MT, I have a lab at my local photography store, they do E6 and are very good..have not been in contact with them lately, so just in case, ware is Dwaynes...
CHOLLY wrote:
NO ONE thinks your gear is crappy. Hardly; your Canon gear is pretty good stuff.
NO NONE has said otherwise.
Do NOT confuse reporting statistics with criticizing your camera or brand.
In fact, I think that's why you Canon folk are all in a huff; because you think DxOMark is criticizing your gear. Well they aren't and neither are we. Just pointing out that OTHER gear can be had for less that scores as well or better than the new 7DmkII on DxO's battery of tests.
If I didn't have my Sony... and Nikon weren't around, I might be a Canon shooter for wildlife. It's good stuff. ;)
NO ONE thinks your gear is crappy. Hardly; your Ca... (
show quote)
Well I guess I got a little huffy.. Actually I'm one who doesn't get all huffy about this report, they were just reporting what the experienced with the camera... Actually I read a small review by a pro photographer a month or so ago on the A77MKII and it was good. Now today I had some time (rare as it is) to read allot of the posts about this camera, It is truly impressive, it appears to be a great camera. I also read about your Topsy derby incident, well, that's a testament to how well this camera is built, and all for a great price, again impressive.. On another note, I have been a fan of Sony video for the past 30+ years now and that is all I buy because they are sooooo GOOD...so it is no wonder this camera is as good as it is. I have the original 7D and feel I'm being left behind, so I will have to move into the Mark II version in the not to distant futere....
[quote=CHOLLY]:roll:
See... this is the problem with you fanboys; you are ignorant of the facts but think you know everything.
The Sony is ALL magnesium. And yes... I HAVE dropped my A77. Broke the lens and cracked the flash mount, but the camera itself is 100% fine.
You THINK the 7DmkII is the better camera, IN SPITE OF THE NUMEROUS POSTS PRIOR TO YOURS THAT YOU DIDN'T BOTHER TO READ PRIOR TO YOUR COMMENT.
Man no need to get all HUFFY over this....and no I did not read the prior posts because I DI NOT HAVE TIME TO, UNLIKE SOME PEOPLE WHO CAN SPEND ALL DAY READING EVERY POST. I think the A77MKII is a fine camera but then again so is the 7DMKII... ALSO, I AM NOT A FANBOY!!! there are several good cameras out there I just happen to shoot Canon and I am not about to change brands now with all the Canon glass I have even if another brand is the Holly Grail...
/quote]
As my ole redneck daddy used to say "boy, sometimes it's better to open your ears than it is your mouth."
Understand?
I would not want to be a redneck but being in the High End Audio industry for 40+ years my ears are finely tuned and I can hear just fine thank you..
I do not care who's camera is better, I'll will keep my crappy gear and shoot excellent images!
I stated earlier the Sony A77MII was not a metal body, it is. that was before I checked the facts..so my bad on that. So it appears that the price for the A77 is a very good price, but is it as rugged as the 7DII?
pmackd wrote:
At around $900. new the Sony A77 MkII and Nikon D7100 are true bargains right now. At $1800 the Canon 7DMk II appears overpriced. But some long time Canon users will buy it anyway.
Are you kidding me!!! Sony may be improved in some areas but it is not a pro built body its plastic, the 7DII is a pro built (metal) body and that does not come cheaply..drop that Sony one time add the price of repair and your at the cost of a 7DII...
nsilberma wrote:
Thanks for your comment. I am not looking for a $500 camera. 7D was a great camera for it's time, though still usable for certain types of photography, it's got its limitations that puts it behind the technology and and performance curve.
The MK ii has some nice enhancements like the dual pixel AF and in general better AF functionality, 65 points cross type AF, 10 fps, weather sealing, dual memory card, borrows some features and performance from 1D and 5D and more. The place where I am in doubt is in the misses area: No touch screen, no wifi, noise or SNR performance (slightly better than 7D), Dynamic range and Image quality (though subjective).
I will look at real pictures taken in different situations by others to figure out my trade-off point.
Thanks for your comment. I am not looking for a $5... (
show quote)
Here's the thing. you cannot have WIFI in a pro quality Magnesium body, that body is metal, you can only get WIFI on plastic bodies. If you want touch screen get the 70D the sensor is nearly the same as the 7DII with out all the other pro quality options, oh and yes it has wifi and touch screen.. I hear it is a pretty good camera, and about $600 less then 7DII.. We all want our cake and eat it too, but in this case it isn't going to happen..
Outstanding series Carolina, I understand sharp images for still shots at 640 SS but your action shots are fairly sharp at this slow SS for action shots... I have the 400 5.6L lens and no IS on my 7D and am shooting at around min 1000 to 1600 SS. So in low light and low SS these look great... congrats on your new body, NPI..
John
Basil wrote:
I have a Vivitar for my 7D and quite happy with it. Plan to get Vivitar for the new 7DM2 as soon as it's available.
I have a Vivitar grip on my 7D also, it seems to be working fine for now... However I have one little nit pic, the door on it closes OK but it slides from side to side ever so slightly, and I mean slightly.. With that said the CANON grip on my 40D is rock solid no sliding one way or another.. I believe the Canon grip for 7DII has extra buttons on it compared to third party grips, at least that is what i read.
Dngallagher wrote:
Once I import a raw image into Lightroom, that is where it stays.... I do not monkey with the files and folders outside of Lightroom, and the only thing I export is a completed JPG or TIF.
If I want to go back to a 5 year old raw image as it came from the camera it is a single click away....it is also available as an image at any point in the editing process, for example, uncropped or cropped since all edits in Lightroom are totally non-destructive.
Yup same for me...All my raw files stays in Lightroom.
jaygreen55 wrote:
Lightroom 5 has 2 sharpening presets; one for scenics which is amount 40, radius 0.8 and detail 35 and one for faces which is amount 35, radius 1.4 detail 15 and masking 60. I start from there and add more as needed. If you press the alt key (on windows) as you move the sliders you get a mask over your photo which helps you see the effect of what you're doing
The clarity slider also contributes to the sharpness of the photo and I tend to use a high level of that for landscape and architecture but a negative amount for portraits where too much clarity can be very unflattering (especially for middle aged and older women)
I also use the adjustment brush to apply sharpening and clarity to selective areas of the picture. Sometimes I want the detailed portion of a picture to be extra sharp while leaving areas such as the sky untouched
Finally it depends on how much noise is in the picture. Sharpening accentuates it and needs to be offset by noise reduction which defeats the purpose of sharpening in the first place Masking helps with this
If you google "Sharpening in Light room tutorial" you will find countless video and written guides to sharpening for whatever version of LR you have
Lightroom 5 has 2 sharpening presets; one for scen... (
show quote)
I concur. this exact process works for me as well..
Well of course if one has a high gloss shiny surface there will be some reflection..now the opposite of this would be a dull flat black matte surface, there will be no reflection how can it be unless there is a high powered BEAM of light on it and even then if there is a reflection it would be very slim.. But for ambient light purposes and using it to direct light, I'm not buying it as a reflector..
Rongnongno wrote..
Black reflector, indeed to add contour to a light or translucent object
There is no such thing as "black reflector", a black absorber ok....yes this device will change/ add contour to light.
RichieC wrote:
You can use to reflect black into an object or block a light source, however, by its nature of being black ( absorbing light) it does not reflect. So in what case are you referring? Placing over the top of a highly lit person to allow light from the side to illuminate the subject, or placed in such a way to give contour to a reflective subject?
Yes I have used a black collapsible hoop to block unwanted light. A boom is very desirable when over the top of a subject or you'll get the feet of the assistant or the base of the step ladder, etc etc.
You can use to reflect black into an object or blo... (
show quote)
When I read the tittle, I thought, what black reflector, by nature black DOES NOT reflect it absorbs... Oh btw I use acollapsable hoop it change/absorb light.