October 22, 2014, 11:11:32 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 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 132
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: the canon 100d/sl1
« on: April 18, 2014, 07:27:17 AM »
I've been playing about with my daughter's 1100D recently, using it in RAW for the first time, because I'm going to get a small body for when I don't want to lug the larger stuff around. I was considering the M, but now think I am almost certainly going to get a 100D instead because I really like the tiny dSLR form.

However for myself the size of the camera body must match the lens, so I would never buy something so small to use a 70-200 on a regular basis.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: How to Annoy a Photography Snob
« on: April 18, 2014, 07:18:35 AM »
Some highly amusing banter going on here. Just my two cents to the 'must shoot RAW' snob line, for which I am sure I will get flamed...

I think that probably for many posters on this forum, the use of jpeg is the more sensible choice. The file sizes are a lot smaller and you have to be fairly decent at photoshop before you get any overall noticeable improvement in final picture quality with RAW. Just coming from looking at the 'Show us your best landscape picture' thread where some peoples best pictures are IMO not great (a tree branch in flat light). Not intentially trying to knock those people or their pictures per se but there is little evidence they have sufficient post-processing ability to ensure the careful, artistic and selective use of what are essentially extremely heavy handed techniques such as de-noising, sharpening etc necessary to improve on most DSLR's in-camera processing. Having out of the camera useable jpegs also might get round the 'death by editing' syndrome, where all objectivity goes out the window in favour of a faux-HDR, totally over-processed look. I should know, I've been there myself!

If you are not going to manipulate the data in post processing I agree that if you can get it right in camera, then given the modern camera produced jpegs, there just isn't any practical difference.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: How to Annoy a Photography Snob
« on: April 18, 2014, 07:10:47 AM »
I would consider myself to be the antithesis of a 'Photographic Snob', and I'm all for IS standard to wide primes. I do not want to always have to carry or use a tripod and virtually all of my Building Panoramic pictures are taken just after sunrise or just before sunset so you're talking about EV 9. In these pictures I always want through depth of field, so about f8 depending, and an ISO of 100. ( Though this is not written in stone with the 6D). So my most common shutter speed is in the region of 1/20, and I can't guarantee to hand hold that speed shake free with any focal length without IS.

So from my point of view these new three IS primes are excellent. Bring on the 50 ! I guess the only reason they have not been introduced earlier is that the focus has been on zooms, which is, after all, where the bulk of the market is, but I wonder if the increase in smaller cameras is going to regenerate the small prime market.

I have not used original 5D, but some friends use and the noise in the shadows is very ugly. :-[ Any Rebel model currently has more like colored noise film, while the original 5D has horrible colored spots. 8)

As a long time user of the 5D, often in very 'difficult' lighting conditions, I strongly disagree. If you really foul up the exposure of a 5D II the 'noise in the shadows' is actually worse than the 5D.

Regarding buying a more modern crop camera for the same money; I can't disagree on that. It just depends upon have valid your reasons are for wanting the larger sensor.

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
« on: April 17, 2014, 04:30:00 PM »
Playing about with my daughter's 1100D. I'm surprised by how much latitude there is in the RAW data. I can pull it around much more than I thought would be possible.

This is just one exposure, no flash, shot on the 50/1.4 @ about f2.8. ISO 200

I used a 5D for years - from 2005 in fact. You'll find the LCD, menus and transfer rates inferior to later cameras. Also it doesn't have AFMA so it's important to check a new purchase is accurate with your lenses. Ones that have a serial number beginning with '2' or '3' have both the mirror modification and a better LCD screen, so avoid ones beginning with '0' or '1'.

Ooc joeys are also much better from later cameras, but you're probably using predominantly RAW anyway so it's of no consequence. Obviously there is no live view or video.

Other than the factors I'm mentioned I think it's pretty close to the latest kit at 100 to 400 ISO. Perhaps a little harsher in tonal quality. It also responds really well to ISO 50 - or overexposing 100 by one full stop in Raw on reducing in post. ( highlights allowing).

In the UK a good one sells for £450. As a comparison a good mark II goes for about £950.

If I was British, I would be insulted that they picked my country for this ugly abomination.

Haven't you ever heard of The White Horse ? The White Lady ? The White City ? The White Star Line ? The White Cliffs of Dover ? The White Company ? The White Christmas ? The Whiter-than-Snow-Politicians ?

Canon really know their market !

This is what I'd love to see in a Canon body, especially with the 6D center point:
Hasselblad True Focus


that would be great

Another nail in the coffin of manual focus.

Seriously though, reference the 6D points being inferior to a much cheaper 650D, it's just inevitable if the concept of the 6D was to exist. Canon had to protect the 5D III. Remember that 5D II was 'crippled' with the 5D/20D focus system to protect the 1Ds. However it didn't work; 5D II's really ate into 1Ds sales, so Canon effectively said 'if you can't beat them, join them' and introduced the 5D III with full 'pro' AF and effectively dropped the 1Ds line. The 5D III is still much cheaper than a 1Ds !

Canon wouldn't want the 6D to do the same thing to the 5D line so they added plenty more 'crippling' features to be sure.  :(

I'm not a Nikon expert but I'm guessing that Nikon wanted to sell as many D600's as they could given the cool response to 36mp, so they don't have the same vested interest in protecting the D800 line.

I still find the 6D a fantastic camera but when the time comes to change the 5D II I'm currently not sure if we'll get another 6D or a 5D III.

Sports / Re: Quidditch World Cup VII, taken with 6D
« on: April 17, 2014, 08:44:55 AM »
Well ! I've heard of 'holding your own' in competition but this gives the phrase a whole new meaning.

Sports / Re: Quidditch World Cup VII, taken with 6D
« on: April 17, 2014, 02:24:23 AM »
You're pictures are good - nice sharp shallow dof action shots with the 6D, but what are those guys doing !?

Lenses / Re: Canon 50L - Love or Hate?
« on: April 16, 2014, 06:54:53 PM »
The used market place gives a pretty good indication of how the 50L is being received. Other Canon lenses which take a beating in on line reviews such as the 70-300 DO, and 28/1.8 for instance sell for about 50% of their new retail price, whereas most other Canon lenses sell for close to their new price less tax. The 50L, despite many highly critical reviews still sells used for the 'nearly new' price.

I know that Canon's lack of descriptive info on the 50L at it's introduction led to a number of well known photographers playing merry hell with Canon over the mid frame performance in sharpness at around f4 - 5.6, but they had bought the lens assuming it would be superior to the 1.4 in resolution overthe f stop range and frame.

I think the lens is better understood now for what it is.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: April 16, 2014, 05:02:40 PM »
The 'Orange Fool'

50mm f1.4 @ f2.2 1/100 ISO 100. Taken on my daughter's 1100D.

Maybe I should start an 'Anything shot on a 1100D thread'  ::)

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dissuade me to get a Rolleiflex
« on: April 16, 2014, 04:48:59 PM »
Actually one thing that would make me not pull the trigger is the announcement of a full frame Fuji X100s :D


From one extreme to the other............ ::)

Lenses / Re: Sigma vs Zeiss vs Canon
« on: April 16, 2014, 04:21:48 PM »
I guess it's the same reason why Canon have kept both the old 100 f2 and 85 f1.8 in the catalogue. You'll hear many people stating that the 100 is the better of the two because it's slightly sharper and has less purple fringing wide open. But the out of focus transition isn't quite as smooth and dreamy as the 85 - because the 100 is better corrected for chromatic aberration.

Lenses / Re: Canon 135mm f/2.....Is this normal?
« on: April 16, 2014, 04:10:01 PM »
There's no focus limiter on the 135L.

there is, 0.9m, or 1.6m-infinity

I stand corrected. I've sold mine and forgotten it had one on. Suggest the OP sets it to stop the AF cycling right back to closes focus !

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 132