|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
11-19-2009, 07:59 PM
|
| |
I just added the 300/f4 IS. Great lens, and no equivalent in Nikon land (their non-IS f4 lens costs more than the Canon). Similarly, the Canon 70-200/f4 IS doesn't have a Nikon equivalent. Frankly, I'd rather have f4 with IS than 2.8 without as I shoot almost exclusively handheld but that depends on how you work. The 70-200 is my favorite glass right now and that's saying a lot because I don't like zooms.
The Nikon 14-24/2.8 is legendary though and if you want to work ultrawide that might be the kick over the edge. I have the Canon 16-35/2.8 and it is good but probably looses in a horse race to the Nikon.
The reality is you can't really go wrong with either one.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
11-18-2009, 06:56 PM
|
| |
I just picked up the 300/4 IS and I'm impressed. I have been using it indoors handheld in crappy light and it renders nicely and it totally manageable. I'll likely get a TC and may actually pick up a flash (gasp!) as a cinematographer colleague shoots a lot of 5D2 w/off-camera flash to great effect.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
11-13-2009, 05:17 PM
|
| |
You have great Canon glass - that is reason enough to stay with the brand. I agree that the D700 is a great camera, but the 5D2 is pretty much a wash against it. D700 wins with another stop of usable ISO, but higher rez file of the 5D2 allows for more aggressive crop and scaling down reduces apparent noise. I love the files from the Sony cameras but good glass isn't cheap (and there isn't a huge selection), and if you shoot low light then I think you've lost the IQ advantage.
If you like your glass, I'd say stay Canon. If you aren't satisfied, then consider jumping to Nikon. But it'll cost you...
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
11-13-2009, 01:38 PM
|
| |
I'm convinced that probably 90+% of "problems" are user error or a variable that the user is not accounting for.
I also have no doubt that there are some niggles with the 7D. Every camera has them. But I also have no doubt that there are plenty of users who will create stunning images with the camera. From all accounts the new AF system is just that - a *new* AF system, and one needs to learn the system to take full advantage. Too many people (myself included) get a new tool and don't bother to learn how to use it, and instead try to use their previous skill set or approach.
If the 7D doesn't do it for you, then don't buy it. No one is holding a gun to your head. And the author of the blog should be happy that a G11 does what he needs. I find it hard to believe that a G11 file will stand up to a properly shot and developed 7D file. But if he's pointing and shooting, then maybe the G11 is the right tool...
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
11-10-2009, 12:51 PM
|
| |
I'm not sure I "get" this yet. I understand RED, but with this I haven't figured out the long-term issues.
So what you have is a UI, battery and processor that you'd keep for many years. And then a lens and sensor that you'd keep as well. Presumably they would make different size "bodies" with the same mount, and one could also imagine a "sensor pack" with a bayonet so that you could mount whatever you want. At that point it begins to get interesting.
At least it is something different. Kudos to Ricoh for having the balls to play around with a different concept. As for obsolescence, in this case look at the times you end up buying a new body. This may end up being a little cheaper. But in the end you pay your money one way or another...
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
11-08-2009, 08:18 PM
|
| |
And you see no difference between the raw files, and no advantage with the FF system?
If that is the case, then you have the right camera.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
11-01-2009, 01:07 PM
|
| |
Samsung NX Purple Monkey Dishwasher
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-31-2009, 11:18 AM
|
| |
I predict fail (at least in the US market) unless it is ridiculously cheap.
Next rumor, please...
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-30-2009, 08:45 AM
|
| |
Have you shot a K20d and 5D2 back to back and compared the results?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-29-2009, 07:11 PM
|
| |
Hmm, we have a contender for the new street cam. Kx with a 40/2.8 would be just about perfect. I don't care about AF points showing in the display, and it looks like this will spank any of the u4/3 cameras. Interesintg...
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-28-2009, 12:55 PM
|
| |
You have selective reading. If you look you can find people hammering on Canon for everything including the situation in Tibet. You will also find Canon apologists. No different from the Pentax world.
People started complaining about the 7D AF even before the camera was out. Canon has also been lambasted for "ancient" AF on the 5D2, the 1D3 "abomination", etc. And whenever a new Nikon comes out, there are the obligatory, "Canon better get their act together or I'm leaving..." posts.
You are noticing human interwebs nature, not something brand-specific.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-28-2009, 08:37 AM
|
| |
WHy is a K20d your "dream camera"?
The main reason to get a second brand is if there is particular glass you want to use that isn't offered by your main system. Or if there is some feature that you really want/need. I'm shooting Canon right now and if I had spare money around would get a D700 and a few lenses just for shooting stupid low light. I still want a "small" system and really none of the Canon crop bodies send me so I'll end up with either u4/3 or mirrorless APS-C unless I decide to get a Kx and a ltd prime lens. But I have specific needs/goals that I'm trying to fulfill.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-28-2009, 12:29 AM
|
| |
well, that's a big issue, and was a main reason I switched. I wanted to be able to shoot 3200 and 6400 without losing sleep. Both the 5D2 and D700 allow that. I was generally ok with 1600 on the K20d and K7.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-27-2009, 09:20 PM
|
| |
Kinda hard to say as I didn't shoot them back to back. I did shoot the K20d and 5D2 back to back and it was kinda like night and day wrt speed and accuracy (especially in low light). This was using single/center point with both.
I recall the K7 was better than the K20d especially in low light. But my memory guess would be that the 5D2 is still faster than the K7. The USM lenses are certainly faster than the SDM - no contest there. In ultra low light both will hunt, but that is comparing fast glass on the Pentax (f1.8) to slower glass on the Canon (f4).
K7 will outperform FPS but I don't shoot that way so a non-issue for me. But I'd have to say that AF on the 5D2 is better than K7. But the K7 is totally viable.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-26-2009, 01:12 PM
|
| |
I would buy a Ricoh APS-C camera. They likely will get it very right.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-25-2009, 10:24 AM
|
| |
I knew I could trust Samsungian to do the cost analysis for me, so I'll focus on usability and other issues. He always saves me work :D
When I decided to go FF, I had some very clear objectives. First was good hi iso as I shoot low available light a lot. Second was the ability to crop and still print large. Unfortunately those both favor different choices (D700 for first, 5D2 for the second).
So, then it comes down to individual choice. Ergonomics are important to me, and I hand carry for long periods so the body has to feel right in my hands. I found that the D700 to feel more solid, but there is a ridge in the finger tip area that I don't really like. Some aspects of the buttons and menus I don't care for on the D700, but nobody gets this perfect. I wasn't a fan of Canon's approach at first.
I shot both the D700 and 5D2 a couple of times at my local shop along with my K20d for comparison. I then took the files home and pixel peeped to my hearts content, and performed some of what would be typical PP.
Then you have to consider what glass you're likely to want to shoot. With Pentax I liked fast primes, but frankly neither Cannon or Nikon has anything like the ltd primes. But by contrast some of their zooms are pretty amazing, and there are some incredible primes as well. They are just bigger and more expensive (some) than Pentax. I wanted IS/VR in as many lenses as I could get as I'm used to it and shoot handheld/low light a lot. This was where Canon won imho. The "kit" 24-105/4IS is way better than the Nikon "walkaround zoom." For the 24-70, neither have IS, and the Nikon is about $500 more. Nikon also doesn't have anything like the 70-200/4 IS (relatively small/light but high quality longer zoom - like the 50-135*).
In the end, having the 5D2 feel better in my hand and the glass choices for what I wanted tipped the scales towards Canon. After I bought it I wondered if I would have been better off with the D700 which does have about an extra stop of hi iso performance and "better" AF for tracking, etc. But I don't really shoot tracking stuff, instead used to single/center point. If you read the forums, some people claim the 5D2 has "terrible" AF, and rail against Canon for it. In my experience, it is just another example of forum whining by most of the users. The extra MP of the 5D2 help a lot with cropping, and also help to equalize the hi iso issues. I can shoot 3200 without worrying, and 6400 works in a pinch.
Right now I have a few L lenses that cover most everything: 16-35/2.8L II, 24-105/4L IS, 70-200/4L IS, 135/2L, and a 50/1.4 that was under $400. Not thrilled with the 50 but it is ok for the money. The 70-200/4L IS is worth the price of admission imho...stellar lens.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-24-2009, 10:08 AM
|
| |
Funny, after reading a few threads on flash at a Canon board I'm considering a 580 as well. I traditionally have hated flash, but as I find myself in more "proper" shooting situations where I can use it (ie I'm either shooting interiors or the subjects are part of a planned shoot) I can see the utility. And with Canon it seems the flash works fine.
I didn't really consider the 70-200/2.8 because it is too big/heavy for walkaround. The f4 version is incredibly sharp and highly portable for what it is.
Still not sure on 50/1.2. The 24-105 actually is a pretty decent lens, and I can shoot that wide open to good effect. Still no substitute for when you want narrow DOF.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-23-2009, 10:10 PM
|
| |
I think that is the case for most every tattoo
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-23-2009, 10:06 PM
|
| |
I've read the mixed reviews on the 50/1.2 but there are a couple of things involved in the decision. First is weight - the 85 is a tank and the way I use/carry the camera that makes a difference. Second is that I find the 70-200/4 IS to be *so* good the only thing the 85 gets me is a razor thin DOF and a little better bokeh. For my uses, the IS makes up for most of the 1.2 vs 4.0 difference (knowing I don't need to freeze fast action.
I would like a 24-70, but without IS I can't see a huge difference between it and the 24-105. Yes, a little less distortion and more isolation, but the IS, for what/how I shoot, is a big deal. I've already found that with the 135/2. I shot it back to back with the 70-200 and in some of my typical low light situations the IS saved the shot.
I'm seriously thinking of the new 100/2.8 IS macro, as I miss my old Nikkor 105/2.8 micro.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-23-2009, 05:35 PM
|
| |
Thx. The 85/1.2 is the only one on that list I'm interested in and I think I'd prefer the 50/1.2. Frankly the 70-200/4IS is to good I have a tough time rationalizing another lens in that FOV range (though f1.2 is attractive...wish it had IS). The 300/4IS is probably my next purchase, and I'm also interested in the 100/2.8IS macro.
I think everyone is waiting for the 24-70/2.8 IS, but I wish the 35/1.4 had IS. One advantage with Pentax...don't have to worry about whether or not they make a particular lens with IS.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-22-2009, 10:39 PM
|
| |
I have shot a GRD2. I love Ricoh but I don't really see the world at 28mm. I'm interested to see if the GX300 comes out, and there also are rumors of Ricoh making an APS-C sensor small cam. It is hard to beat my DLux4 for small sensor at the moment...there really isn't a compelling competitor that gives significant advantages. The X1 still has my greatest interest, in part because it is rumored to have little/no AA filter. And while 35mm isn't an "ideal" FOV for me, if the glass is up to real Leica quality and the sensor is good, the almost perfect UI makes a package that is hard to beat...as long as one can swallow the $2K price tag.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-22-2009, 04:44 PM
|
| |
Looks good. Doesn't feel good. Simulation isn't the real thing...and I design simulations ;)
What is interesting is that I ran LS in GT before I did in person. It actually didn't help at all, and in fact may have had some aspects of negative training. However once I ran the track in person, I was much better on the game.
The problem comes in the amount of physical feedback that you use when driving at the limit. The visual cues (which simulation does well) diminish in comparison to the physical cues (which simulation does poorly or not at all).
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-22-2009, 04:20 PM
|
| |
Are the samples raw files or jpgs? imho jpg files mean very little.
I've actually shot EP1, G1 and GF1. Of all three I like the output from the EP1 the best, but none are in my bag at the moment. Right now u4/3 occupies an interesting niche and it really depends on what your needs are. I'm holding out for a compact APS-C because I haven't been happy with the Panny u4/3 files.
I'm close to picking up an S90 though as I'd like to have something *really* compact that still shoots raw. I haven't handled a G11 yet but it seems significantly bigger.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-22-2009, 04:17 PM
|
| |
I've raced Laguna Seca on Gran Turismo and in person. Unfortunately one has very little to do with the other. Simulation sucks...but is a hell of a lot cheaper, especially if you overcook turn 9 :D
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-21-2009, 07:08 PM
|
| |
Who's actually done the test? You go from Ned saying it "might not be up to the task" to a factual pronouncement. A little disingenuous I think...
|
