Nice looking cameras. Interesting that the G5 X is shown with the tilt and swivel LCD screen from the original G1X and the 60D/70D, rather than the tilt-only screen from the G1XII, G7x, and G3X. I am a fan of the tilt swivel.

Maximilian said:

Please take some time, put the pictures away, wait a week or longer and then decide again.

Click to expand...

I think that is your answer. Only you can determine what is or is not a keeper for your use.

Why would you care what people on a internet forum would think? They are your photographs, for your purposes. Really, only you can, and in my opinion, should, make.


" I only want to keep .... real keepers" Maybe the answer is, after waiting a bit, is that you keep all eight.

You may find that over the years, what you personally may feel is a "real keeper" (what ever that means) may change.

If there is that much doubt, keep it.

What is the risk of keeping something you shouldn't vice not keeping something you should? Especially when storage is so inexpensive these days.

privatebydesign said:

I have said for a long tome three versions makes sense.

1: 5DS/R for the resolution, changing to a unified 5DSR II.
2: 5D MkIV, the next iteration of the best general purpose camera ever made.
3: 5DC, low resolution optimised for video and simple interpolation. There is a big video DSLR market with many people owning large systems based on the DSLR format and limitations, cages, monitors, mics etc. It could also double as a low resolution high iso stills camera.

Click to expand...

+1

Furthermore:
* Video-centric 5DC shall as expensive as hi-rez 5DS R - sames as Sony A7S vs. A7R II vs. A7 II 8)
* 5D IV should be a truly stills-centric camera with "as little video stuff as possible" and be priced considerably lower than 5D III ... not a cent more than Nikon D820 or D900 (whatever their D810 successor might be called).

Probably a smart move on their part. Wish them the best of luck!

Thanks for all your input!

There is a reason why you shouldn't buy the most expensive equipment right away, nothing will ever measure up after But to be serious, I might be able to live without F1.2, barely, but there is just something special with the bokeh of the 85L.

Maybe I'm the weird one here, but everything doesn't have to be perfect, ultra sharp, I don't need a lens for every focal distance, but still that F1.2 creates something special, even if it's not perfectly sharp or in focus to the mm. There is not much else I want (of lenses), maybe a UW lens if I'm planing on climbing some high peaks next year (only time I think I'll miss it), so spending some time saving up to it won't be a problem. In the meantime I do have the 70-200.

I think I've got my answer,
Thanks!

ahsanford said:

That's the thing -- things did change. Apparently, Sony blew up in the last few years:
http://petapixel.com/2015/05/01/40-of-all-camera-sensors-sold-in-2014-were-made-by-sony/

Click to expand...

According to Sony in March 2014, they supllied 16% more sensors in 2013 than 2012

http://www.sonyrumors.net/2014/03/28/sonys-image-sensors-selling-like-lemonade-hot-day/

Which makes one hell of a jump from 21% in 2012, increasing to 24.3% (16% increase) in 2013 to 40% in 2014 - that's what, a 65% increase in supply in a single year ?

Also... In July 2015, Sony was deemed second in this article

http://www.unifore.net/company-highlights/2014-top-10-cmos-image-sensor-manufacturers.html

The figures don't add up to the 40% claimed share when Sony (second remember), OV (first remember so more than 40%) Samsung, Galaxycore had 78% market share

chromophore said:

The MTF curves that LensRentals does is valid for comparing between brands because these curves are empirically derived from actual lenses, all on the same measuring device(s).

That said, the MTF tells you only so much: it is not, for example, going to directly tell you about chromatic aberration or the look of the bokeh.

So far, what we have seen is that the EF 35/1.4L II is indeed an impressive lens. I may have to get one for myself: I think if I could sell my EF 35/1.4L at a good price, I would go for the upgrade. Anybody want to buy mine? It's in excellent condition. ;D

Click to expand...

I had a hard time selling my 35L, even though it was in like-new condition and physically indistinguishable from a brand new one, took almost 3 weeks to get rid of it at $950. :-\

Instead of starting a new thread

Does anyone know how do save the data you enter for a resized printed target? Printed Target Width box is located in Preference's - Tests. When I enter the new value and close the Preference window it resets. At this point I'm wondering if you are just supposed to leave it open during the test?

Last one tonight, found a willing live model. This is wide open standard picture style with default sharpness of 3. This is a very sharp lens wide open.

I edit another copy of this shot removing the "sneaky" vase on the left bottom corner, but still shows how shallow f1.4 is at 30 feet away

Here are some from Eindhoven, the Netherlands.

Hi, is anyone having problems using the Tamron 1.4X tele-converter with the Mark II, it worked fine with my 7D but now it locks up the camera gives and error message and when you turn the camera off it says that it is downloading. Only way to unlock the camera is to unload the battery. It happens with the 24-105 and with the 70-300mm L lenses. Appreciate any thoughts!

Moderator note:

Political comments and topics are prohibited. A simple question like the op posted quickly degrades into political arguments.

Re: Canon Developing 8K Cinema EOS Camera, 120mp DSLR & 8K Display

privatebydesign said:

tvexecutive said:

Canon can't get an 18MP 1DX to work right and we're here talking about 120MP???? INSANITY!!!!

rs said:

Featuring a resolution of approximately 120 effective megapixels, the SLR camera now being developed will incorporate a Canon-developed high-pixel-density CMOS sensor within the current EOS-series platform, which will realize compatibility with the Company’s diverse interchangeable EF lens lineup.3 The high-resolution images that the camera will be capable of producing will recreate the three-dimensional texture, feel and presence of subjects, making them appear as if they are really before one’s eyes. The camera will facilitate a level of resolution that is more than sufficient for enlarged poster-sized printout while also enabling images to be cropped and trimmed without sacrificing image resolution and clarity.

source: http://www.canon.com/news/2015/sep08e2.html

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I think, judging from your hyperbolic posts so far it is you that is more likely the problem, not your Canon gear. There are many people doing work like you with Canon gear and they are quite happy, wonder why?

Click to expand...

He is correct, with the amount of photos this forum has, coming from the crappy 1D X and the crappier lower end cameras like the 5D III, you would wonder how anyone is still shooting with a Canon camera, especially those at major sports events, or those doing BIF, I am sure this photo sucks because my camera is too crappy to shoot at low light

Interested in your comments Tex, you quote : " The review over at the Digital picture indicates Bryan Carnathan went from not using the IS for sports on Version I to only using Mode 3 IS 100% of the time on".
A while back I had the original Canon EF 400 F2.8L and found no use for IS - good thing as it didn't have it! These days I mainly use the Canon 800 F5.6 L IS and the IS is just a hindrance in all but the most extreme circumstances. haven't used it for 21 Months and am getting more keepers as a result.
What I am getting at is that at the shutter speeds needed for sports (or in my case wildlife) IS, in any form, simply gets in the way. IS cannot help but slow down AF and impair tracking and, more importantly, contributes nothing at the shutter speeds necessary to freeze action at longer focal lengths. The newer IS systems with Mode 3 are better in theory as they allow the camera to achieve focus and only slow the whole business down AFTER focus has been achieved as opposed to doing this before focus is achieved - either way who want's it? Certainly not me.
As to lens recommendations - both are excellent but the 400 F2.8 Mk2 is even more excellent. The OP was not worried about weight - trust me the lighter weigh of the Mk2 IS a significant advantage! Panning and subject acquisition are significantly better with the lighter Mk2. As a bare lens there is not much difference in the IQ or AF but the MK 2 has the edge - only slightly - but that slight improvement can make all the difference! If you intend to use extenders then the Mk2 is simply the better option.
If the budget will allow the Canon 400 F2.8 L IS Mk2 is as good as it gets - period. The Mk 1 IS is wonderful but not quite as wonderful!
With either lens the photographer is the deciding factor. Happy choosing!

derrald said:

greekcs said:

When's the last time someone mounted a $2K+ lens on a $300 entry level consumer DSLR?

Click to expand...

I've used a 500 f/4l on a Rebel SL1. It works great!

I wasn't near my computer to attach so here's a link:
http://www.journeyoflight.com/photo/ring-necked-pheasant/pheasant/0/0/12/0

Click to expand...

That's an amazing pheasant shot there! Those little buggers can be difficult to shoot sometimes. Hear a squawk in front of you and then he's 100 feet behind you 3 seconds later.

I wonder how many 70-200 F4 L IS lenses Canon has had to fix due to the focus slipping issue that can arise after the lenses have been left in hot temperatures? They also had some production issues with some copies not able to focus to infinity at certain focal lengths, along with a few decentered copies. I've gone through a few copies of this lens over the years and have seen all of the issues in the ones I returned.

I could see Canon releasing a update with the production issues fixed, a little lighter, better flare control, and maybe a little bit quieter IS.

If you get a good copy today, it's still one of the best zoom lenses money can buy. though.
I've always been blown away with the image quality of a good copy.

It sounds like you have a earth issue on the 1DX, it is simple to deal with, just give the hotshoe a really good clean with an alcohol based cleaner, especially the inside edge of the hotshoe rail, that is where it earths, via the spring thing on the side of the PocketWizard where I have arrowed.

This diagnosis can normally be confirmed by trying to trigger the remotes via the shutter button while you apply a gentle twisting force to the PocketWizard.

Maximilian said:

Mantadude said:

...
Enjoy!
Dustin

Click to expand...

Hi Dustin!

Thank you for sharing!
Always surprising how big the prey of such ambush predators can be.
I wouldn't have imagined that it could swallow such a (relatively) big fish.

Also good capture and cut. Thank you.

Click to expand...

Thanks. It is surprising how big of prey that can fit in there...

@Krisbell - Those are fantastic! Love them both, but especially the second one.

I've had a power zoom EF lens. I'd not want another. I also hate the power zoom on P&S cameras.

When kids get their parents login as a part of inheritance.

andrewflo said:

leGreve said:

DanThePhotoMan said:

Yeah, from the tests I've watched, the autofocus is seriously impressive. The footage looked great too considering all the compression in the Vimeo upload. I seriously hope he missed focus on the slow motion shot though. It looked absolutely atrocious.

Click to expand...

That's just the thing... he didn't... it is THAT soft, which more or less makes slow mo in the C300 II useless.

Another camera from Canon to rent in when needed, for all round work it's not good enough to be owned (depending on your type of work, but for my type, I would get more use out of a Sony than the C300 for a smaller price point)

Click to expand...

Agreed that the slowmo clip looked unbelievable soft... also hoping it was a fluke :|

Click to expand...

Only the slow-motion footage? The whole thing looks soft to me. Maybe it's 'net compression.

rfdesigner said:

ajfotofilmagem said:

Thanks for sharing your insights about the lens hood most appropriate for APS-C cameras.

When you look at the lens in backlit (off camera), you see dust inside? Normally, the dust in front elements has little influence on the image, but in the rear elements becomes more visible.

I would like to have a 28mm F1.8 lens (or 24) with good contrast and sharpness when wide open in my APS-C cameras. But I think the Canon 28mm F1.8 is outdated for today's cameras. I believe the anti reflective coatings are poor in digital cameras, and still waiting for a decent upgrade, or I'll buy the Sigma 30mm Art.

Click to expand...

no not dust, but a sea of very very little dots, looks like a million little glass beads, dust never worries me.. my telescope only gets cleaned of dust annually if it's lucky.

For me I value fast and accurate AF over perfectly sharp in the corners ability.. I know the sigmas are better at shooting stationary objects.

Anyway I'll see how the lens fairs on Monday when I get it vacuumed.

Click to expand...

According to my understanding, "a million little glass beads" are the same as dust.

You should know that a lens disassemble and clean it is very easy. ??? Difficult is to assemble again, with everything at the right place, and calibrate the focus. 8)