« on: June 19, 2014, 12:57:24 PM »
Even photozone's at it now; comparing against the EF 50mm f1.2 L II !
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.
I'm really starting to think that Canon may just drop the XD line and concentrate on more video related cameras.
It will be interesting to see what happens in August. Will the 7D2 be announced? My guess? Maybe not...
I have 17-40, and it sounds different. Almost silent with hardly noticeable plastic movement inside, same as 35L.
beautiful eldar,i really have to tour my own country lolIt often takes a foreigner to show how nice home is
Here´s one from the Stonehaven port on the east coast of Scotland, also with the 21mm Zeiss.
I have mostly been shooting birds and animals lately, interrupted by the occasional portrait and event. Wide angle landscape shooting turned out to be a lot more difficult than I remembered (I have tried becoming a photographer for only 40 years ... ).
Rodeo with 70-200 2.8 and 300 2.8
P mode can be used as a modified Av mode, in that you can still override the aperture setting and also compensate. Used this way it can be useful. So it's not as much for 'losers' as you might at first think.
Help me out here - why wouldn't I just use Av mode? I mean, assuming I'm not Ken "The P stands for Professional!" Rockwell.
So, for example, is you never use P mode - cause you're not a loser - you can take it out of the rotation.P mode can be used as a modified Av mode, in that you can still override the aperture setting and also compensate. Used this way it can be useful. So it's not as much for 'losers' as you might at first think.
Not sure this is good advice. It depends on shooting style and priorities. I personally wouldn't look at the 6d as an upgrade at all. Slower sync time and maximum speed would be way more important to me than any more or less useful high ISO figures.
The answer lies in what ISO is...and isn't. Many people have a poor understanding of ISO, incorrectly assuming that a given ISO setting means a fixed amount of gain applied to the signal. ISO is a standard (that's the 'S' in ISO, ISO 12232 is the relevant standard in this case), and that standard effectively means that for a given exposure setting in terms of aperture and shutter speed, the resulting image will have a defined brightness. How does an image taken at f/2, 1/100 s, ISO 200 on a PowerShot S100 have the same brightness as an image at f/2, 1/100 s, ISO 200 on a FF sensor, even though the FF sensor is over 20 times larger? More amplification (gain) must be applied to the lower total signal from the smaller sensor. More amplification means more noise. Obviously, the same is true for m4/3 and APS-C relative to FF, to a progressively lesser degree. Likewise, a medium format sensor needs less amplification than a FF sensor to achieve the necessary brightness for a given ISO according to the standard, and therefore has less noise than FF.