer" but that's the nature of the game. At the edges, the 135 does have a visible advantage.

288

Portrait / Re: Candid portraits

« on: January 12, 2012, 04:40:08 PM »

And the weird thing is that there used to be a flag that you could set to enable color management in Chrome but they removed it at some point.
It's a shame really. From a performance and usability point of view, Chrome is by far my favorite browser.

289

EOS Bodies / Re: Is "X" the new "L"?

« on: January 10, 2012, 03:15:59 PM »

And don't forget Canon can designate as many segments as they want.

Top-of-the-line Entry Level DSLR
Top-of-the-line Prosumer
Top-of-the-line High MP Camera
Top-of-the-line Photo/Video Hybrid

So I won't be surprised if we're going to see a lot more X's this year

290

Software & Accessories / Re: Canon Handstrap

« on: January 09, 2012, 05:12:17 PM »

I have two E1 straps for my 5D and 7D. The first I bought is a Canon original from B&H and the second was some $6 knockoff from some chinese seller on eBay. Looking at them you can't tell the apart and only to touch, the material feels a bit different. Not better or worse, just different.

291

EOS Bodies / Re: Shutter Life - non-serious post :-)

« on: January 07, 2012, 01:57:33 PM »

And at about 25MB per RAW file, it comes to a measly 10TB of disk space.

292

Canon General / Re: Tiffen DFX V3 anyone?

« on: January 04, 2012, 06:03:46 PM »

Oh, I agree that a lot can be done in post and probably there isn't a single image in my portfolio that didn't get some kind treatment. Be it in Lightroom or in Photoshop. All that I'm saying is that for some things I still prefer the optical approach. Especially where gradient NDs and polarizers are concerned. The former especially for high contrast landscapes and the latter for unappealing reflections mostly.

293

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's D4 Outed Officially

« on: January 04, 2012, 05:46:51 PM »

And so the battle begins. The Olympics Royal Rumble.

294

Canon General / Re: Tiffen DFX V3 anyone?

« on: January 04, 2012, 02:35:00 PM »

I never used the program myself but I do use Photoshop extensively and while some things can be emulated nicely in software, you have to keep in mind that the computer is modifying existing data and cannot create things that weren't there in the original photo. So even if it manages to darken that overexposed sky, it won't reveal details that an optical filter could have picked like details in the clouds for example. For that, for example, I will resort to HDR if I couldn't capture the exposure as I wanted and I thought that a correction in post will be to straining on the image. Obviously, the more you push the correction, the lower the IQ will get.
Secondly, a filter like a polarizer cannot be fully emulated since it functions on optical principles. A software package will never be able to eliminate water reflections to reveal the fishies below while an optical filter most certainly can.
The bottom line is that regardless of software, I will probably always carry optical filters in my bag as any amount of correction beyond a couple of stops will most of the time degrade the IQ too much for my taste.

295

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 3D & 5D Mark III Mentions

« on: January 02, 2012, 05:53:49 PM »

I absolutely agree that from what we know so far, it seems that Canon strives for a clear cut diversification between its stills and video line. I just personally think that this might not be such a smart move. Sure, I am not being objective because as a costumer I want a 5D/C300 hybrid for 3K but if Canon leaves an open gap in the market someone else will surely step in to fill it. Especially since Canon themselves proved how successful that combination of price/features can be.

296

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 3D & 5D Mark III Mentions

« on: January 02, 2012, 01:43:04 PM »

I would likely have to agree. Although, at this point, I don't see why Canon WOULD continue to upgrade video features in their photo-intensive cameras simply because they appear to be segregating the video from photo into a new grouping of sorts.

I can think of two reasons. The first is that regardless of the cinema line, the market expects it. One of things that made the 5D2 so successful is the combination of photo and video features. The option NOT to buy a separate camera was and still is a HUGE deal to a lot of people. Both from a usability/convenience point if view and value wise. I am not so sure that saying to these costumers that while in '08 you could buy a great stills camera AND a video camera for 3K, now you have to pay 3K + 3,5 or 10K. Sure, the 5D3 will do video better than the 5D2, but will it improve it enough to be considered as great as the 2 was in '08?

Secondly, while Canon now has its cine line, Nikon doesn't. That means that Nikon will probably push the video capabilities in its new DSLRs to the max. Can Canon afford to play second fiddle to Nikon in the DSLR stills/video hybrid department? I'm not so sure that Canon can easily afford reviews that go something like "Canon X is just as good as Nikon Y in the stills department, but lags way behind it on the video side".

297

Canon General / Re: Short film - Canon 7D

« on: January 01, 2012, 01:04:35 PM »

Thank you all for the comments.

The 1.2 was indeed used a lot and I agree that the the DOF is too shallow in a lot of shots.
The lighting was pretty bad and I struggled to find a good combination of ISO and f-stop/DOF.
Oh, and I actually tried to follow the cutter in that shot but not having a follow focus resulted in a pretty shaky shot so in the end I decided to go with the stationary one.

298

Software & Accessories / Re: thoughts on the Think Tank Sling-O-Matic 10?

« on: December 30, 2011, 04:40:29 PM »

Never used the Sling-O-Matic but as I like to take a camera with me whenever I go out of the house, my day-to-day bag is a Domke shoulder bag. It fits a gripped body and two large lenses quite comfortably if none of the lenses are attached. It IS possible to carry an a gripped body with a lens attached but then it starts to get a bit too wide for my taste. It also has a 13" laptop compartment which usually holds an iPad in my case. Also, as far as discreet goes, you can't go more discreet than this bag, IMO. It has a nice brown color and coated with wax so it pretty much looks like a nicely weathered run of the mill messenger bag. You can also remove the inner padding and use it as an ordinary shoulder bag if you wish. Personally I am very happy with it.

As far as drawbacks go, besides the gripped body+lens issue, it only has one zippered compartment. A large compartment, but still I'd like to have a few more, even if smaller, for better organization.

Oh, the model is F-832

299

Canon General / Short film - Canon 7D

« on: December 30, 2011, 02:50:37 PM »

Shot this short video recently of the work and process of two good friends of mine in making leather bags. This was my first somewhat serious attempt to shoot video with a DSLR. I made a ton of mistakes but it has been a valuable learning experience.

Hope you enjoy:

http://vimeo.com/34378466
	Small | Large

300

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Looking for tripod advice...

« on: December 29, 2011, 07:36:22 PM »

I can also vouch for the Benro CF legs. Mine are branded as Induro but they are one and the same. Very stable with my typical loads (either a gripped 7D with 70-200 2.8 as the biggest lens or an RZ67) and even when I'm shooting video with a medium-ish rig on it they seem to transfer vibrations very well.
When I was debating the issue myself, the Gitzo ones that I tried didn't justify the big price difference. Maybe if I was using heavier setups it would be different but as it is I am very happy with its performance.