August 20, 2014, 08:22:17 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 - Sporgon

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 117
106
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 07, 2014, 04:48:28 PM »

Serious 7D shooters are not necessarily amateurs on tight budgets.


Not everyone can afford to spend significant amounts of money on a camera body, or indeed lenses, yet they may wish or really need to have a given performance. Many people who earn their living from photography cannot afford 'the best' or 'the latest'. I was at a large function recently where the official photographer was using two Nikon D200 s, 2005 tech. ( With its CCD the D200 was, and still is, a fine camera).

When I was at the London Olympics I was surprised to see so many of the official photographers with ringside access using 7D s. I think someone on a 7DII thread here on CR recently said they were surprised at how many 'non gripped' Canons with pop up flash were in use at such a big event as the World Cup, so one would assume they were 7D s. 

For the images that these people are producing there will be no perceivable difference between FF or crop; no one will know the difference. That situation will change in low light sports though. Will this situation change; will Canon want it to change ? This may be one reason why the new 7DII won't be 16 mp. It is one thing to offer a cheaper, credible alternate to those that cannot afford a 1Dx, but quite another to allow that cheaper alternative to compete in every sphere !

So as I have said before, the 7DII has to be significantly cheaper than a 5DIII.

The 7D is far from being a cheap camera anyway, so someone who is really 'budget minded' would be splashing out on one. However if the 7D and the 5DIII were the same price I think the 7D only be a very small percent of purchases.

107
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 07, 2014, 02:42:11 PM »
16 to 24 MP, but FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST (10 fps) and with 1 stop improvement in low light ability (I judge that the 6D has a 2 stop advantage over the 60D of the same sensor vintage). Small pro-grade weather-sealed body, under 900 grams. Giant buffer, 30 RAW at 10 fps. 1DX/5D3 focusing system, fewer points, perhaps, but similar algorithms. AF at f/8. Costs the same or less than the 6D.

I've seen some cost comments from folks. I know that this is a thread about positivity, but sub $2k, sub 6D pricing may be a tough get depending on how 'pro' this body is designed.

As I've said many times in this forum, for some people, the reach of APS-C is vital to what they do (BIF people come to mind).  To those folks, crop is a really high-quality 1.6x T/C without the T/C headaches of AF responsiveness or significantly lessened IQ.  To those folks, the length upside lets them not have to buy a $10k+ lens to get their shots or for those who do have that money, it lets those great lenses reach even further.  To those folks, Canon could eeeeeeasily get above $2k for this new body.

I don't want to be a pessimist, but I kind of want this thing to be so good it's worth over $2k.  I'll say it:  if it's a $1,599 camera, it probably won't be so compelling performance wise for me.

- A

I think if the new 7DII was anything like approaching the price of the 5DIII it would lose it's whole raison d'etre. When sitting in a range with FF cameras - especially fast ones like the 5DIII - crop has to be cheaper, otherwise it loses it's ace card. I suppose it could be marketed a little more expensive than the 6D without upsetting the range, as the two will be completely different cameras. Personally I still think it will (eventually) sit just under the 6D price.

108
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How disappointed will you be if . . .?
« on: July 07, 2014, 02:33:49 PM »

Look at the original 5D and compare against the MK III significantly different, but II to III not so different.

My experience was that from 5D to MK II not so different but MK II to MK III significantly different.

Do other peoples experience match colinrb or mine?

I know this is going off thread, but it is an interesting question because it really depends on where your priorities lie. The 5DII offered a significant improvement in tonal quality over the original, especially in more extreme lighting conditions, a noticeable increase in resolution and a moderately better higher ISO performance. OOC jpegs can be quite useable. The II also had the much improved screen, video capability etc.. The 5DIII gives a very subtle improvement in tonal quality over the II, but a huge improvement in high ISO performance. It is also much faster, has an improved level of build, and of course, the AF in in a different league.

If you look at the overall package of the camera, I would say on balance that each mark was an equal jump forward in 'overall' performance.

I think most would agree that the first incarnation of the ubiquitous 18mp sensor in the 7D was the worst, so hopefully if the 7DII does have a new sensor it will be more thoroughly sorted than the original. 

109
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How disappointed will you be if . . .?
« on: July 07, 2014, 12:32:15 PM »

Bigger sensors aren't better in low-light, larger apertures are.  Bigger sensors work better in low-light when you can use a longer focal length at the same f-stop, thus increasing aperture. 

I think that from that statement you are confusing light intensity with quantity of light. So a large aperture ( greater intensity) coupled with a larger sensor ( greater quantity) is going to provide more light than the equivalent in a smaller sensor.

110
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 07, 2014, 12:16:02 PM »
If it was everything we expect, but had a 16mp sensor with superior low light ( high iso ) performance, best possible 'IQ' from a crop sensor, in a small, tough, pro grade body, with NO pop up flash, and priced just below the (original) price of the 6D, then yes, I'd be excited !

111
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How disappointed will you be if . . .?
« on: July 07, 2014, 12:06:33 PM »
It's probably not the camera for me, so I'd be more surprised than disappointed. IMO the long delay on the 7DII must relate to the sensor; everything else is in place.

So if the sensor doesn't offer some significant advance over the 70D s new tech of duel 'pixel' I'd be surprised. I still wonder if Canon would have the b***s to make it a high speed, low light king of around 16 mp. Leave the really high mp to the amateur lines and really kick out some FF challenging IQ from the crop sensor.

112
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Anyone own both Canon and Nikon
« on: July 07, 2014, 04:25:26 AM »
Rent a D800 and try before committing to the purchase and all the problems of investing / operating two different systems.

I think you will find that the constant sermons preached by the Exmor missionaries over state the 'landscape' advantages of the D800. 36 mp is not as much more resolution as you might at first think compared with 23, and the "2 stop" dynamic range seems to be extreme shadow rather than highlights.

Also putting to one side that fact that the Nikkor has a one stop advantage, I thought the new 16-35 was similar performance.

I tried one; I didn't find enough difference to make me want to change. I do think it is an easier camera to get results in difficult lighting conditions, but the Canon can match it with more skill / understanding of exposure etc. Also I have absolutely no need to dodge shadows by four stops or shoot with the lens cap on.

113
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« on: July 06, 2014, 06:10:53 AM »
I do not know why so many people hate this lens... I love it! I don't care what Sigma or what ever present, that 1.2L Glas is so damn lovely! <3
Shot on a 5D Lr + Ps for Skin. (all at 1.2, except the last one at 1.4)


The problem with "examples" like that is they are post process driven, I could give an image shot taken with any 50mm lens at any aperture (at the same shoot) to a decent post processor and get them to look very similar.

Disagree completely, what plant are you living on?!!
These are a brilliant wee set, shot nicely and processed beautifully to compliment the 50L's creamy quality wide open and take these way beyond what 'any 50 at any aperture' would do.
If you have a personal dislike for processed shots then just say they're not to your taste. but to say any 50 at any aperture with processing would get similar results is nuts!
There's a lot more consideration and skill gone into these than you may think than just processing.
Location, time of day, quality of light, shooting/model position and styling, and then finally processing to complete the shot's mood and style.
If you're sick of too many style centric processed shots everywhere you see then thats a different story, as most of us prob dislike average or crap shots over processed just to look cool or cover up bad shooting technique. But these are made with certain style and subtlety that actually works for the shot. Well done Imaxmax!

Get off your high horse and read what I actually wrote. And, I don't live on a plant [sic].

I cast no judgement and expressed no opinion of the images other than to point out that with that much post processing any lens characteristics are heavily masked. That is not a contentious comment, it is a factual statement.

Hey PD, I'll get of my high horse then.. but would you like to discuss factually how ' an image shot taken with any 50mm lens at any aperture (at the same shoot) to a decent post processor and get them to look very similar.'

To me thats a really generalising statement and technically untrue I believe, and especially invalid in the 50L discussion thread. Maybe could be seen to be 'similar' by joe public for the general processing colour look. But should we not be discussing the 50Ls merits / qualities here and with a very keen eye?
What I see is the 50Ls lovely smooth rendering of the OOF areas and to my eyes that has been brilliantly retained within the processing. I can tell when too much contrast, highlights / shadows pulled in, clarity, sharpening begin to affect the natural look of a lens and the 50L especially. If you process harder sharper it pushes it more towards the 50 1.4 look and feel but at 1.2 and 1.4 you'd never achieve as beautiful lens rendering with any other lens maybe aside from the Otis.

There's a few other examples on this page that I however see some slight heavy handed sharpening on shots not taken as wide open that start to make it harder to me to discern as that '50L Look' This isn't go at anyone else but just technical observations.
Sparda79's fighfighters shots are nicely made ,but to me these don't show the natural 50L qualities that makes the 50L really shine compared to when shot wide openish of a closer portrait. There's a touch too much sharpening on these that hardens the bokeh rings much like the 501.4 does. To me these set of shots would be much harder to say that the 50L was used. And might have been a more valid discussion than Imaxmax's set.

All I'm saying here PD is we should be discussing the lens attributes and be doing it discerningly, and this page is chance to see some great work produced by the lens, and see the differences different subject matters, apertures, light and backgrounds are rendered by this len. For people who already use it and those who are thinking about owning it. It's a special lens and can be difficult to work with so when good results are made is great to see.
But there is a sweat spot it shines at, and that is wideish open but does also rely on the light in scene, the background, subject matter and of course... processing :)

Quote

Get off your high horse and read what I actually wrote. And, I don't live on a plant [sic].

I cast no judgement and expressed no opinion of the images other than to point out that with that much post processing any lens characteristics are heavily masked. That is not a contentious comment, it is a factual statement.

Post processing or not i think u can always see the character of a lens still. PP makes the shot better but not the feel. Something like that. Personally i think the more crappy a lens the more easy it is to notice the PP.

Well if you two guys want to demonstrate your observational skills you will have no problems telling us which of these images was shot with the 50 f1.2. Of course if you can't get them all right I might just have made a valid point.

P.S. For some bonus points tell us which other lenses were used.

That's not fair ! There's no reference point, such as 'EF 50L gallery" or 'anything shot on a mki 50 1.8'. How are we supposed to appreciate the subtleties of a favourite lens if we don't know which one we are looking at ?

114
Lenses / Re: Photozone Review of the 16-35mm f/4L IS
« on: July 05, 2014, 07:08:58 AM »
Petty that a site with photozone's reputation gives a throw away comment about IQ being slightly lower with IS activated, but doesn't give any factual evidence for this comment.

I've long felt that on the 24-105 the IS can reduce resolution compared to when it's off , given appropriate shutter speeds, yet when I have tried to proof it the results are inconclusive, as if it's a random event.

115
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: July 04, 2014, 02:00:36 PM »
Here's an oldie with my first DSLR, 40D + EF-S 17-85 IS USM.

Kinderdijk in the Netherlands.

That's rather nice. I do find that is scenes with low contrast the older cameras ( ie 20-40D 5D etc) do give a pleasing tonal quality.

116
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX dust behind superimposed screen
« on: July 03, 2014, 06:42:32 PM »
I had a speck like that, it worked it's way out after a few weeks.

Thank you for the response, Neuro. Perhaps it's just a natural occurrence then?

I'll try to tell the little voice in the back of my mind to shut up and ignore it. Hopefully mine will work their way out too over a few weeks of usage.

Honestly, dust specs on a DSLR screen are normal. If you haven't any now you will have eventually, it's inevitable. Just ignore it, or you may start noticing the 'floaters' in your eyes too !  ;)

I'm doing my best to so far!

One quick question: since the dust is on the focus screen or super imposed display, is there the potential for the dust to ever effect the autofocusing of the camera?

Dust on the focusing screen: no. The AF marks are just to show you where the AF is, they are not connected to the AF in any way. Dust on the AF sensor sat in the bottom of the mirror box; another thing. Many people seem not to want to accept this, but dust / dirt here can make AF malfunction,  normally only one effected point at a time though. So if ever one of our AF points appears to lose accuracy or stop working give the mirror box ( with mirror up) a good vac and blow job.

117
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX dust behind superimposed screen
« on: July 03, 2014, 04:42:50 PM »
I had a speck like that, it worked it's way out after a few weeks.

Thank you for the response, Neuro. Perhaps it's just a natural occurrence then?

I'll try to tell the little voice in the back of my mind to shut up and ignore it. Hopefully mine will work their way out too over a few weeks of usage.

Honestly, dust specs on a DSLR screen are normal. If you haven't any now you will have eventually, it's inevitable. Just ignore it, or you may start noticing the 'floaters' in your eyes too !  ;)

118
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: July 03, 2014, 03:48:02 PM »
Great Stookan on the North coast of Ireland, taken from Giant's Causeway. Although I have thrown focus out in the distance you can see make out Grandmother Rock on the original - looks like a bent over old woman climbing the hill.

Canon 5D + 40mm pancake

I can't see Grandma?

@ Northstar; just for you. This is a crop from the unfinished pano; the picture I posted was a single frame shot ( but multiple exposure of course). The pano of this is being a real pain as there are so many bracketed frames, and the whole thing is blended by hand.

You can just make out Grandma climbing the hill. On this pano I have held focus in the distance but still not sure which one I am going to go with.

119
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: July 03, 2014, 03:43:27 PM »
Great Stookan on the North coast of Ireland, taken from Giant's Causeway. Although I have thrown focus out in the distance you can see make out Grandmother Rock on the original - looks like a bent over old woman climbing the hill.

Canon 5D + 40mm pancake

That is very special.
Did you use some extra light in front on the rocks?

Thanks candyman, very pleased with your comment. I'll be giving my techniques away, but yes I carry a very light weight lasolite, five foot across but folds really small and hangs from my belt. Used the gold foil side.

120
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: July 03, 2014, 03:39:51 PM »
Great Stookan on the North coast of Ireland, taken from Giant's Causeway. Although I have thrown focus out in the distance you can see make out Grandmother Rock on the original - looks like a bent over old woman climbing the hill.

Canon 5D + 40mm pancake

Feel like I'm in the "300" movie. Very nice Sporgon.

The 40mm pancake is a small lens. However, this little guy plays big role in Canon lineup. I'm thinking selling my a7r + FE 55mm and replace with 5D III + pancake.

Many thanks Dylan, I was shooting for the 300 movie effect !  :)

With regard to camera sizes I find that it is the size and imbalance of the lenses that can make a dslr heavy. I was out to day on the East coast with the 5DII and 24-105, walked for about five miles along the cliff tops. That combo really gets heavy after a few hours of carry, whereas I was in the same place two weeks earlier with the same body with the 40mm pancake on and a light 28mm prime in my pocket and it goes totally unnoticed. The 6D is even better. If I go even lighter with my daughter's 1100D I don't feel any difference because the other bodies are light enough to make no difference.

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 117