Posts

Bosman · Nov 9, 2012

http://www.eoshd.com/content/9044/exclusive-canon-confirm-1d-c-4k-dslr-is-same-hardware-as-the-1d-x

This to me is identical enough to be called identical for all intensive purposes. I agree to disagree. I am thinking about firmware being the main thing to Canon's camera sensor capabilities. Firmware and gapless sensors being the last way to give their cameras a boost before moving to more advanced sensor tech. I claim no knowledge on the matter but believe it. Chuck Westfall did seem to allude to great firmware being a major advancement during the 5dm3 release.

Nov 9, 2012

Hi Everyone,

I've shot Leica Rangefinders for the last couple of years. Prior to that I was a Nikon film user. I just purcahsed a Mark III and to say I'm overwhelmed would be an understatement. I have the opportunity to get on the field this weekend for the pregame activities, warm ups, etc. at the Panthers-Broncos game. I have a 70-200 II IS lens but I need some advice regarding settings for the Mark III. I'm reading the manual and a Nook download but I just don't have the time to learn and figure things out for myself since the game is this weekend.

Any help with settings, etc., would be greatly appreciated!!!

Chuck Alaimo · Nov 9, 2012

Zlatko said:
NormanBates said:

Forget about inflation, exchange rates, and all that. Those are all excuses. The 5D3 doesn't have to compete with a 5D2 released at $2700 4 years ago. It has to compete with the D800, which has a much better sensor and sells for $3000.

Click to expand...

Right, it does have to compete against the D800, which was priced lower at introduction. Happily, the 5D3 price is coming down.

However, the question of a "better sensor" depends on the intended use and the preferences of the user. I prefer Canon color for photos of people, so the 5D3 has the better sensor for me. If I were a landscape photographer, I'd probably favor the D800 sensor.

And other important factors come into the equation. Without a smaller Raw file format and without a super-quiet shutter mode and without Canon ergonomics and certain Canon lenses and the Canon radio-controlled flash, the D800 is less attractive for me, and therefor less competitive even at a lower price. For these reasons, the 5D3 competes very well for some photographers, whether priced the same as the D800 or higher. It comes down to the needs and preferences of the photographer.

So there are multiple factors, some of which have greater importance to certain photographers; DR is just one of them. Back when Nikon didn't offer a full-frame camera or any camera with excellent high ISO performance, some photographers still preferred Nikon because other factors were more important to them. This is why reducing camera competitiveness to just one or two factors and a price doesn't work.

There are obviously many photographers for whom the D800 will be a better fit and likewise many for whom the 5D3 will be a better fit, notwithstanding any price differences. It's apparent that Canon and Nikon intentionally design at least some of their products with somewhat different buyers in mind (with a good deal of overlap, of course) — this way they don't have to compete strictly on price.

+1 ...others have said it so I'll repeat it...why are we so dogmatic about this that we can't just use 2 systems if the needs for both are that great? I shoot weddings, portraits and events as my bread and butter...but I do also shoot landscapes and cityscapes and urban decay, etc, etc too. If demand for my art were to get to a point where I could live off of it, then yeah I would seriously consider picking up a d800. But, right now for me the service end is more lucrative - and yeah, the 5d3 is the better camera for that kind of work.

Bosman · Nov 9, 2012

Manual is so much better than relying on the meter to decide shutter speed.

Nov 9, 2012

Its available at B&H.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/895598-REG/Rokinon_cv85c_85mm_T1_5_Cine_AS.html

RLPhoto · Nov 9, 2012

florianbieler.de said:
After spending some weeks thinking about this 135 and especially it's massive price tag (at least for me it is), I decided to trash my 70-200 4.0L non-IS (don't use it that often anyway) and get the 135 instead.

So now I own the 100L and the 135L. I am going out for a testdrive later this weekend to see if it's really that magic. But I very much hope so.

Enjoy! If you recieved a good 135L copy, You'll find it's just as sharp as your 70-200 F/4 @ F/2.

bornshooter · Nov 9, 2012

RLPhoto said:
I like the punchy-colors much better.

You must have been eye-level when shooting these shots because the first photo has a-lot of headroom. If your going for atmosphere around your model, a lower angle would seperate and yet, make the background present. Eye level or above eye level tends to put emphasis on the foreground in-front of your subject.

thanks for the tip i will give it a go on my next shoot

Random Orbits · Nov 9, 2012

d8032 said:
I've gone back and forth with myself over the 15 vs. the 8-15. I think the 8-15 is reasonably priced, but I don't know that I would use the wide end of it very much and question if the difference in cost could be better used somewhere else. Do you have experience with either lens? What types of situations would you want the circular image the 8mm produces on a FF body?

The zoom range of the 8-15 is nice if you have camera bodies of different formats, which you do. You can get full frame 180 diagonal AOV with both bodies, and you can decrease the AOV on the crop by using it at longer focal lengths. The longer focal length on a crop effectively uses the center of the image circle, which is less distorted.

dmcassidy · Nov 9, 2012

No not a pro but on a weekend trip in the keys my camera went down and luckily one of the others in them group had a spare 7d so I could continue with the trip. Prior to that I never would have thought about having two bodies. After all the good comments I am going to kept my 1div and get rid of my two 7ds at whatever I can get for them. Thanks again to everyone

robbymack · Nov 9, 2012

bruce

i only rented a copy of the tamron for a weekend alongside the 24-70ii so my experience may not be as great as some, and since no one has hands on a 24-70 f4 the rest is speculation on my part. What I can tell you is that compared to your 28-135 you won't be disappointed with the tamron. Its sharper than any 24-70 f2.8 mark i I have ever used and it's $1000 cheaper than the 24-70ii. The 24-70ii is sharper across the range than the tamron, but I wouldn't call it twice as sharp which is what it should be for twice the price. I suspect the 24-70 f4 you are considering will be likely as sharp as the Tamron, but you lose the f2.8. AF does feel a tad bit slow when compared to the 24-70ii, and it does struggle a bit more in low light, but then again you have primes to cover that issue. I would say for a GP zoom it is probably the best bet right right now. You get the f2.8 advantage over the 24-105 and it has the IS advantage over the 24-70ii, and while canon says you can have a 24-70 f4 maybe by christmas I'm going to guess the normal canon production delays will end up tossing it into february.

Personally I am holding out for a price drop on the tammy to closer to $1100 before pulling the trigger. In the mean time I picked up a nice copy of a 24-105 on craigslist a few months back for a little less than $700 and if I ever want to sell it I won't lose much if any value. Heck if the 24-70 f4 is not that great I may even make a little money on that lens.

Lee Jay · Nov 9, 2012

24-85/2.8L IS
100-400L II
7DII w/>20MP and f/8 AF
In-camera stabilization for short primes instead of the new 24, 28 and 35. I already have a 35L and 85/1.8 that I wouldn't mind being stabilized.

Nov 9, 2012

IMO, difference between 100mm and 105mm is irrelevant, it's more about a tradition within within lens makers (Most brands take 100mm, Nikon for some reason decided for 105mm, most likely to set themselves apart).

However, 28 and 24 mm are slightly different lenses. I am so used to the 24mm that feels more "natural" than the 28mm (that's highly personnal and subjective). The difference in angle of view is not so big, so if you have room behind you, moving a couple of feet back will allow you to put as much in the frame with the 28mm.

But in the good old times of film, 28mm was a more common focal, the saying was that the 28mm is the widest angle you can use without showing excessive perspective distortion, typical of very wide angles. Fact is that the 28mm is a wide angle that gives a very natural perspective, without that "super-wide angle" look.

Nov 9, 2012

I had this problem before. it was the card reader for me.
i was using the Transcend reader, everything corrupt,
i switched to Kingston everything was fine.
you can check this by see if you can see the pictures in camera, if can't then i think its the card.

anand · Nov 8, 2012

One more.............

Shawn L · Nov 8, 2012

Thanks again for the help, Mt. Spokane.

Shawn L.

MichaelHodges · Nov 8, 2012

http://michaelhodgesfiction.com/

rh81photo · Nov 8, 2012

hmm, wishlist, yes!

70-200 f2.8 L USM II
This version should have:
-less weight (however achieved, it just shouldn't feel cheap)
-less purple/green LoCA fringing at f2.8
-a tad more contrast and sharpness wide open
-even faster AF (feedback loop would be nice)
-a hood with the click like the IS II version has
-weather sealing
-focus limiter with more steps (1.5m-inf, 3m-inf, 4.5m-inf)
-AF stop button(s)
-white-white instead of muddy-grey-white paint OR a black painted version of it...

the old version (17years old) is a really nice lens, but the above mentioned points could be improved. except for the optical formula it wouldn't require much R&D. It would become a little less versatile lens compared to the IS II version due to the lacking IS, but I hope the pricing would reflect this. the IS II version shows that stellar performance wide open is possible...why not have the same thing without IS? I think this is not asking for too much

and I would pay a premium over the old version. for that I paid 1100EUR and never regretted the purchase. a lens with the above mentioned improvements is probably 1500€ to 1600€ worth to me, maybe 1700€ if it is featherlight.
also if someone invents a 70-180 f2.2 L USM lens at the same weight...oh well, now I'm dreaming... :

Viggo · Nov 8, 2012

Yes, it's completely awesome! And you can't fake your way there with anything else, 24mm at 1,4 is magic stuff...

Nov 8, 2012

skitron said:
PackLight said:

skitron said:

PackLight said:

It would be price fixing if Nikon, Canon and Sony agreed to sell at certain agreed prices. It would be price fixing if all retailers agreed to set a fixed price.

This is not price fixing. A manufacture can require it's retailers to charge a certain price. It happens all the time.

Click to expand...

Actually according to US anti-trust law, manufacturer mandated prices to their dealers perfectly fit the descriptions of prohibited actions described in the Sherman Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Clayton Act.

However...the acts also have language about "reasonableness" of the actions that fit the descriptions. Which in legalese means its up to the courts to determine who gets to violate the acts and who doesn't.

Obviously a manufacturer of some sort with a dealer network, was in the past, given a favorable ruling in a court case and now "dealer network price fixing" activity is essentially exempt from the acts as a result.

But that doesn't mean that dealer network price fixing doesn't fit the descriptions of prohibited activities under the acts, it just means the courts have issued an exemption is all...which of course if you're Canon, that's all you need and care about.

Click to expand...

What you miss with your interpretation is that the "Dealer" is not setting the price, the manufacture is. The manufacture can set the price of their product and dictate the amount it is sold for, provided the manufacture has adequate competition in the market. This is a common practice with manufactures. You can call it "Price Fixing" if you like, but it is not illegal "Price Fixing".

Click to expand...

Actually the fact the dealer is not setting the price is precisely my point. The price is being set by one party, the mfgr, and other parties are acting in concert to also set the identical price, the dealers. It's classic price fixing with the caveat that the courts have allowed an exemption under the "reasonableness" language of the acts. And as I stated in my first post, it is not illegal since they (apparently) have court precedents where courts have granted exemptions for this practice, assumingly for the very reason you cite - that there is competition between mfgrs therefore competition between dealers is not needed for an efficient market. Which the economics minor in me knows is pure hogwash. But yet I agree Canon is within their legal comfort zone to do it. And we of course are within our right to not buy their wares.

Canon is only one example, this happens with Cars, TV's, electronics, Apple Computers, iphone plans, furniture companies and much much more.

Plus the reason for the price control in Canon's situation is to protect the Mom and Pop stores that can't compete with B&H, Adorama and Amazons of the world. Protection of the Mom and Pop stores is the essence of why the Sherman Act was created in the first place. To say this law should be used to destroy the very entities it was created to protect just so we can buy a 5D III $200 cheaper online is ridiculous. And apparantly the courts have agreed with this.

zim · Nov 8, 2012

iaind said:
tron said:

zim said:

chasn said:

I have used HDEW and while they may import from HK or wherever you have no risk of import duty ( as they are UK based ) and they bolt on a three year warranty. It may not be a full Canon warranty but I have had cause to rely on it with an earlier purchase and the camera was repaired quickly, no quibbles and well by what looks to be a reputable repair shop in Glasgow. So only one experience but one satisfied customer here ( £2000 for a 5D III not too bad )

Click to expand...

Hi Chasn

I'd be interested to know the name of that repair shop?
If you don't want to broadcast it please PM me

Regards

Click to expand...

hello,

I am interested in learning this information too since I bought my 5D3 from HDEW.

Was it A J J________
in Hope St

Click to expand...

That's actually what I was wondering too

Nov 8, 2012

I would go with the 35L. Very natural FOV on the 60D and other 1.6x cameras.

The 70-200 2.8 is an excellent lens but in my opinion, it would seem way too obvious for street candids (it's big, it's white, it's heavy, it's attention-grabbing!)

Another option is to grab the 40mm 2.8 (excellent lens for the price) and then hold out for the new 6D (will come out to ~same price as 70-200). The 6D is supposed to be able to focus in lower light than any of the current Canon cameras currently out at the moment.

RLPhoto · Nov 8, 2012

hbengtsson said:
I'm not sure if this has been discussed before but I recently upgraded from Mark2 -> Mark3 and one thing that I noticed instantly was the improved colors/character in the RAW files compared to the Mark2. Not only do they look (according to my tase) more pleasing and vidid but the entire files seem more balanced and neutral yet punchy out of cam. It's almost like I don't need to color correct (which I ALWAYS need to do with the Mark2 files, even with accurate WB, there's a warm/reddish bias)

And when processing the Mark3 files further it only gets better. I'm not sure if this is thanks to a much better AWB or the new color filter, improved profiles or whatever. The last time I got this "feeling" straight out of cam was when shooting with the old classic 5D original - and that's a good sign! Of course, we are talking about subtle observations here but still to me very very noticeable - and I thought it would be fun to share and perhaps hear your opinions as well.

Cheers,

I admit the 5D3 files are fantastic. I went from 5Dc ------> 5D3 and it has a similar color tone. I still like the 5Dc a-little better but the 5D3 is close enough.

Nov 8, 2012

Thank you for the information: I don't know if I should be happy that my lens creeps naturally.

The hood requires much more torsion if mounted the "wrong" way, I don't know why, but that's the way it is. Anyway, if I get the chance will as a Canon dealer to give me his opinion about. I plan to get the STM version (to take videos with autofocus and for better close ups) as soon as a new crop Canon with a decent sensor comes out. For now I have the 550D, which surprisingly is better in IQ than the 650D: congratulations to Canon for the devolution.

Nov 8, 2012

Just an fyi (I didn't look at the date of this point)...the latest versions of the eyefi cards (I just purchased the 16G class 10 with new firmware)..don't require a network or hotspot when you're out in the field working. The new Direct connect option just requires that you have your cell phone with you, with the wi-fi turned on. Took me a little while to configure it but it works very well. Haven't tried geotagging yet but it will probably work the same way..and will be as accurate as cell-tower gps can be.

sanj · Nov 8, 2012

Thank you. Am using my commonsense now.

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics