April 27, 2017, 01:01:41 PM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 ... 10
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EOS 77D By TDP
« Last post by Chaitanya on Today at 12:09:08 PM »
"At the time of this review, there is no battery grip available for the 77D (or T7i)." :-X
I highly doubt Canon will ever release a battery grip for this camera or any camera in that price segment.

Rubbish.  https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/battery-grip-bg-e18

The BG-E18 is a battery grip developed for the Rebel T6s and Rebel T6i that enables high-volume shooting and easier vertical shooting. The grip holds one or two LP-E17 Battery Packs.

There was also the BG-E8 for at least T2i, T3i, T4i.  So the lack of a battery grip for the 77D is certainly odd and could even be considered a downgrade - especially given the 77D uses the same LP-E17 as the 750D/760D. 

I do wonder how many people buying an xxxD level camera actually buy the grip though.
Let me rephrase, Going into future highly doubt Canon will ever release a battery grip for the camera of EOSXXXD/77D class. They already dont offer grips for EOS 100D and EOS XXXXD(since 1100D)1 series of cameras. If Canon decides to emulate Nikon then we can forget vertical grip for replacement of 80D as well.
Software & Accessories / Re: Breakthrough coming out with glass ND grads!
« Last post by LesC on Today at 12:07:24 PM »
The WCC system looks really nice but not cheap if you need to buy a new polariser too. Good that the 'vaults' take Lee filters too but I wonder if they take a big stopper too due the the felt gasket?

I'm not sure if it's perhaps a little over- engineered but nicer than the Lee holder. I like my Lee filters but the holder really is pretty cheap & not that well made.
I don't use LR but I used a smart album-ish sort of approach to back out how little I use the 70-200.  Since I got it in 2012, I have captured:

  • 1,759 pictures (from any lens) that I personally peg as a 3/5 star or better shot.

  • Only 105 of those were taken on the 70-200

It's a stellar, stellar lens.  But I use it 4-5 times a year for the odd portraiture need or occasional varmint spotting while hiking or camping.  It will not join me on this trip due to weight, what I prefer to shoot, and the relatively close confines of the city.

- A
I guess you and I shoot quite differently. I've had a career as a photojournalist, sports and on-location commercial photographer. Many situations would come up where, despite packing a long tele, I could never get close enough. Even if I'd carry only three lenses, one would be a 300 - or longer.
I agree with you, in the city, a good wide angle is likely to be the lens most used. That's why the 16-35 is an obvious choice. But, unlike you, I find the 50mm focal length unnecessary and it's perspective uninteresting, which is why I'd want something longer. I'm just not sure that 70mm or even 85mm is enough for a lot of cases, say on the ferries around Copenhagen and Stockholm or when you want to zoom in on a architectural detail or isolate your subject.
You're right in that the 70-200/2.8 can be burdensome when you're trying to travel light. (I'm afraid I'm so used to it. In fact, it's the shortest in my three-lens kit when I shoot sailboat racing (the others are 300 and 500, and, yes, hand held). You can save a little bit of weight by removing the tripod mount. Or, better yet, rent or borrow the f:4 model; the IS version won't disappoint you.
I went back and looked into my catalogs to see what lenses I used most on recent overseas trips - Danube, Middle East, Greece and Australia. By a large margin, the 70-200 was my go to lens, with the 16-35 being used less than half as much. Even if I looked at only what I photographed in the cities, it still made up nearly half of my shots.
While I don't know how you shoot or what are your particular subjects (you can probably tell I don't have children), but I would think having something long (at least 100mm anyway) would be a good call. It's probably my photojournalist training, but what I most want to bring back from my trip is the story of where I've been
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New 5DSR Vs. refurbished.
« Last post by kaswindell on Today at 12:01:50 PM »
I purchased a refurb 5D3 from Canon about two years ago, it has been rock solid.
Interesting his choice of words, he said the firmware is still being worked out and when it is ready we will let you guys know. He never mentioned anything about a hardware upgrade just firmware.
    There is no hardware upgrade... only a firmware update, but seem that this firmware can only be updated using a service tool in Canon.

    Have a nice day.

Everything with C-LOG in the past has been this way, Canon's way of keeping Magic Lantern style reverse engineering and hacking away from the Cinema line.  Previous rumors/reports of legal threats if the Magic Lantern team touched the 1DC/C100/C300/etc. 

My understanding is that as soon as the complete firmware is available for download, the reverse engineering is MUCH easier to accomplish and load.  Would assume any firmware updates would not have the complete loader.
Reviews / Re: Rokinon (Samyang) SP 14mm f/2.4 Review | Dustin
« Last post by BeenThere on Today at 11:48:29 AM »
Thanks Dustin. This is an impressive lens in many respects. I will be comparing this lens with the upcoming Siggy 14mm f1.8, and will likely get one of them. Interesting comment that you expect the Siggy to have worse coma than the Rokinon based on your experience. We will see 🤔  Rumor has it that one of the engineers on the Sigma design team is an astrophotographer, so there is some excitement building!
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D MklV or 1DX
« Last post by SteveM on Today at 11:42:34 AM »
Thanks for the replies, not owning a 1DX I have no chance of a direct comparison. It is looking like I'll be spending the money on a holiday....somewhere I can use and enjoy my gear as opposed to collecting it!
Funny how one feels a little disappointed when not given a reason to buy something new, there's probably a medical name for this.
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Last post by Jack Douglas on Today at 11:40:22 AM »
I think I'm finally catching on.  My grandfather used to say we were as useless as tits on a boar.  I've only seen cowbirds on cattle.

Lovely shots, all.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Last post by Jack Douglas on Today at 11:36:26 AM »
Made a new friend. Says his name is Jake lol
_DIV5555 by Stuart Edwards, on Flickr

What a fine edible specimen! ;)

Probably because there are a lot more subjective factors than contrast and sharpness.


What subjective factors do you mean?

Others are chiming in but I posted a woodpecker shot where he opened his mouth and used his very unique tongue to clean his upper mandible.  The other shots were in focus and differ only slightly except for the tongue. 

Another sequence has birds fighting in the air.  Now if they are out of focus badly an algorithm could could certainly dispense with those but the poses that are sharp all have different more/less desirable visual characteristics - lighting, angle, pose etc.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 ... 10