New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Canon Thread - Page 162

post #2416 of 2662

I love full frame too, but I love carrying my X pro 1 better. IQ is better on the Fuji IMO

Sold off all my 5d stuff and don't regret it for one second.

 

Don't hate me!!


Edited by aqsw - 1/15/13 at 4:31pm
post #2417 of 2662
Quote:
Originally Posted by aqsw View Post

I love full frame too, but I love carrying my X pro 1 better. IQ is better on the Fuji IMO

Sold off all my 5d stuff and don't regret it for one second.

 

Don't hate me!!

 

I do wish Canon would take the morrorless market more seriously, judging by the meager EOS-M effort.  

 

Fuji's new X-trans II sensor looks mighty tasty to me also, but 2 things, actually 3, give me pause:

 

1.  Very limited choices when it comes to serious strobist and studio lighting work, especially wireless transceivers, not to mention  E-TTL capable transceivers.  

 

2.  Limited choice and quality of RAW converter program for Fuji files.  

 

3.  No full frame.  

 

These limitations, at least for me, makes Fuji at most a supplement to my FF DSLR, not a replacement..


Edited by Jon L - 1/15/13 at 11:19pm
post #2418 of 2662

I've been planning on swapping my 5D2 for a 5D3 and I will still do so but I have a feeling it will be the last (and only 2nd) DSLR that I buy.  The Fuji X100s looks really interesting to me and I'd be tempted to buy one, shoot JPG and not sweat the details.  I understand that Fuji's JPG engine is truly outstanding as well.

post #2419 of 2662
Quote:
Originally Posted by leftnose View Post

I've been planning on swapping my 5D2 for a 5D3 and I will still do so but I have a feeling it will be the last (and only 2nd) DSLR that I buy.  

I dunno.  If I were in your shoes, unless you shoot fast sports, I would tend to just wait another generation.  I just don't see significant RAW IQ jump from 5D II to 5D III.  From reviews of 6D, which has a bit better high iso noise and definitely better AF (although center AF only) in darkness (-3 EV! Better than even 1Dx), I get the feeling Canon has better sensor technology in hand or in development for the next generation of bodies, e..g 5D MKIV.  

 

I have a large collection of Canon lenses, but I have been selling them off slowly, starting with non-L lenses.  Like countless other Canon shooters, unless Canon shows us they are serious about real improvements in their bodies/sensors, not just fancy advertising, I will seek a better solution next generation around.  


Edited by Jon L - 1/27/13 at 11:11am
post #2420 of 2662
The 5 D MK III will crush the MK II and the 6D in terms of high ISO. The 6D is a fine cam but the MK III reigns supreme in the high ISO dept.
post #2421 of 2662

i'm with jon on this one.

to me the only real reason to go from 5Dmk2 to mk3 is the real massive improvement in autofocus. the few tests i ve done (i don't own the mk3, i just go bother some merchant from time to time) i had like 3 times the amount of out of focus shots on the mk2. anybody a little concerned by speed and quality of focus should upgrade.  for image quality the mk2 is so close, i don't see the point of wasting money.

 

 if your real concern is high iso... nikon does a much better, be it for noise or autofocus in low lights. sad but true.
 

post #2422 of 2662
The MK 2 is a good daylight /studio camera and at low ISO there isn't any viable dif. But beyond ISO 400 the image starts to smear.
Nikon does indeed do better. Especially the D4. ISO 6400 with hardly any color noise.
post #2423 of 2662
Quote:
Originally Posted by castleofargh View Post

 

 if your real concern is high iso... nikon does a much better, be it for noise or autofocus in low lights. sad but true.
 

 

Even though I'm a Canon shooter, this does appear to be the case.  Nikon's newer bodies are excellent performers in low light situations.  Hopefully Canon will catch up with their sensor technology. 

post #2424 of 2662
Quote:
Originally Posted by musubi1000 View Post

The 5 D MK III will crush the MK II and the 6D in terms of high ISO. The 6D is a fine cam but the MK III reigns supreme in the high ISO dept.

Well, I don't know where you are getting that info from.  Although I shoot 5D III, in most tests, the 6D is at least as good (slightly better even) as 5D III for high ISO noise.  There are some side-by-side ISO charts in the review below.  

 

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-6D-Digital-SLR-Camera-Review.aspx

 

As for Nikon, most comparisons show that the main advantage is the dynamic range of Nikons, mostly in shadows.  Another usual Nikon advantage is the LOW ISO noise (say for iso <400), but at such low iso's, most cameras are plenty clean to begin with anyway IME.  Once looking past Megapixel/resolution, Canons actually tend to be tiny bit better for high ISO noise, and then there are many who feel Canon colors are "better" (subjective of course).  Just what I've consistently noticed in my readings and my 5 cents smile.gif

post #2425 of 2662

i had the opportunity to shoot a 5D3 for the first time...full frame for the first time actually... omg, I was blown away. 

 

Guy sitting next to me at Benihana happened to have his 5D3 and 135L and 50mm 1.4 manual Zeiss lens.  I tried to manually focus but it was pretty tough as our chef was moving around pretty fast.  With the larger viewfinder I was able to manually focus decently when he was standing kinda still. I put my SD card in his camera and took this..

 

ISO400, 1/100, f/1.6 in manual mode:

 

SOOC:  http://www.flickr.com/photos/hyofoto/8413409509/

and a heavy crop:  http://www.flickr.com/photos/hyofoto/8414509612/in/contacts/

 

 

 

and from my Rebel T1i.............Iso 1600, f/1.4, and 1/320 (I wish I had changed it to compare exact same settings, but I was too excited.. I had raised the ISO to hopefully get some action shots of the chef...).

 

sigma 30mm 1.4...which is not great at focusing in low light.. SOOC:

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hyofoto/8414518052/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hyofoto/8414518138/ 

 

The wife finally gave me the go ahead to trade bodies and lenses for a FF and more likely less lenses.  I am seriously considering jumping to either a Nikon D700 or D600 which I know has much better AF than the 5D2...and I believe low light performance as well....

 

I'm tempted to either get a 5D1 b/c it's so cheap... or the 5D2 which has the video recording advantage over the D700...but I think especially the 5D2 is overpriced for used right now :(  I'd love to get one for about $1000. 

 

Here are a couple of better photos I've taken lately I think. 

And these are certainly my best product photos so far..

 

I took these last night, but already sold the fisheye and the 430EX that I used to take them on Craigslist today...  Like I've said before, I'm quite impulsive -_-

 

Here are a couple portraits I think are my better ones: 

 

I've been focusing on trying to get skin tones to look right--obviously the top one is a little more stylized, though.  Flash really helps because with my camera..anything higher than ISO200 and I start to dramatically lose dynamic range and color depth. 

 

I think I could be very satisfied with the 5Dc...I know the noise usability is only good to 1600...maybe 3200...   I like the smaller pixel density and 12MP...   But the wife won't be letting me switch again if I miss video or want to upgrade....so this body change has to last me quite a long while.. 

 

Just a couple more fun pics

 

These two I added the tilt shift effect using de-sharpen in Lightroom. 

 

 

 

 

 


this last one I revisited the PP a little bit.  I am learning to adjust colors individually a little better I think in LR.

post #2426 of 2662
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyogen View Post

The wife finally gave me the go ahead to trade bodies and lenses for a FF and more likely less lenses.  I am seriously considering jumping to either a Nikon D700 or D600 which I know has much better AF than the 5D2...and I believe low light performance as well....

 

I'm tempted to either get a 5D1 b/c it's so cheap... or the 5D2 which has the video recording advantage over the D700...but I think especially the 5D2 is overpriced for used right now :(  I'd love to get one for about $1000. 

 

 

 

Pretty good job nailing focus on manual on the 5D3 -- its focusing screen is not suited for manual focus work, and therefore doesn't show the proper DOF necessary for critical MF work.

 

Personally, I would recommend either a 5D2 or 6D. Don't fall for the incorrect assumption that larger pixels == less noise; noise is all about the efficiency of the sensor, not the size of the pixels. The 5D2's sensor performance, despite being 3 years old, is still very comparable to the 5D3 and 6D, losing out only at the very high ISOs so it should last you much longer than the 5D1 or D700. I can't say much about the D600, but I would be wary of the Nikon's QC issues on dust/oil.

 

Also, don't sweat too much on lenses again; some people can go far with just a cheap 35mm or 50mm. You don't need to try and cover all the focal lengths, just the ones you use the most.

 

And talking about being impulsive... that reminds me a lot of someone I know, that I always meet in the morning in front of the mirror lol. But here's my advice: hold on, and don't buy the thing you want for at least 2 weeks. Each time you're about to hit the buy button, do a double-take and ask yourself, "do I NEED this thing, or do I just WANT it?". After 2 weeks, if the enthusiasm for that new toy is still there, then by all means go ahead and buy it. If you've lost the urge, then cool -- you've saved yourself some money.

 

I found that most of the stuff I bought and sold within less than a year, have been due to impulse buys while things that I have thought long and hard before buying, I keep them and use them for a much longer time.

 

---

 

On a somewhat-related topic... I have agonized over this for countless nights, sometimes even bordering on insomnia, so recently I bit the bullet (having passed my 2 weeks threshold) and have a new system to partner/backup my somewhat depleted Canon system:

 

 

 

:-D

post #2427 of 2662

very nice, and congrats.  I should probably not even look at how much those kinds of cameras cost :)    Here's a processed version of the one from the 5D3. 

 

 

 

I didn't mean to accumulate 6 lenses....the pancake I got for free.  I could have gotten rid of the fisheye before, but now I'm pretty convinced that I just don't need it.  my 70-300 lens was dirt cheap. I used the 30mm and 50mm a ton, but the 10-20mm not as much as I thought--would be good for trips mainly. 

 

After hearing my 2 photography enthusiast friends who got me into SLRs rave on and on about the D700 and D600 I was pretty convinced.  But after more research and looking at buying used lenses and watching some pretty unbiased comparisons on youtube, I am now actually leaning towards either 6D or 5D2.  I would go with the 5Dc, but this switch has to last me like 6 years (after Dental school the wife says....we have fought a lot b/c of my obsession with photography in general and she's really giving in a LOT to let me go full frame before I got accepted into school..).  This time it will seriously seriously be written in BLOOD.  I'd be pretty happy with keeping my rebel and getting 5Dc...but 2 bodies is out of the question.

 

I agree I don't need that many lenses.  I think I'll eventually end up with a 14mm 2.8 samyang fully manual for my wide angle (I can wait till summer for this one).  I'll either keep my 40mm 2.8 or preferably the 50mm 1.4 (sigma) as my general purpose lens.  Aaand, for the time being I'll probably try to get a 85mm 1.8.  quite cheap--$315 new and a pristine one sold for $250 today on POTN......I was so sad I missed it.    Nikon's used lenses seem to be more expensive and less of them for sale...

 

So this will be the difference... 5D2 and 2-3 lenses now.  OR 6D and 1-2 lenses now and be patient.  I think I would be completely satisfied with a wide angle like 14mm 2.8,  50mm 1.4, and a huge jump to the 135 f2L......  Although on my crop right now, I end up using my 30mm more even though I like the 50mm 1.4 better....when I DO use the 50mm (85 on full frame as you know) a lot of times I have plennnty of space to back up and wish I could get an even thinner DOF. 

 

I'm really disappointed with the single cross type focus point on the 6D.....but I guess I don't take pics of a lot of moving stuff too often (except for my cats...which I guess is actually a lot). 

 

Insomnia...yes....  I force that upon myself.  in the last 4 days I've slept maybe 15 hours  :-/    It's too bad my local Fry's doesn't have the 6D + 24-105 kit lens in stock.  Can buy the kit for $2300 and sell the lens for $700-750 pretty easily.  No tax in oregon also.  Otherwise pay essentially $100 more for the 6D by itself which they do have in stock......  

 

 

Here are a couple photographer's processing styles I really like and would love to mimick in case you're curious.  http://voltronofawesomeness.com/   This guy was named one of top 10 wedding photographers in the world by American Photography Magazine last year.    Also, http://www.jordanvoth.com/


Edited by hyogen - 1/27/13 at 9:01am
post #2428 of 2662

I checked out Jordan Voth's collection -- his portraits that immediately stand out to me are the ones taken in evening light. At this time, the lighting is warmer, and he often positions his subjects with the light coming from behind. I love this kind of lighting a lot and have taken a lot of pics of my daughter this way, so it is not just the lens that does the job but the environment and lighting too.

 

 

On lenses, here's a suggestion:

 

1) keep the 70-300; it's cheap enough that you probably won't get much back in return.

 

2) get a 50 and 85, since that seems to be the FL that you're often at. For the 85, that's the 85/1.8. For 50, I guess 50L is out of the question so the next best option, price/performance-wise, is Canon's 50/1.4. Or if cash is an issue, the 50/1.8 can also pretty good; you'll still be getting slightly thinner DOF with a fullframe + 50/1.8 vs rebel + 30/1.4.

 

3) that Samyang sounds very nice, but 14mm is very wide on fullframe. It's even wider than your 10-22, so I'm questioning are you sure it's what you want? A wide prime is much harder to tame than a normal or telephoto prime, perhaps a zoom such as the 17-40L would be a better option?

 

 

And one final thing: don't mix up AF performance and cross points. They're not mutually exclusive. A cross point simply means it is sensitive to both vertical and horizontal features, e.g. so a vertically-sensitive point will not AF on a horizontal line. A non-cross point can still be good if presented with a suitable AF target, and many real world features have some vertical edges to AF on; don't automatically assume it's useless just because it isn't a cross point. It's worth noting that 6D does have better AF performance than the 5D2 though, and the 5D2's peripheral points aren't reliable in low light.

post #2429 of 2662
Quote:

 Nikon's used lenses seem to be more expensive and less of them for sale...

 This is a huge practical point in real life that many don't realize.  There's simply much less "good stuff" on the used market for Nikon gear, especially the popular lenses, thus more competition and price to grab them.  Even for new gear, Nikon seems to have large issues with their production and distribution volume, as many popular new products will simply be "Out of stock" at many stores and take months and months to be in stock.  In addition, Nikon relies much more on out-of-Japan countries for production, e.g. Thailand, China, and Nikon's recent and multiple QC issues have gotten my attention as well.  Third-party accessories, such as wireless speedlite triggers, lenses, and even speedlites, always come out for Canon first, then Nikon, if at all.  

 

This is one of the big reasons I am still sort of forced to give Canon another chance to come up with some real advancements for their bodies before switching..frown.gif

post #2430 of 2662

Look through your EXIF data at focal lengths and make your lens buying decisions based on that.  I just culled my 2012 Lightroom catalog to 4008 images. Of those, 1254 images were taken at 35mm (mix of 35/2, 35L, and 24-105L).  Add together 85 and 135mm and I've got nearly another 1200 photos.  So I can take 35, 85, and 135 primes and know I have lenses that were responsible for ~60% of my "un-flawed" images last year.  Of those, the 135 would be the first to go and I'd be happy as a clam with nothing more than the 35 and 85.  Most of the rest of my images were taken with my 100L Macro, 70-300L, and 17-40L in that order.  I didn't take a single keeper with my 200/2.8L last year so it may be time to sell that lens.

 

A used 35/2 and 85/1.8 combo should cost you in the ballpark of $600.  That's money better spent in terms of IQ than, say, a used 24-105L and you'd still have money left over for an extra CF card and a spare battery.

 

And I would definitely skip both the 5Dc and D700.  The decision between 5D2, 6D, and D600 is a tougher one.


Edited by leftnose - 1/27/13 at 1:38pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home