December 03, 2016, 02:02:32 AM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 ... 10
11
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Last post by Click on December 02, 2016, 08:25:52 PM »
Lovely shot, Vern.   :)
12
Lenses / Re: No New 50mm Lens Coming in 2017 [CR2]
« Last post by ajfotofilmagem on December 02, 2016, 08:06:10 PM »
I read somewhere, that body image stabilization (IBIS) works well with wide-angle lenses, and not very well with tele lenses.
penny drops!..  of course it does!

With a WA the camera has to wobble an awful lot to move the image at all, with a telephoto hardly any movement results in image shift.   Any accelerometer in the camera will be limited (noise & resolution), and that limit will show up at the "long" end of the lens range first.
Obviously I compared stabilization in the lens, versus stabilization in the body, both with the same viewing angle.

In this scenario, IBIS is competitive with wide-angle lenses.
On the other hand, with tele lenses, IBIS is ineffective COMPARING WITH STABILIZER ON THE LENS.
13
Software & Accessories / Re: Phase One Releases Capture One Pro 10
« Last post by melbournite on December 02, 2016, 07:58:45 PM »
Its good to see someone up the game and try to take on the dominance of Adobe were all better when competition comes into play. Apple badly let down their customers when they abandoned Aperture it just showed the accountant in Tim Cook as opposed to Steve Jobs and Photos is a standing joke that Apple should be ashamed of.

Yes, I totally agree.

And although I have, and use both Lightroom and Capture One, I still use Aperture.  Nothing beats it for speed (not even this new release 10), intuitiveness and simplicity.

I still have my finger in every pie, holding out as long as possible.  I'm leaning towards Capture One over Lightroom but hoping that maybe some day Photos becomes useable or gets a great plugin from a developer - at least so I can migrate my old libraries (from Aperture).  I'm surprised there isn't a flood of developers doing stuff for Photos?
14
Reviews / Re: M5
« Last post by jolyonralph on December 02, 2016, 07:48:15 PM »
I'm sure we've been through this discussion before :)

Canon have tested the waters with the EOS-M range and have actually done very well with them (especially in Asia.) The EOS M5 looks like it will be an absolute winner.

If anyone thinks that Canon are going to sit back and ignore the market potential of a full-frame mirrorless camera then they really don't understand the market.

I think it's inevitable we'll see a FF mirrorless announcement sometime in 2017.
15
Reviews / Re: M5
« Last post by jd7 on December 02, 2016, 07:46:29 PM »
I would like to see some additional primes to better round out the M glass line-up, but I'm pretty comfortable with my current M5 and kit:

(1) EF-M 15-45 - compact standard zoom
(2) EF-M 55-200 tele zoom
(3) EF-M 22/2 - super compact prime
(4*) EF 50 STM mounted on an M adapter

Using the 50 STM on an adaptor fills the portrait prime gap in the current lineup and its small/light enough even mounted on an adapter that I works well with a compact kit.  I'd love to see Canon come out with a 55mm and 85mm EF-M prime at some point.

This 4 lens combination gives me 24mm-320mm full format equivalent focal length coverage with slow zooms and the two primes (35 and 80mm equivalent) for low light and option for shallow depth of field.

I haven't experimented with my better quality EF L lenses on the M5 yet, but plan to this weekend just to experiment.  I don't expect its something I will do with any frequency, even with the M5's capable autofocus capability since the whole idea behind the M series is small size and limited weight.

My M5 + 15-45 kit arrived yesterday as did by EF-M 55-200.  Limited time and terrible weather have prevented any serious photography yet, but I was able do to some shooting with it yesterday during my lunch hour.  I like how it handles and am initially impressed with the EVF and auto focus system.  I'll run it through more thorough testing shooting the kids this weekend and I'll report back next week.

Just wondering what made you choose the EF-M 15-45 over the EF-M 18-55?  Just came in a kit with the M5? 

I'm not in the market for an M5 quite yet but maybe one of these days, and if I did get one, I'm not sure which of those two I would go for.  I like the idea of 15 at the wide end, and the compactness of the 15-45, but I get the impression the 18-55 is better optically(?).
16
Reviews / Re: Lensrentals.com Puts the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II Through Testing
« Last post by jd7 on December 02, 2016, 07:38:28 PM »
Like many others, I'm a bit disappointed by the reviews. Honestly, I was expecting to, and would would have paid, 50% more than the retail price of the II for a really stellar upgrade.

But, in comparing all the 24-105s and seeing how small the differences are, I have to wonder is there is something that I don't understand which limits just how good a lens in this range can be. I suspect that if Canon could have made a better lens for another $500-$600 they probably would have done it.

I haven't ruled this lens out, but I'm not sure it's worth upgrading just for the zoom lock and improved IS. This was the only lens I was contemplating next year (after pretty much filling out my lens wants/needs over the past two years), so 2017 might be a no-lens purchase year (although I kind of doubt it. :) )

I am certainly no lens designer, so take this with a grain of salt, but my guess is producing a zoom lens which goes from wide angle to telephoto is a particular challenge.  I get the impression a range which is all telephoto (eg 100-400) or all wide angle is probably easier (although not necessarily easy, I'm sure!). 

I am sure Canon does manufacture to a price point (not going to work commercially otherwise), but I suspect the lack of substantial IQ improvement in the 24-105s which have come out since the L mk 1 is probably testament to the fact it's a hard range to cover well.

Anyone with real knowledge of lens design care to comment?
17
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Some help needed - 1dx mkII or 5dMkIV
« Last post by Jack Douglas on December 02, 2016, 07:33:33 PM »
To the guy saying 6000$ camera spares don't matter.

800mbps video of the MKII = 100mbs per second = 6GB per minute. 128GB Card (350$) holds 20 minutes.

For a normal standard of 5 hours worth of media for documentary/nature shooting,

3 cards give you an Hour at 950$.

5 hours and batteries needed to run the camera for 5 hours equals = funnily, 6000$ish

The 4K on the MKII is only suitable for very high end applications where 12K for a video rig is pretty good. But for us, who want to shoot comfortably at the awesome 60p quality of the MKII, believe it or not, on a doc shoot we need accessories that cost as much as the camera body.

I say shoot the messenger, that's not what I want to hear! ;)  However, I can't imagine myself shooting a documentary, rather I'm interested in sharing clips much like I share photos of nature and wildlife with friends.  Never the less, there is still the issue of the card expense and needing two or three.  I have bought a spare battery already.  What other items would be high on your list?

I've now shot a few small videos but not enough to gain much knowledge or insight but one thing for sure is that shooting with the 400 DO II X2 III requires more steadiness than I would initially have assumed compared to still shooting, even with a gimbal.  I'll probably be dropping back to 560 in most cases.  A woodpecker shot at 120p was interesting to watch.  So much to learn - ugh.

Jack
18
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Canon 1DXmkII 4K Video jello.
« Last post by Jack Douglas on December 02, 2016, 07:19:58 PM »
Josh Denver, that's a very thoughtful and well written commentary on the subject; one we have to live with.  I've Googled a fair amount over the last week and personally had more or less sorted it out but this was still helpful.

Now what if the scenario is one of a moving object, say a bird, and I'm using at a very high shutter speed.  Would the 1DX II still display a jello distortion when extracting a shot, thus diminishing the value of this form of action shooting; in other words 60 fps vs 14 fps is not really useful??

Jack
19
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Last post by Jack Douglas on December 02, 2016, 07:09:43 PM »
dpc, that's an attractive shot of what some would call a beautiful bird, although I beg to differ on what I call it.  It's one of my popular pests stealing food I try to serve to others!  It and the squirrel, but that's being a little too harsh perhaps. ;)

Jack
20
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Last post by Jack Douglas on December 02, 2016, 07:06:18 PM »
Carolina Chickadee, 5DSR ISO 500, 600II f4, 1/1000, fill flash @-1 1/3 w better beamer.

my critique - would be better w a little more DOF. Focal point was on the eye but looks slightly front focused (just did AFMA using Focal, but looks like it missed slightly). Would have been better to trade off shutter speed for f5.6, I think. I'd like to be better at spotting this in the field, but its hard to see on the back of the camera.

I'm experimenting to see if avian pics w/o the 1.4X III are OK with just the 600 while using the 5DSR.

Unfortunately, our leaves have now fallen and all the beautiful color around the birds is on the ground.

Vern, it does seem to be front focused and I've run into this too.  I've even gone so as to alter my AFMA towards back focusing in cases where my bet is that a small birds shoulder will be the focus point.  It's also easy to shift aim unknowingly or in my case with BB focus to release unknowingly or subconsciously knowingly, if that makes any sense.  I'm presuming it's spot single point you're using?

In general, about positive feedback/criticism, it's very difficult for a person who is not at hand to offer advice when all the facts/factors are not there to be evaluated in a methodical manner of progressive elimination.  All we can do is try.

Relative to this idea of choosing to purposely back focus when there is a strong possibility that the camera will focus on a forward point of a bird, let's say it's flying laterally.  The eye is always behind the body, the nearest object, which is what cameras are configured to focus on, so I'm thinking it's a valid tool.  Thus, I'm about to investigate if different AFMA settings can be associated with C1 .. C3 in my 1DX II - anyone know?

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