February 27, 2015, 10:20:16 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 - Sporgon

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 150
196
Lenses / Re: Landscape Lens for Crop To Make Me Go Wow!
« on: November 26, 2014, 07:30:36 AM »
ajfotofilmagem - 'Wow' as in image quality/sharpness. That's what I particularly noticed in using the 70-300L and the 50mm over the 18-135.

In that case, your personal "wow" is cheap to come by: The 70-300L is certainly a good lens and very sturdy, but on crop wide open it's noticeably less sharp than on full frame. So any half-decent midrange lenses should satisfy your needs.


That might be true in your case, but it doesn't mean it is universally true. Nailing every one of those 18 mp on your 60D with a 70-300 takes some doing. With really sound technique the only difference will be the amount of post shot magnification required.

197
seems like a new kind of spam

?

I linked this fellows work on 500 px a few months ago when we were having vitriolic arguments about Exmor's ability to produce quality pictures whilst Canon can't. (Sarcasm alert !)

(They are actually composites, but great images, so who cares).

198
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 26, 2014, 07:01:13 AM »

A Fujifilm XT-1 if I remember. A really neat little camera that has so much going for it - except it's not a FF 6D, with a crisp OVF.

Do I detect a hint of jealousy there?

 ;D  No. I have always liked Fuji, right from my days as a teenager using an old Fujica ST701, and I think the XT-1 system is quite appealing. But; I don't feel that the slimmer body is worth trading the OVF for, or losing the full frame. And, as has been pointed out here on CR many times, to achieve the equivalent in lens speed on these crop systems is actually very expensive, more so than FF. Add these factors to the reduced versatility and no, the system isn't for me.

Dearest friend, have you personally ever tried EVF?

Yes, of course, the XT-1 which I understand is probably the best out there at the moment. I thought in my previous post I had made it clear that I have considered the Fuji system.

What can I say ? Call be 'old fashioned' but I like to be able to optically see through the lens in real time, at least on a decent system. I don't think I am alone in this.  I can see that EVFs like the one on the Fuji have great appeal to many; indeed most people are going to find it better than a dim, small pentamirror with slow 'kit' lens on a Rebel, but even then people keep buying cheap dslrs, probably because as it is a mature, simple system it is also cheap to produce and buy.

I perceived a lag, maybe that is just my imagination. The very large size doesn't do it for me, but the ability to reduce the viewfinder size is neat. Then there is the power useage; I want a battery to last as long as possible. In fact I have recently ditched by iphone and got a simple Nokia with a keypad because I am sick of having to charge the iphone every day. Just been to Poland for four days; never had to charge the phone or the camera !

I think we are going to see a FF dslr from Canon which will have interchangeable finders, like in the old days of top end slrs, except now one will be a normal pentaprism, and will be used in the conventional way, and another will be an EVF. You then lock the mirror up and away you go, using the Dual Pixel AF system direct off the sensor for focus. Use it for stills or video, it's up to you. By having the head as a sliding fit from the rear it could incorporate physical plug connections, which would probably needed to do this.

Then those that say Canon isn't innovative will have to find some other area to whinge about.

Thanks so much for replying. I personally find the advantages of EVF overpowering the disadvantages in such a carry around camera. But want my optical on the 1dx.

I tend to agree with you. If manufacturers can bring EVF of the XT-1 down to the prices of a simple, pentamirror system few are going to buy the latter, whereas a high quality, large pentaprism OVF still offers a great deal on larger, more general purpose cameras. However OVF manufacturers could retaliate by giving the lower end cameras a decent pentaprism system and good magnification like the 7DII. I could see someone like Pentax and Canon doing this.

Personally I do not like two systems; I want one 'do it all' system that is light enough for casual travel and good enough for professional work.

This is possibly to do with the fact that skinflint Sporgon likes to spend his hard earned cash on fast horses and fast women, not necessarily in that order, and not photographic gear  ;)

199
Lenses / Re: Landscape Lens for Crop To Make Me Go Wow!
« on: November 26, 2014, 04:38:05 AM »
The trouble with focal lengths of 10 mm etc is that they are only passing a tiny amount of light for a given exposure. One of the reasons you have a 'wow' factor on your 70-300L lens is that apart from it being a very good optic you have huge magnification and light compared with a much shorter focal length.

So if you want the same 'wow' factor from a much shorter optic on APS, my advice is don't go too short, put funds into a better computer / software system if necessary and stitch. The 24 mm on APS is an ideal focal length when shooting the picture in portrait orientated sections. The 24 mm in portrait is giving you the vertical field of view of a 16 mm lens in landscape orientation, but you are using twice the volume of light to make each section of your image than you would if using a 16 mm focal length.

200
Lenses / Re: Landscape Lens for Crop To Make Me Go Wow!
« on: November 25, 2014, 05:50:09 PM »
The new EFs 24 mm f2.8 pancake. If you want to go wider for landscape, stitch.

201
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 25, 2014, 09:00:40 AM »

A Fujifilm XT-1 if I remember. A really neat little camera that has so much going for it - except it's not a FF 6D, with a crisp OVF.

Do I detect a hint of jealousy there?

 ;D  No. I have always liked Fuji, right from my days as a teenager using an old Fujica ST701, and I think the XT-1 system is quite appealing. But; I don't feel that the slimmer body is worth trading the OVF for, or losing the full frame. And, as has been pointed out here on CR many times, to achieve the equivalent in lens speed on these crop systems is actually very expensive, more so than FF. Add these factors to the reduced versatility and no, the system isn't for me.

Dearest friend, have you personally ever tried EVF?

Yes, of course, the XT-1 which I understand is probably the best out there at the moment. I thought in my previous post I had made it clear that I have considered the Fuji system.

What can I say ? Call be 'old fashioned' but I like to be able to optically see through the lens in real time, at least on a decent system. I don't think I am alone in this.  I can see that EVFs like the one on the Fuji have great appeal to many; indeed most people are going to find it better than a dim, small pentamirror with slow 'kit' lens on a Rebel, but even then people keep buying cheap dslrs, probably because as it is a mature, simple system it is also cheap to produce and buy.

I perceived a lag, maybe that is just my imagination. The very large size doesn't do it for me, but the ability to reduce the viewfinder size is neat. Then there is the power useage; I want a battery to last as long as possible. In fact I have recently ditched by iphone and got a simple Nokia with a keypad because I am sick of having to charge the iphone every day. Just been to Poland for four days; never had to charge the phone or the camera !

I think we are going to see a FF dslr from Canon which will have interchangeable finders, like in the old days of top end slrs, except now one will be a normal pentaprism, and will be used in the conventional way, and another will be an EVF. You then lock the mirror up and away you go, using the Dual Pixel AF system direct off the sensor for focus. Use it for stills or video, it's up to you. By having the head as a sliding fit from the rear it could incorporate physical plug connections, which would probably needed to do this.

Then those that say Canon isn't innovative will have to find some other area to whinge about.

202
Good advice given on this page above. A wedding is a one off event ( or at least it is supposed to be ). I too have only had an slr fail once in thirty five years of photography; the mirror fell out of a 5D. As the camera had no live view it rendered it useless until I had glued it back in- whereupon it fell off again shortly afterwards, and I had to get it modified properly, free, by Canon. So to be paid for services in producing wedding pictures without a back up body is a 'no-no', even if, as has been stated earlier, that back up is a rebel.

The only reason not to get exactly the same camera body as a 'back up' is budget constraints. Two exactly the same is by far the most efficient option form a work point of view.

203
EOS Bodies / Re: Another 50mp FF DSLR Mention [CR2]
« on: November 25, 2014, 05:06:27 AM »
Can anyone tell me what differences there are with a 50mp medium format size sensor compared to a 50mp 35mm size sensor.

This is not exactly what you asked for but it's close enough (50 mp MF vs 36 mp FF):

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=pentax_645z&attr13_1=nikon_d810&attr13_2=phaseone_iq180&attr13_3=sony_a7r&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=100&attr16_1=100&attr16_2=35&attr16_3=100&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0&y=0

When you start looking at image quality and resolution the inescapable facts are that the smaller the format the smaller the focal length lenses uses, so the lower the subject magnification and the lower the amount of light passing through the lens. For example take a 100 mm lens at f2.8. It allows five times the volume of light to pass through it at the same aperture as a 24 mm lens. Exposure remains the same because exposure is a function of light intensity ( I think the correct term is really density) and not total volume.

Shoot your landscape picture on an DMF camera at say f8 on a 50 mm lens and you have double the volume of light passing through the lens than you have with an APS-c camera using a 17 mm lens. So not only has your picture been captured on a larger sensor, with more magnification, it has also been recorded with twice the amount of light. The optical resolution of the lens isn't as critical either as you have more magnification. 

This is the problem with more pixels on a given sensor size. Pixels are only one part of what you need to realize full potential resolution. I guess this is why Canon haven't been in a great hurry to bring out a 'very high mp' FF sensor. Incidentally I believe this is the reason we don't see the full 'reach benefit' of crop sensors. When you are reach limited and use a crop sensor as opposed to cropping in on a FF sensor ( resulting in less 'pixels on target'), the only thing you are benefiting from is more pixels. The magnification, volume of light, lens optics etc. all remain the same. So you don't realize anything like the amount you think you should.

Now's probably not the right time to say I'm thinking of getting another 5D mark 1.

204
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 24, 2014, 02:06:15 PM »
;D  No. I have always liked Fuji, right from my days as a teenager using an old Fujica ST701, and I think the XT-1 system is quite appealing. But; I don't feel that the slimmer body is worth trading the OVF for, or losing the full frame. And, as has been pointed out here on CR many times, to achieve the equivalent in lens speed on these crop systems is actually very expensive, more so than FF. Add these factors to the reduced versatility and no, the system isn't for me.

OK, this actually raises one of the issues I have with Canon ... what you term "lens speed on these crop systems". FUJIFILM made the 56mm f/1.2 lens, yet Canon offers nothing similar for their "crop-frame" cameras. It seems that their (Canon) philosophy is that if you want "fast lenses" then you must buy into their "full-frame" products.

Now this being the case, and given the collapse of the consumer market, why does Canon still persist with "crop-frame" cameras. None of their (Canon) current "crop-frame" stuff can compete with FUJIFILM, Panasonic, etc. in terms of "fast" lenses, without resorting to "full-frame" lenses. (And I'll concede that for now none of the current "other" manufacturers' "crop-frame" products can really compete with Canon's "full-frame" gear in terms of "fast" lenses. But we're comparing oranges to oranges and not oranges to apples here.)

Fuji offer this lens because they don't have a FF stable. Lets assume you were starting from scratch and want to shoot shallow dof portraits. You have a choice between the XT-1 + 56/1.2 or a 6D + 85/1.8. Both will achieve pretty much the same thing in good light. Using UK prices the cost of the Fuji kit is £1771, the cost of the 6D kit is £1569, so the FF system works out cheaper. If a manufacturer has a number of FF cameras in their line up it is not economical for the customer to pay out for expensive, very fast prime crop sensor lenses.

So Fuji's production of these lenses would suggest they aren't going to bring a FF camera to market any time soon.

Now Pentax, that's another thing. What most people don't realize is that those APS-c primes that Pentax  make -  many have a full frame image circle.  ;)

205
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 24, 2014, 12:48:42 PM »

A Fujifilm XT-1 if I remember. A really neat little camera that has so much going for it - except it's not a FF 6D, with a crisp OVF.

Do I detect a hint of jealousy there?

 ;D  No. I have always liked Fuji, right from my days as a teenager using an old Fujica ST701, and I think the XT-1 system is quite appealing. But; I don't feel that the slimmer body is worth trading the OVF for, or losing the full frame. And, as has been pointed out here on CR many times, to achieve the equivalent in lens speed on these crop systems is actually very expensive, more so than FF. Add these factors to the reduced versatility and no, the system isn't for me.

206
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 24, 2014, 12:37:14 PM »
but the lens works so well on the 5D2.....

It is a case of the same lens being great on both Crop and FF and not having to buy a separate lens for both. I like how Canon can use FF lenses on it's crop cameras......

It's great if you use both "full-frame" and "crop-frame" cameras. However, for those of us who do not need *GASP* "full-frame", having to purchase "full-frame" lenses for our "crop-frame" cameras 'cause Canon neglected to cater to our needs, is bad economy: we pay for what we cannot even use.

Waste to use FF lenses on a crop frame Canon camera???  LOL Now I really have heard everything!!!  One of he great strengths of the Canon crop-frame line is that it can use the entire family of EF-S and EF lenses!  Moreover, issues like corner softness and vignetting either 'go away' or become far less acute.  AND my 100-400mm becomes a 160-640mm equivalent! 

Ah, the silly, silly things people complain about!  :o

Also due to the pixel densities of current crop cameras, and so the potential for resolution, these cameras need the best glass possible. OK so you lose some of the outer image circle, but as Marauder says, that has its benefits too. Producing lenses of this quality is going to be relatively large and expensive whether they have an aps-c image circle or FF one.

207
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 24, 2014, 09:33:07 AM »
Face it, Canon, the "Rebel" line is dead, so bury it ... along with the 70D and the (still-born) 7DII. As for the latter (the 7dII), it is a weather-sealed camera, but has no decent weather-sealed companion lens!?

Odd my 70D is working out just fine and when I wear that out I'll probably go for a 7DII - which seems to be getting a great reception . . . I think it might be you that isn't listening to what Canon's customers are actually saying.

Technology has moved quite a distance since the previous decade and production cost have equally dropped. The question which answers my statement above, is why does Canon persist with a "crop-frame" line-up, especially since all their good lenses are "full-frame" stuff? They should just drop it and concentrate on "full-frame" exclusively: the 6D is a "Rebel", the 5D is the 70D, and the 1D is the equivalent of the new 7D. Only difference is in the size of the sensor and the price that is asked by Canon.

Also, anyone who today (or tomorrow) considers buying a "crop-frame" camera will also look seriously at the mirrorless offerings from other companies. Only in the "full-frame" segment is Canon still tops. So unless you have an investment in "full-frame" Canon lenses, which would make "upgrading" to a "full-frame" camera a financial no-brainer, Canon's "crop-frame" line-up offers very little to the enthusiast ... because if the enthusiast with a Canon "crop-frame" camera wants a decent lens, then a "full-frame" lens must be bought. This is very wasteful for the enthusiast - although great for the shareholders!

(Just to clarify, I am not saying that "crop-frame" is dead, just that Canon's versions thereof are well past their sell-by date.)

Hey Sella ! I thought you had sold up your Canon gear and moved to Fuji ? A Fujifilm XT-1 if I remember. A really neat little camera that has so much going for it - except it's not a FF 6D, with a crisp OVF.

208
Reviews / Re: Bryan Carnathan has completed his review of the 7D Mark II
« on: November 24, 2014, 09:27:15 AM »
+1 on the post above me. Horses can easily run faster than the 18mph that Sporgon said. Please exercise at least common sense. A horse cannot run faster than a human? Football running backs run at 20mph, and none of them will outrun a horse. And yes, various online resources rate the horse at around 45mph tops. Which makes the AF all the more impressive.

If only we had some photographic evidence. Oh wait ! We have  ;D

OK, in fairness Brian's example was to show the effectiveness of ten frames per second in capturing the moment of suspension in the horses's gait rather than AF accuracy with a target moving towards the camera, and ten frames per second has clearly capture the horse..... in canter gait, not gallop.  ;)

 I'll give in, maybe she had it up to 22 mph.

Incidentally I think the 7DII is shaping up to be a really excellent value top end action camera.

209
Reviews / Re: Bryan Carnathan has completed his review of the 7D Mark II
« on: November 23, 2014, 05:34:01 PM »
Well I hope Brian's knowledge of the camera is better than his knowledge of horses !

You might try reading the review before embarrassing yourself with a gratuitous negative comment.

"Perhaps even more beneficial for understanding what can be done with this frame rate is to look at a visual example. Drag your mouse over the labels under the following image for a visual look at the 10 fps rate. Drag your mouse completely across all of the labels in 1.3 seconds to get an idea of the speed of the approaching horse – approximately 40-45 mph (64-72 kph). I know, the labels are a bit small for that mouse move, but this approach happened very fast."

She would have to be riding a top form Derby winner - on the flat - on good going - with a race saddle - riding weight less than 7 stone. As I said, this target would have been travelling towards the camera at 18 mph max.

210
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 23, 2014, 04:23:03 PM »

This is sounding more and more like a Monty Python sketch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9foi342LXQE

So apart from the best lenses, flash system, ergonomics, service, reliability, etc, "What have Canon ever done for us?"

Brought us the tiniest dslr ever ?  ;D

Monty Python's Life of Brian has to be one of the funniest films ever made. I never get tired of watching it !

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 150