MAC

Lives in United States midwest, United States
Joined on Sep 5, 2001
About me:

Canon 7d2, SL1, + lenses-- Sports, Events, and Creative shooting

Comments

Total: 100, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

J A C S: "You don't get a significant improvement in AF performance,"

You do. For the same DOF (a.k.a. as equivalent shots), the AF is significantly better on FF. AF is not about tracking only.

"nor do you get the all-round improvement in image quality"

With fast primes and equivalent shots (when possible), FF creates crispier images. That is IQ.

Meant to say my T7i

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 17:16 UTC
In reply to:

J A C S: "You don't get a significant improvement in AF performance,"

You do. For the same DOF (a.k.a. as equivalent shots), the AF is significantly better on FF. AF is not about tracking only.

"nor do you get the all-round improvement in image quality"

With fast primes and equivalent shots (when possible), FF creates crispier images. That is IQ.

FFontes

Canons 16-35 f4IS goes for around $1000

Canon can push shadows by a few stops

Pushing shadows by 4-5 stops blows colors

How often do you push shadows by 4-5 stops and go 20x30 in print where you can see this improvement?

Most post web size where a few stop shadow push is not an issue for canon and in my case, I use my $699 T4i for scrapes with 10-18 stm that is on par with your low ISO dr

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 17:14 UTC
In reply to:

J A C S: "You don't get a significant improvement in AF performance,"

You do. For the same DOF (a.k.a. as equivalent shots), the AF is significantly better on FF. AF is not about tracking only.

"nor do you get the all-round improvement in image quality"

With fast primes and equivalent shots (when possible), FF creates crispier images. That is IQ.

To FFontes: and I'm a Canon shooter

Which Canon setup would I rather have for landscapes: an 80d + 10-18 stm or a 6d 2 + 16-35 IS?

When you put the L lens on the FF, IQ is better. Your DR obsession is only a feature that in a small % of cases matters

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 15:31 UTC
In reply to:

J A C S: "You don't get a significant improvement in AF performance,"

You do. For the same DOF (a.k.a. as equivalent shots), the AF is significantly better on FF. AF is not about tracking only.

"nor do you get the all-round improvement in image quality"

With fast primes and equivalent shots (when possible), FF creates crispier images. That is IQ.

For equivalence, imo, the distance from the subject needs to remain the same. Therefore different primes would be used and equivance is hard to measure. When using zooms to test equivalence, even the same zoom can perform differently in the zoom range. There is also the aspect that each body reacts differently to the same lens. Anyway, a general statement that is true is when you buy more expensive, heavier, L - EF glass designed for FF, that the combo bigger more expensive system is better in IQ. How much better though depends on each shot and the output
size.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 15:02 UTC

Canon lost my purchase of this camera with lame decisions: no dual slots; throwing what appears to be an intentional monkey wrench into the dr; the lame 1/4000 and 1/180 limits.
Your article is pretty good but needs more added on the better L glass designed for FF in the medium and wide range - if one is willing to spend the extra dollars on this EF L glass and carry the extra weight, then the system combination improves the overall IQ versus examining only the body alone

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 14:25 UTC as 71st comment

My Toki 10-17 FE was hosed

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2017 at 21:21 UTC as 18th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

J A C S: The biggest difference (for stills) is the lenses you can screw on them. For those who would use it with the kit lens only, as a P&S, the most important differences are WB, color rendition, and auto exposure.

Canons 10-18 stm, 24 stm, 35 f2 IS, 50 stm, 55-250 stm are all awesome for the $

Canon colors are the best

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2017 at 15:25 UTC

SL2 a good light weight backup. And a good primary when you want to travel light!

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2017 at 15:19 UTC as 49th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

brycesteiner: The Rebel T7i is quite a bit better IMO.

And for 1/3 the price! Likin mine

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 01:38 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Canon EOS 80D (264 comments in total)
In reply to:

TonyPM: The thing I Most like about the d7500 is the auto lens correction, to get better focused images. That, and the lighter body.

The 80d looks like a Great camera. I think it should be good for both stills and video, and having in mind all the new lenses that canon is coming up with for apsc cameras, its only going to get better.

But, the eos 77d, that is smaller and lighter, has just as good image quality if not slightly better or sharper. Same focusing system and newer processing unit. It might fall behind in some things more or less important to some people. Let's not forget it stabilizes video too..., still no 4k on apsc though.

But its cheaper.

Canons new rebel not only cheaper, but better focus in Live View

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2017 at 13:58 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Canon EOS 80D (264 comments in total)
In reply to:

Satyaa: "So, which is better? Well, of course it depends."
Thanks!!

Do lenses play no part in this discussion? For example, compatibility with Nikon's newer AF-P lenses is a requirement for good video experience. Similarly, on Canon side, the STM lenses are better suited for video than the older ones.

Again... "it depends"!

I find the comparisons within a brand useful... D7500 vs. D7200 vs. D500 vs. D5600, or 80D vs. 800D vs. 77D vs. 70D. Based on one's shooting experience and lenses in the bag, it makes sense comparing even a semi-pro with a starter camera or one step higher.

I don't find it useful comparing this way across brands. If this is meant for a beginner who has no background or lenses, then this comparison isn't complete for them to make an informed decision.

Agree, they ignore lens systems in these comparisons. You can't shoot a shot without a lens. They are hung up on dynamic range at iso 100 and minor differences.

Lens systems represent major impact, so comparisons should not be done across systems without including lenses

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2017 at 12:58 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Canon EOS 80D (264 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dante Birchen: Canon really needs to bring out a 7DMkIII with the new sensor

the 7d2 isn't a landscape camera needing dynamic range at iso100. The 7d2 has better high iso noise performance than the 80d with the newer canon sensor

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2017 at 12:32 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Canon EOS 80D (264 comments in total)

7d2 sports/action camera... and video dual pixel... not in same category. Sports photographers pay big bucks for just a few extra frames per second , Reviewers don't give that credit. Canon's rebel in same category as the Nikon. Also you haven't tested it yet, and are making conclusions. Canon's crop glass rules

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2017 at 12:04 UTC as 70th comment

expensive combo ($1500) imo

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2017 at 14:46 UTC as 35th comment

what? he doesn't shoot pro football with sony mirrorless? staff around here are gonna be mad ;)

Link | Posted on Dec 25, 2016 at 04:38 UTC as 9th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

t.c. marino: for those of you that didn't get the memo..the 1DXMK2 and D5 cameras are action/sports oriented cameras that will serve their intented markets EXTREMELY WELL,,it is a fact these 2 flagship cameras will outperform every other camera in regards to action/sports photography.How many mirrorless cameras do you see on the sidelines at NFL,MLB,SOCCER/TENNIS?,,NONE..For studio shooters/portraits/landscapes/still photography canon and Nikon offer other types of equipment that do a better job(canon 5dsr and Nikon d810)

your memo is spot on

Link | Posted on May 5, 2016 at 01:52 UTC
On article Newly enthused: hands on with the Canon EOS 80D (680 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Could this be Canon's first Gold Award camera on DPR in the past 3 years?

For video and the price, this Canon looks great. The new lens may be one I eventually buy when it is discounted. My 7d2 is still the better Sports, Action, and Wildlife camera. DPR doesn't know how to rate an artist's brush for what it is. They don't place high value on the difference between hit rates as well as 10 fps vs 7 fps. I have gorgeous 20x30's. 10 fps, joystick, af system, optical vf, price, lenses matter. 5 stop shadow pushing isn't something that makes the difference in most cases. A camera body doesn't take one photo one its own. Getting the shot with a great system is the difference. DPR doesn't rate the overall system, which is what really matters.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2016 at 11:33 UTC
On article 2015 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $1200-2000 (328 comments in total)
In reply to:

Henrik Herranen: The title for the last page is: "Which camera should I buy?"

Regardless of how good a camera is, how can you with clear conscience recommend putting money into a system that the manufacturer has abandoned, without even mentioning the fact? Yes, Samsung NX1, It's you I'm talking about!

Having zero consideration of a manufacturer's commitment to the camera system and lens selection they sell is doing a great disservice to Canon and Nikon, who have built camera systems and wonderful lenses for decades, and who will be there long after the little charlatans of the 2010's have disappeared.

agree, sink money into fleeting gear and it's gone in no time

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2015 at 13:15 UTC
On article 2015 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $1200-2000 (328 comments in total)

"DPR's Gold" doesn't translate into what one should buy imo...it's about the system when buying a camera that will last more than a fleeting moment in time

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2015 at 13:12 UTC as 29th comment
On article 2015 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $1200-2000 (328 comments in total)
In reply to:

sunjester: The camera you should buy at this price point is not the camera you have to put away when the going gets tough. It is the camera you pick up when the going gets tough.
It should be able to go out in the Arctic if it has to. It should be able to photograph your daughters high school soccer game, or your son's college football game. It should be able to do birds, wildlife, any event with action. It should be able to do a birthday party or any other aspect of life. Life is not always static.

It should have the choice of lenses to do anything you want. Be it macro of mushrooms or of deadly snakes. It should be able to do astrophotography or landscapes.

Dpreviews view of photography is too limited. Which seems to explain the fascination with specifications instead of a camera's overall usability. It makes for some really sad choices in each of the groups.

agree, your 7200, my 7d2 are great choices, they know fascination, but don't know real gold - it is the glass, and flash and support, not just a body alone...

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2015 at 13:02 UTC
Total: 100, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »