Considering Canon

Started Jun 4, 2013 | Discussions thread
AlterHase Regular Member • Posts: 119
Re: Considering Canon

Colin Franks wrote:

I suppose that my main disappointment is with the 100-300 lens. The other day I was shooting a Blue Heron at the beach, and took many shots at myriad settings (tripod).  Granted, this lens is known to be a little soft on the far end, but none of the images were tack sharp, and I wasn't happy with 'em.

I don't know a lot about your current equipment, but I know that shooting at 600mm FF equivalent focal length has its own challenges. I.e. given unfavorable atmospheric conditions it might be impossible to get a tack sharp picture even with the best optical system. In short: technique and experience of the photographer are a significant factor in this type of photography (not suggesting you're lacking either) - maybe more significant than the equipment?

I like to think that a 5D mkIII and a 100-400L or better lens will offer benefits in the AF department for wildlife or even BiF photography. Maybe also in the image quality department.

My 20mm/1.7 is an impressive little lens, and does well for its uses, but tell me if I'm incorrect in the following:
It seems that I see sooo many images (on the 'net) from the big bad-boy Canikons that just flat-out have an IQ that a M4/3 cannot achieve.  Yes, the M4/3s are a good little camera, but their sensor is considerably smaller.  And isn't there something to be said about the fact that Canon & Nikon are "camera" companies, and all the rest are "electronics" companies; or is that just not the case now-a-days?

Hmm, before considering the technical correctness of theoretically achievable image quality let me try to put some doubt into the statement that the images of Canikons on the net are better than M4/3s.

I think for every image that impress you with their IQ there are hundreds of the very same camera/lens setup that fail to impress. Have you looked for impressive images with your camera/lens combination? I'm sure they exist, too.

Also, there is a numbers game. Canikons make up the bulk of digital cameras with advanced image quality (trying to avoid the DSLR vs. mirrorless religious debate). Assuming an equal distribution of excellent photographers on all systems, statistically, that tilts the favor for finding a larger proportion of impressive images to Canikon.

Lastly, do you feel that you're able to achieve the best image quality that your current system is capable of. I don't mean this in a derogatory way, just from my own observation that I am (my style of photography is) mostly the limiting factor with my camera setup. If your answer if positive than I would consider an upgrade of camera equipment. If not, I fear that you might have the "grass-is-greener-on-the-other-side" syndrome. I am, like so many on this forum, fighting it regularly

Now, that being said, I feel that a Canon FF system offers advantages over a M4/3 system. In terms of usability, handling, speed, and image quality. All of this at a price.

I have a rather large printer. It accepts 54" wide rolls of media in the back, so I print some large canvas.

Congrats. Now, I'm jealous.

Thanks for the replies.

 AlterHase's gear list:AlterHase's gear list
Canon EOS 450D Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM +10 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow