September 02, 2014, 04:24:01 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 - MichaelHodges

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 21
1
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7DMk II or the 1DMk IV
« on: September 01, 2014, 09:21:29 AM »
I would avoid 2X teleconverters on anything but the sharpest of sharp lenses on a crop camera. The 400F5.6 and the 100-400 with 2X teleconverter will have LESS resolving power than the bare lens...

I did the test several years ago.... it was an eye-opener....

Yep. Unless you have a 300 2.8 II, forget the 2x.

--------------

http://michaelhodgesfiction.com/

2
Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: August 30, 2014, 01:44:34 AM »

If it is not broke don't fix it! I hope Canon Never messes with the 5.6 400. It is a perfect lens for the size, weight, price and does exactly what it does with no crap added. IS will only add weight and Jack the price sky high out of most peoples price range, if you want newer optics and IS look at the 2.8 II USM or the new f4 and be ok to pony up the crazy extra cost but don't ruin it for everyone else who can't afford, don't want IS, carry extra weight. In USA you can find them used for $900 in great condition and the sharpness is so good you can crop the crap out of the image even on a 1.6 sensor, that is why the 5.6 is a perfect BIF lens, all you have to do is point it and get center spot focus  then hit the shutter....amazing Bird pictures easily!


How would making a new 400 5.6 IS ruin the current non-IS version?


3
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors sell the Camera?
« on: August 28, 2014, 10:29:58 AM »


Which is exactly the point.  You use the sensor every time you take a shot, so if Canon sensors were so inferior, Canon would not have remained the market leader. 



Right now, Canon sensors are absolutely inferior at low ISO.  This is fact.

I'm not really interested in who sells the most hamburgers. If I was, I'd be shooting grizzlies with iPads and you probably wouldn't hear from me soon.


Quote
How do those touting Exmor advantages demonstrate them?  They underexpose by 4-5 stops then push the shadows back up.  While there are valid reasons to do that, it's an 'advantage' that's totally useless to the vast majority of dSLR buyers.

Fortunately, technological improvements aren't based on this.

The low ISO DR of the Exmor's is extremely beneficial for landscape and wildlife shooters. I know a few shooters who even tossed their GND's.  Simply expose for the sky and lift your shadows later on with minimal penalty.

This is a good thing.

I'm genuinely intrigued, would you say wildlife work is mostly low-ISO? I find the opposite.


Wildlife chooses the appropriate ISO setting.  I find myself shooting from ISO 100 to 12,800 in RAW (yes, the 6D can handle this). 

This shot was recently picked up for an international textbook run. It was *cold*,  and I had to expose for the sky. I'm happy with what the 7D did here, but it could have been much cleaner.  This was either ISO 100 or 200:



I had to lift the bison/foreground by a couple stops. The pattern noise and lack of detail in the lower third of the frame has prevented me from printing this image as large as I would like, unfortunately.

For my preferred shots (animalscapes) low ISO dynamic range is incredibly important.


4
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors sell the Camera?
« on: August 27, 2014, 10:39:53 PM »

It's essentially an emergency recovery tool for badly underexposed photos. High quality landscape work...where extended DR is often needed...is simply not produced this way. You bracket and blend/HDR, or use GND filters.

IS? High quality work is produced with a telephoto lens on a sturdy tripod. Auto focus? Nah. If you don't have the skills to work the focus ring in a timely fashion, you can't produce good work.


Quote
I find that the problem is not Canon sensor noise, but the simple fact that the tonality and detail is sub par vs. a properly produced shot.

Tonality and detail is sub-par if you're lifting shadows with a sensor that can't handle it.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors sell the Camera?
« on: August 27, 2014, 09:43:57 PM »
I think it's more a commitment to getting the most money out of an investment in facilities.


Wow, not the best marketing pitch:

Canon: When you choose one of our DSLR's, you know we've made a commitment to getting the most money out of an investment in facilities.



6
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors sell the Camera?
« on: August 27, 2014, 09:22:34 PM »

Michael, I think you may be missing the point of those (including me) who keep saying "but Canon sells more."  I think everyone agrees that better IQ at any/all ISOs is a "good thing."  That's not the point.  The point is that you, Aglet and other pro-Exmor folks keep reminding us of your personal needs. 


Isn't everyone "pro-better sensor"? 

At least I hope so within the context of a forum dedicated to tech and gear rumors.




Quote
That's great, and I wish you all the best in finding the gear that helps you do the job.  The difficulty is that Canon will not change their technology based on your personal needs, nor based on the needs of a minority.  They are not artists seeking the best quality product, they are a for-profit corporation.  Canon is interested in profit, and takes a certain strategy to achieve it. The strategy, which has been quite successful relative to their competitors, is to make very reliable products and systems that appeal to a large market segment, and support that with strong marketing campaigns.

No argument here.


Quote
If Canon products do not satisfy your needs you should buy another brand, you can't expect Canon to deviate from a successful business practice to suit a minority need.  This is not a question of art, it's a question of money.  Because I accept this fact I'm not offended that Canon's sensors are inferior at low ISO (they are).  I wish they were better, but my wishing makes no difference.

Yeah I'm not jumping ship. I prefer the Canon system. That said, as a first time user, the DR of the Sony sensors would make me think twice about Canon's commitment to sensor technology in the long run.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors Make the Camera?
« on: August 27, 2014, 08:56:51 PM »
True. Most people buy iPads and iPhones to shoot with.  So I guess that makes them superior cameras to Canon DSLR's?

If it does, then Canon's dSLRs are superior among all other dSLRs.

I'm relieved you used the word "if" there.   8)

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors Make the Camera?
« on: August 27, 2014, 08:42:24 PM »
True. Most people buy iPads and iPhones to shoot with.  So I guess that makes them superior cameras to Canon DSLR's?

9
Technical Support / Re: DPP "transfer to photoshop"
« on: August 27, 2014, 08:39:16 PM »
Step 1:

Uninstall DPP

Step 2:

Get Lightroom or Capture One.


I don't mean that sarcastically. Save yourself the time and headaches.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors sell the Camera?
« on: August 27, 2014, 08:34:42 PM »


Which is exactly the point.  You use the sensor every time you take a shot, so if Canon sensors were so inferior, Canon would not have remained the market leader. 



Right now, Canon sensors are absolutely inferior at low ISO.  This is fact.

I'm not really interested in who sells the most hamburgers. If I was, I'd be shooting grizzlies with iPads and you probably wouldn't hear from me soon.


Quote
How do those touting Exmor advantages demonstrate them?  They underexpose by 4-5 stops then push the shadows back up.  While there are valid reasons to do that, it's an 'advantage' that's totally useless to the vast majority of dSLR buyers.

Fortunately, technological improvements aren't based on this.

The low ISO DR of the Exmor's is extremely beneficial for landscape and wildlife shooters. I know a few shooters who even tossed their GND's.  Simply expose for the sky and lift your shadows later on with minimal penalty.

This is a good thing.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Are you planning to purchase a 7D2
« on: August 27, 2014, 07:35:15 PM »
...

I'm not really impressed with 6,000 focus points with multi quad-sensors. Give me a strong center point focus that brings the goods most of the time, and then we'll go from there. My 7D couldn't even do that with telephotos.

A little off topic but I've got to disagree with just a center focus. Put the center focus on the moose's head and his rear is out of the picture (having made this mistake many times).

I agree with you. My point was get the center point right first, and then worry about the rest.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors sell the Camera?
« on: August 27, 2014, 07:34:08 PM »

All of this Sensor Hype is probably meaningless to that crowd as well just the same as it is to 90% of those buying Sony and Nikon equipment.  If this were all that important, Nikon cameras would be selling a lot better than Canon and that is not what we really see.

The problem with that comparison is you use the sensor every single time you take a photo, and not "the system".

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Are you planning to purchase a 7D2
« on: August 27, 2014, 06:13:01 PM »
Also see a lot of folks discussing focusing issues with 7D. I can't say I've noticed any more or less problems there myself. Granted it doesn't have the nuclear powered laser guided focus of a 1DX, but nothing else does. What is the general problem with it?  Is it tracking action in Servo? Stills? Portraiture?

Hi Class,

I can't speak for everyone else, but the 7D did not perform well for me with telephoto lenses (multiple versions of 7D's).  It seemed to have horrendous focus consistency on earth tones such as deer, elk, bears, and brown birds.  This "near miss" auto focus, when combined with inherently soft images at 100% and poor noise levels created a murky soup for me, rendering many RAW files simply unusable.

It wasn't really about the focus features being less than the 1DX, it was about clean, well-focused images even in the most unchallenging situations.  I could take ten shots of a perched golden eagle with a grey cloud background, and eight would be out of focus, one so-so, and one in focus. However, cropping would be negated on the in-focus bird thanks to high noise levels and a waxy-looking AA filter. I could then point the same lens combo at someone wearing a pink shirt, and have no problem focusing.  There was no consistent, repeatable pattern. Sometimes the focus was great, then, for nor reason, it was poor.

It was literally the worst wildlife camera I've ever owned.  The 70D is a big improvement.

I'm not really impressed with 6,000 focus points with multi quad-sensors. Give me a strong center point focus that brings the goods most of the time, and then we'll go from there. My 7D couldn't even do that with telephotos.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Are you planning to purchase a 7D2
« on: August 27, 2014, 03:15:56 PM »
My back up 70D is a moderate improvement in IQ and a significant improvement in AF over the my former 7D.


Could not agree more with this.


15
EOS Bodies / Re: Are you planning to purchase a 7D2
« on: August 27, 2014, 03:14:01 PM »
Nope.

The 7D was the worst Canon DSLR I've owned in terms of IQ and focus consistency. I'm extremely happy with my much more reliable 70D.  It's the only APS-C I need. The rest is FF.

I would not pay over $1100 for an APS-C sensor.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 21