October 23, 2014, 04:22:07 AM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
Lenses / Re: 70-200 2.8 II or 100 2.8L and 135 2 and 200 2.8
« Last post by tushit on Today at 12:13:08 AM »
Thank you all. Am still going through the responses but the zoom seems to be the winner. Really appreciate the insights. I think I should look at the 35mm as well though I do have the 50.
22
EOS Bodies / Re: 7d mark II as reviewed by Artie Morris
« Last post by neuroanatomist on October 22, 2014, 11:42:17 PM »
Perhaps I'm being too cynical, but having owned and used both options, while the 70-200 II is excellent and versatile, the 100-400L was a much better option for bird photography IMO. 
23
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« Last post by 3kramd5 on October 22, 2014, 11:39:08 PM »
Have you seen the "ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 300mm F2.8"?  In FF equivalent it is a 600 f/2.8 ...

600/5.6.  You don't get something for nothing.

It's always both amusing and rather sad that people don't understand the word "equivalent".

It's very odd, especially when the same people don't make the same mistake with teleconverters, which do exactly the same thing as smaller sensors (crop and enlarge).

They do the same thing. So do scissors and bandsaws. That doesn't make them the same. Optical cropping and magnifying does not equal digital cropping and up sampling. The end is likely very similar, however (although with canon's signal chain, I imagine enlarging and increasing sensitivity before digitizing is better). It would be interesting to actually test which process takes a bigger noise penalty.
24
Software & Accessories / Re: Canon GP-E2 Problem / Issues resolved
« Last post by Mt Spokane Photography on October 22, 2014, 11:32:19 PM »
My 5D MK III allows for setting of Standard Time as well as setting Daylight Savings Time.  Some places do not recognize it, some change by 30 minutes, so setting it properly should eliminate the issue.
25
EOS Bodies / Re: 7d mark II as reviewed by Artie Morris
« Last post by jrista on October 22, 2014, 11:30:54 PM »
...I think Artie Morris is in an excellent position to provide insights and valuable comments - but his position as a salesman of Canon products means we should treat what he says with some degree of caution.

It's important to keep such motivations in mind.  For example, his recommendation of the 70-200/2.8L IS II + 2xIII over the 100-400L...it doesn't make much sense from an optical, AF, or handling standpoint…but it makes perfect sense from the standpoint of financial gain for Artie Morris.



There are plenty of reasons to recommend the 70-200+2x combo over the 100-400L, and making an extra buck off Canon isn't the best, not even remotely. For one, it's more versatile, especially in poorer light (you can pop off the TC and creep up closer, if needed, with an f/2.8 lens instead of being stuck at, AT BEST, f/4.5 @ 100mm).


There is also the whole design aspect. A lot of people, and I would even go so far as to say a majority of people, don't like the 100-400L push/pull design. I personally like it, but it is an oddity overall. I believe lot of people prefer the classic dual ring design, one to focus one to zoom. That alone is probably more than enough reason for Art to recommend the 70-200+2x combo over the 100-400L.


There is minimal to no loss in IQ between the two options. The 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II is a newer lens design, with better IS functional up to -4 stops, vs. the 100-400mm design IS which is at best functional at -2 stops. The MFD of the 70-200 is much closer (47.2" vs. 70.9") than the 100-400mm.


The 70-200mm focal length, especially with the fast max aperture, also makes it a much more versatile general purpose lens than the 100-400mm. You don't see many wedding photographers using the 100-400 (if any), however the 70-200's are a staple. The 70-200 with TCs can nicely round off a kit that is comprised of a fairly minimal set of lenses. Many photographers could get away with nothing other than the 16-35mm, 24-70mm & 70-200mm, or maybe some alternative with a couple wide primes.


The only real major drawback of the 70-200 f/2.8 L II with TCs vs. the 100-400mm is weight. The latter is quite a bit lighter weight than the former (without the TC). Overall, however, the 70-200 is a vastly superior lens. I see absolutely no reason why Art would recommend the 70-200 just to pad his own pockets. He doesn't strike me as that kind of individual...and his reputation is probably one of the most valuable things he has. I don't see him destroying that to make an extra buck from Canon by pushing a more expensive lens. I don't think expense has anything to do with it...I think the simple fact that the 70-200/2.8 II is a better lens period, even with the 2x TC, is the reason he pushes it.
26
Software & Accessories / Re: DxO Optics Pro 9: cost of upgrade from version 8?
« Last post by Perio on October 22, 2014, 11:28:28 PM »
You may also find some Black Friday discounts coming up.  They have to compete for the buyers dollar.
 
Adorama has 1 new pro 8 Elite left for $150 on ebay with free shipping, so you would save $50 on the upgrade.

There's one version 9 item for about $250 on ebay, so I guess it's just easier if I pick it up instead of messing up with upgrade. Thanks guys, you're always very helpful.
27
Lenses / Re: Night Sky
« Last post by Tabor Warren Photography on October 22, 2014, 11:21:35 PM »
Not a novice, and I hate to jump into an existing forum, but I believe the answer may also help the OP.

I shoot weddings, but I live way out in the boondocks (though orange on the map that was linked).

For astro work, I was thinking the 5Diii and 24 1.4L, but I have no idea what to do for settings. When shooting at the moon, I did fast shutter work, but what about the Milky Way like the OP was asking about. Is it something I should attack wide open, stopped down, quickly, open shutter? I do not need exact specs, just a quick response, but I do believe I should turn it on its side and aim South, yes?

Anyway, I hope the answers help the OP as well as myself. It's not too often I am in the dark in photography, but astro work would definitely be one of those areas.

Thank you all greatly for your help!

Cheers,
-Tabor
28
You may also find some Black Friday discounts coming up.  They have to compete for the buyers dollar.
 
Adorama has 1 new pro 8 Elite left for $150 on ebay with free shipping, so you would save $50 on the upgrade.
29
Portrait / Jack-O-Lantern Portrait
« Last post by distant.star on October 22, 2014, 11:17:24 PM »
.
It being the Halloween season...

I just realized I don't have a decent jack-o-lantern picture. The best I have is this hastily done thing with a little P&S from five years or so ago. Anyone have any good pictures? I'm going out looking the next week or so, see what I can scare up, so to speak.


30
Her analysis is exactly what I expected of the camera, so, of course, I tend to believe it. 
 
This is not a camera intended for photographers to use in professional level sports.  That's not bad, its just what it is.  Certainly, it can be used for professional sports, but lacks the features to fit into a workflow that makes use of voice recording, as in her example, where different people develop and edit the images, and need to be able to title them accurately.
 
She mentioned that it still had a lot of noise at high ISO's, but is better than the original 7D.  I've seen plenty of test shots by now that confirm that.  The APS-C sensor might gain 1/2+ stop over the original 7D, but there are no miracles or violations of the laws of physics.
 
Overall, for the price, its going to be a great camera and very popular for enthusiasts and for wildlife, but it is not a substitute for a D1X, and not advertised as such.  I'd have no problem buying one, except that extreme low light is what I do most, and even a FF sensor struggles there.  I don't expect a new FF sensor to be much better in low light, but some of the other areas are overdue for a big improvement.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10