SteB

SteB

Lives in United Kingdom North Shropshire, United Kingdom
Joined on Apr 3, 2007

Comments

Total: 189, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Week in Review: Hungry Birds (6 comments in total)
In reply to:

HSway: more photos from the Sigma 100-400…

I'd say the use of this Sigma for wildlife (a broad term) will be peripheral and occasional. The bird samples show nicely how the lens renders but the segment of wildlife zoom was transformed by the 160-600 lenses. A 100-400 this small is actually a rare travel zoom alternative to 70-200/4 zooms. - The compactness the defining factor of its use (and the speed).

I disagree completely. Both primes in 300-400mm range and something to 400mm zooms are amongst the most popular and common used lenses by both bird and wildlife photographers in general. I actually had and used a Tamron 150-600mm, before that a Sigma 50-500mm, but prefer my current Canon 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS II zoom.

This is not just a personal opinion. You only have to look at how many people are using 300mm f4 - 400mm f5.6 primes, and something to 400mm zooms when there are gatherings of bird or wildlife photographers, and on forums, to know that the idea 150-600mm zooms have made 400mm obsolete for wildlife and birds is a mistaken idea.

Whilst not massively smaller, it's far easier to carry around my Canon 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS II around than the Tamron 150-600mm. A lot of birders are still using something to 300mm zooms, and this Sigma 100-400m is a useful step up from them, whilst only being a bit bigger. I think it will be very popular for birds and wildlife.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2017 at 13:51 UTC
On article Sigma 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM sample gallery (142 comments in total)
In reply to:

SteB: I think it was a mistake to use the Canon 5D mkIV for this sample gallery. Put very simply, I should imagine a very large proportion of the buyers of this lens will not be using it was a camera like the 5D mkIV, or full-frame. It gives a misleading impression of a lens like this when a gallery is shot with a full-frame cameras. Crop sensor cameras put far more stress on the lens with their higher pixel density.

What's more a large proportion of those using this lens for wildlife, will be using a crop body either because of the effective reach, or because crop sensor bodies are cheaper and this is a lower cost 100-400mm type zoom than those offered by the camera manufacturers.

It would have been far more appropriate to shoot this sample gallery with something like an 80D as it would be more relevant to the prospective purchasers of this lens.

Yes. That class of camera. Sure some people will use this lens on a full frame camera like the 5D mkIV, but I think this lens will be used more on crop bodies, than full-frame cameras.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2017 at 00:42 UTC
On article Sigma 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM sample gallery (142 comments in total)

I think it was a mistake to use the Canon 5D mkIV for this sample gallery. Put very simply, I should imagine a very large proportion of the buyers of this lens will not be using it was a camera like the 5D mkIV, or full-frame. It gives a misleading impression of a lens like this when a gallery is shot with a full-frame cameras. Crop sensor cameras put far more stress on the lens with their higher pixel density.

What's more a large proportion of those using this lens for wildlife, will be using a crop body either because of the effective reach, or because crop sensor bodies are cheaper and this is a lower cost 100-400mm type zoom than those offered by the camera manufacturers.

It would have been far more appropriate to shoot this sample gallery with something like an 80D as it would be more relevant to the prospective purchasers of this lens.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2017 at 22:28 UTC as 20th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

SteB: I'm trying to get my head around a 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 being seen as a substitute for a 300mm f2.8 prime. I love my Canon 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 IS L II, but I wouldn't see it as a substitute for a lens that is 2 stops faster. They are very different types of lenses.

@Eric Hensel

In the costing, the Canon 300mm f2.8 L IS II at $6100 is replaced with the 100-400mm f4.5-5.6.

The article actually states:

"However, these numbers are skewed by the fact that we are comparing a $6100 Canon tele prime to a $2500 Sony tele zoom."

It doesn't matter how the others try to see it, 2 stops faster is 2 stops faster. I don't see any claims that the new Sony 24mp sensor is 2 stops better than the sensors of the 1DX or D4/5.

The Canon 300mm f2.8 L IS II is also one of the sharpest lenses you can get and probably the sharpest longer telephoto. It performs excellently with the 2X extender, where it's still only f5.6 as opposed to f11.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 20:51 UTC

I'm trying to get my head around a 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 being seen as a substitute for a 300mm f2.8 prime. I love my Canon 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 IS L II, but I wouldn't see it as a substitute for a lens that is 2 stops faster. They are very different types of lenses.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 16:50 UTC as 137th comment | 7 replies
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (766 comments in total)

I think it's great that Sony have developed the A9. The potential is there for mirrorless cameras. The A9 sounds like a great camera. However, it's being massively over-hyped as a DSLR killer, especially as regards the Canon 1Dx mkII and Nikon D5. Take lenses for sports shooters and wildlife photographers. Canon has a 200mm f2, 300mm f4 and f2.8, 400mm f2.8 (+ f5.6), 500mm f4, 600mm f4, 800mm f5.6 and 200-400mm f4 as well as the 2 longer focal length Sony lenses has - all native and with no frame rate issue. The A9 headline feature of 20fps has a number of caveats. It also remains to be seen how an electronic shutter actually performs with high speed action.

Sony selling this body at this price point maybe a problem. This electronic technology should soon be much cheaper per unit, which means Sony will have to cripple subsequent cheaper mirrorless cameras. In theory an A7II replacement could have had much of this technology as a simple incremental upgrade as the technology improves.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 11:26 UTC as 169th comment
In reply to:

FrankS009: Canadians have nothing to be proud of. Japanese Canadians also were interred, and often their property was confiscated.
F.

"Interred" means placing a dead body in a grave or tomb. The term is interned.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2016 at 22:04 UTC
In reply to:

Kiwisnap: Don't get the first and second place - nowhere near as good as several of the others placed lower IMV.

I often don't agree with the images that are picked as winners, and think some of the commended images from which they are picked are better. However, that is the nature of competitions. There are no objective criteria where you can judge one image to be better than another - especially when all the images in the final pool are outstanding. Personally I think you can only say an image works very well, or that another image doesn't work. You can even go further and say an image is outstanding. However, when you are presented with a number of outstanding images, selecting one as the best will always be somewhat arbitrary.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2016 at 09:10 UTC
In reply to:

Jack Hogan: What are PP constraints? The bear image is eerie, dramatic and beautiful at the same time but imho diminished by the HDR processing.

This is a link to the rules of the competition. I note the rules have changed somewhat in that you are now allowed to use focus stacking, HDR, stitched panoramas etc. However, there is a sensible general rule of authenticity. You are not allowed to add or remove elements.
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit/wpy/competition/adult-competition/rules.html

I think the idea that HDR etc, or changing tonal values is somehow unauthentic is entirely mistaken. Our eyes see scenes somewhat differently to the way digital cameras capture scenes. In very high contrast light or very low contrast light the generalized parameters of processing applied in all digital cameras produces images that are not at all how we perceive the scene with our own eyes. In other words it is out of camera images that are often unauthentic because they apply general processing parameters to non average light.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2016 at 09:03 UTC
In reply to:

SteB: Odd pricing and release strategy. In reality, aside from a little upgrade in body materials, these are just technology upgrades to the A6000. This is not really a competitor to the Canon 7D mkII or Nikon D500, despite the price because it lacks the rugged bodies, lenses that this sort of user would want, and the rest of the system support these users would want.

@Richard Butler

As I said, the "lenses that this sort of user would want". Typically the user of the class of camera the A6500 places itself with it's price and specification is going to be a wildlife, bird or sports photographer. Both Nikon and Canon have an array of lenses for this type of photographer, and then there are all the independent lenses. This is very limited for the A6500, both native and adapted A lenses. Likewise the large bodies of the 7D mkII and D500 are easier to use with the type of lens this photographer will use.

The A6500 has got some nice videography features, and other features such as the IBIS. However, it doesn't have a specially designed mirrorbox that the 7D mkII and D500 has, which go some way to explaining their price.

Personally, if the A6500 had been the A6300, at the price of the A6300 I'd have considered one. It was after all what was expected.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2016 at 20:43 UTC

Odd pricing and release strategy. In reality, aside from a little upgrade in body materials, these are just technology upgrades to the A6000. This is not really a competitor to the Canon 7D mkII or Nikon D500, despite the price because it lacks the rugged bodies, lenses that this sort of user would want, and the rest of the system support these users would want.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2016 at 15:56 UTC as 248th comment | 4 replies
On photo Orange-tip Butterfly in the Nature's Colour Palette challenge (9 comments in total)

This is a technically excellent photo of an Orange tip, with great light and a very good plane of focus. However let me make a few positive suggestions for improving it. I think the framing is a bit too tight, especially the wing tip at the top right, and it could do with a bit more space all around. If it has been cropped in post, you can just return to the original. Nevertheless if as shot it can be fixed by adding canvas to enlarge the frame size. The smooth oof green background than then be pasted or cloned into the empty space of the added canvas.

I don't personally think adding canvas to an oof background is interfering with the integrity of the photograph as no important picture element is being changed - you are simply creating more space for the frame. Even if you decide to leave it as it is, it is still worth experimenting with this approach.

I don't think the orange wing tip is an anti-predator measure as the female lacks it. Congrats on the photo and placing.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2016 at 21:41 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

PhotoRotterdam: Leica is doing a Hasselblad

You beat me to it. At least they didn't put a wooden grip on it.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 18:34 UTC

Thanks for this test. I think it confirms that this feature is not as useful as it first seemed, as the image is noticeably softer when the dual pixel RAW is adjusted to the max, which isn't much. Currently with my macro images I sometimes use local wider pixel radius high pass filter sharpening if the eye of an insect is minutely off the plane of focus, and I think this probably works better (for my use anyway).

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2016 at 08:55 UTC as 31st comment
On article Accessory Review: Peak Design Slide Camera Sling strap (148 comments in total)
In reply to:

SteB: I haven't gone Peak Design yet for my straps. However, I was thinking about changing all my cameras and binoculars etc, to Peak Design, simply because it's possible to use one or two straps to fit them all. I'm mainly interested in how well they perform, rather than hypothetical concerns like the strap adjustment buckles scratching equipment.

My idea of using it would be so I could detach the strap and store it separate. I do a lot of all day photography in Summer, and when you're out all day straps tend to get a bit damp with sweat, and storing them with your cameras and lenses isn't such a good idea. I find it's sweat and skin residue that tends to attract fungus on bags and straps. So it's probably not a good idea to store any strap being worn all day with your cameras and lenses, to protect them from fungus.

To me the logical place to store this type of quick detaching camera strap would be in the mesh outer pockets most camera bags have.

My purpose is for wandering around nature and macro photography. This past year I've been covering a big site, a national nature reserve, which takes a few hours to walk around the perimeter. In other words it is not massive, but it still takes most of the day to cover a lot of the site.

I forgot to add that what I like about the Peak Design idea is the Swiss Arca compatibility. I do a mixture of long zoom telephoto photography, macro flash photograph, and tripod natural light photography - along with some general landscape/habitat shots.

So the ability to mount the camera on a tripod without removing a connector is important. Several lenses I use have tripod mount lens collars, but not all. In other words sometimes it is necessary to directly mount the camera on a tripod.

The type of set up I have at the ready depends on what is around or the conditions. Something which isn't easy to predict in advance.

Link | Posted on May 1, 2016 at 18:28 UTC
On article Accessory Review: Peak Design Slide Camera Sling strap (148 comments in total)

I haven't gone Peak Design yet for my straps. However, I was thinking about changing all my cameras and binoculars etc, to Peak Design, simply because it's possible to use one or two straps to fit them all. I'm mainly interested in how well they perform, rather than hypothetical concerns like the strap adjustment buckles scratching equipment.

My idea of using it would be so I could detach the strap and store it separate. I do a lot of all day photography in Summer, and when you're out all day straps tend to get a bit damp with sweat, and storing them with your cameras and lenses isn't such a good idea. I find it's sweat and skin residue that tends to attract fungus on bags and straps. So it's probably not a good idea to store any strap being worn all day with your cameras and lenses, to protect them from fungus.

To me the logical place to store this type of quick detaching camera strap would be in the mesh outer pockets most camera bags have.

Link | Posted on May 1, 2016 at 15:43 UTC as 65th comment | 4 replies

I assume that the 0.49x magnification is a 35mm film (FF) equivalent, because 0.49X magnification on a 1 inch sensor would be super close. Is it a 35mm film equivalent magnification?

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2016 at 20:28 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

SteB: Just an observation. I think to an extent this situation has been set up by Dpreview highlighting ISO invariance and DR as something which was lagging behind on Canon, and where Sony and Nikon were ahead of the curve. In other words the implication was that Nikon DSLRs were better because of the generally better DR of their sensors. Whereas of course better has always been a relative term, and there is much more to a camera and a system than just this particular test.

Now that Canon DSLRs are starting to apparently use a new generation of sensors with on sensor ADC, this scenario is no longer so clear. It is almost certain that the new Canon 1DX mkII will perform much better on Dpreviews DR and ISO invariance tests, than the D5. This will obviously upset the meme that Nikon DSLRs have more advanced sensor technology, and Canon lag behind. So we can expect a bit of strife on Dpreview, as system fans slug it out.

@Richard Butler

I think it's just the way system fans interpret reviews, rather than the way these features were highlighted in Dpreview. Because this aspect was given such prominence, I think fans weren't really reading the rest of the reviews.

Personally I'm not into my system is better than your system arguments as I'm more interested in taking photos, and just see cameras as tools with a range of pluses and minuses. But as you're probably well aware, if the 1DX mkII has better DR than the D5, and I think it is certain as the 80D seems to have the edge over the D5 at lower ISOs, the Canon fans will probably respond with glee. So expect a rocky ride over the next few months as system fans slug it out.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 21:52 UTC

Just an observation. I think to an extent this situation has been set up by Dpreview highlighting ISO invariance and DR as something which was lagging behind on Canon, and where Sony and Nikon were ahead of the curve. In other words the implication was that Nikon DSLRs were better because of the generally better DR of their sensors. Whereas of course better has always been a relative term, and there is much more to a camera and a system than just this particular test.

Now that Canon DSLRs are starting to apparently use a new generation of sensors with on sensor ADC, this scenario is no longer so clear. It is almost certain that the new Canon 1DX mkII will perform much better on Dpreviews DR and ISO invariance tests, than the D5. This will obviously upset the meme that Nikon DSLRs have more advanced sensor technology, and Canon lag behind. So we can expect a bit of strife on Dpreview, as system fans slug it out.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 14:20 UTC as 65th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

sandy b: A couple of Notes. Worst NIKON. Better than the 6D, which is considered in Canon land a very good camera indeed. Probably as good or better then ANY Canon, up to this year. For a sports/Photojournalist camera that may be the best in the world at what it does.
This is a conscious decision by Nikon based on who buys this camera. Not by those who would never buy this camera for any reason, much less a Nikon, and who wouldn't know how to expose or push a shadow if it hit them in the face.
And considering that Nikon sells 4 other cameras that are in the top 5 of DR, a D5 owner probably has that covered. But then most of you complaining the loudest probably don't even have a camera as good as Nikon DR.

I'm not getting in any Nikon bashing because I don't believe in fanboyism, and I've got every respect for the Nikon system.

However, keeping the argument on the straight and narrow. When it comes to pushing the shadows at lower ISOs the D5 is marginally better than the 4 years old 6D, which is due for an update, and clearly not as good as the 80D.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 14:08 UTC
Total: 189, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »