vandit

<p>As an addendum, i just noticed that the OP has mentioned he is a perfectionist. </p>

<p>I dont know in what sense he is using that term, but if his sense of perfectionism includes indulging in the sort of exercise posted a page or 2 earlier (shooting buildings and then looking at the photos at 100% for technical imperfections), then i concede that my advice is going to mostly irrelevant (I only look at 100% to see if the focus is correct. I have never in my life checked corner sharpness of any photo. Etc. etc.). </p>

<p>Following the advice of the more technical-oriented members may be a better option, in that case.</p>

<p>"I guess Ansel Adams was amiss taking his seminal photographs of Yosemite with an 8x10 view camera."</p>

<p>Really? You think that one example of a person shooting large format, back in the era when the technology gap was much larger, is a sufficient answer? </p>

<p>What about all the many superb landscape photos that have been produced after that, with 35mm cameras - would, say 5 Nat Geo photographers shooting 35mm be equal to 1 Ansel shooting LF? What about the fact that the gap between the various small-format cameras in 2016 is orders of magnitude lower than the gap between LF and 35mm back in those days? </p>

<p>Your statement esseentially only males the point that back in the days of Adams, there was a significant gap in technical quality between large format and 35mm. I am at a loss to understand how that is relevant to this discussion today, other than an attempt to take things out of the context of this discussion and make this into a photographic version of a debate on how many angels can dance on a pinhead. </p>

<p>I reckon Moonlight over Hernandez would be just as amazing if it was shot with a 16MP Fuji or a 42mm Sony or a Canikon in 2016. The additional megapixels of a Sony isnt what would make it better, but the composition and Adam's post-processing. </p>

<p>And I will repeat: I have yet to see a photo, either on Photo.net or elsewhere, where i have felt "ooh, this is a great shot, but an additional 10 megapixels would taken it from good to great"</p>

<p>If you feel differently, that is fine. You are entitled to your beliefs and your 20lb backpack - there is no need to go about trying to prove that your opinions are objectively better. </p>

<p>Interesting thread - I recently decided to get a Fuji system as an alternative to carrying a Canon system for general photography, precisely b/c i found that carrying even a 17-40, 24-105 and 70-200 around all day was too much work. </p>

<p>So I ended up with a Fuji XT1, 16/1.4, 23/1.4 and a 35/1.4. </p>

<p>I opted for Fuji b/c of the way it is set up - as a camera, not an electronic box. I like having all the controls at my fingers, instead of looking at the menu, and while i havent quite acquired the same swift reflexes with the Fuji as I do with the Canon, i am a lot closer than with other cameras.This isnt my first tryst with MLCs - I had a Panasonic GF1 when it first came out. Gave it away b/c it was about as ergonomic as dried dog-poop. The camera was an impediment to seeing photos.</p>

<p>And honestly, I see the same issue with the Sonys (well, that and the fact that a comparable Sony FF MLC kit isnt appreciably lighter than a DSLR kit). I am sure they are technically great - but ergonomically, they are lacking. And all the resolution and measurements and specs in the world are meaningless if you end up fighting the camera when you are taking prints. And yes, i realize that someone else may find the Sony to not be as much of an ergonomic disaster as me - if so, have at it.<br /><br /><br>

Re resolution - no one is arguing that more resolution is better, helps with cropping, etc. etc. But I'll also submit to you that no otherwise-great photograph has ever failed b/c of a lack of resolution in the details. The aesthetic elements of a photograph are what matter - every single time. Sure, all else being equal, more megapickles are always nice to have. But all else is rarely equal. Give me a camera that fits my shooting style and gets out of the way, and i have a tool that actively helps my photography - the less time i spend fumbling with the camera, the more time i can spend on my subject.</p>

<p>I actually had no idea how many megapixels the XT1 had when i bought it. I have an X100 (the original) and i dont know how many megapixels it has either. I dont care. And i am not a tech-hating Luddite, btw - I just think that at this stage of technology, megapixels are more or less irrelevant. </p>

<p>So all of this is a long-winded way of repeating that old wisdom - go handle the cameras and pick the one that feels best in your hands (that's also what helped me pick the XT1 over the XT10 and the EM-Ds). </p>

<p>There is no point buying a camera based on specs or lens resolution tests - in the real world, it is going to make no noticeable difference (no one ever looked at a photo and said "great shot, but it would have been better if you shot it with lens Y instead of lens X). <br>

If you are shooting wildlife, you should care about AF speed. For street, landscapes and travel - pretty much any camera these days is going to be competent enough.<br>

So buy whichever camera feels best in your hands, and whose interface/working quirks suit your shooting needs. <br>

I could never shoot with that Sony - it feels like an electronic gadget, not a camera and for whatever reason, that comes in the way of my photography. So i went with a Fuji system last week: was planning to get the XT10, but that was too small in my hands, so XT1 it was. Lens resolutions, image quality pixel peeping, etc - none of these even remotely entered into my equation.</p>

<p>Amazing. Almost 20 replies and only 2-3 actual answers to the OP's question....<br>

To the O: I havent gotten one yet, but based on my research, will be picking one up by end-Jan or so. As far as I can tell, it appears to be a very worthwhile upgrade to the 5D and has comparable/slightly better noise than the D3 when comparing identically-sized images (ie, D3 upressed to 21MP). Since my target output is a print, this is a more useful metric for me.<br>

Cheers,<br>

Vandit</p>

<p>I found a new problem with my cameras - they dont take photos with the lens cap on. What a horrible defect this is - even a pinhole camera can do that. What is Canon doing? And dont you Canon fanboys come here and try to defend that.<br>

"Yet here are Canonites defending seeing the banding on the newest, latest & greatest $2700 price tag Canon 5D Mark II."<br>

Yes - heaven forbid that anyone try to defend a camera that exhibits a problem in a scenario which would virtually NEVER apply in the real world. <br>

"Dave, I don't have a digital setup. I shoot film & was trying to justify switching but am unable to given the latest performance reviews of the 5D MII."<br>

So stick to film.... I dont mean to be rude but what is the point of griping about this? If you are trying to find out the cause of the banding, that is one thing. But going on and on about the defects of the 5DMk2 - when it has been pointed out several times to you how contrived the scenarios are, during which these so-called defects become apparent - is a bit pointless. And if you are just not happy about Canon's implementation - email Canon. <br>

Giampi was spot on the money here. If someone cannot take good photos with a 5DMk2, they should probably consider painting or some other hobby. <br>

Vandit</p>

Yep. I have sold my 40D and am waiting for the 50D. Extra resolution is nice, extra stop or two of ISO performance even

better.

Vandit

Well, it is faster but at a less extreme focal length. That isnt quite the same thing.

Interesting day of releases today - the Leica "large sensor" DSLR, the DP2 and the Oly M4/3rd body... good stuff :)

Vandit

Mmmeeeh. I dont pixel peep and photozone.de isnt a website I ever care to look at. MTF charts exaggerate real world

differences, IMO. For me, crappy AF is a far bigger problem than whatever miniscule IQ differences there are in these

lenses. I think most people would be hard-pressed to notice a difference one way or the other in real-world prints.

Re bokeh - to me, it is going to be a function of not just the lens but also the lighting. Looking at the bokeh of one lens

in isolation makes it hard to isolate what caused the result. I've seen good and lousy bokeh with virtually all lenses.

Anyway, to clarify - I dont mean this as a defense of the 24-70. I dont make it, I dont sell it, so it makes no difference to

me one way or the other what others think, nor do I care to convert others to my point of view. :) I'm just putting forth

my 2 cents about bokeh and MTF charts and all that.

Cheers,

Vandit

I had the Tamron 28-75 - optically great but the AF (or what passed for one on it) drove me nuts and I sold it off. I wish

Tamron would do something about their AF, b/c their optics are great (I also own a Tamron 180mm macro which I use

entirely in MF mode - it too has that noisy hunting thing going when you switch to AF).

I am surprised by your assessment of the 24-70/2.8 - let's just say it differs significantly from mine. But each to their

own, I guess.

The good thing is that we are definitely spoiled for choices now....

Vandit

Peter, I meant "put a Nikon mount on the D60 body" - not "modify a Nikon body". That should work without feedback - my

EOS fires just fine with Nikon lenses mounted on it via an adapter. Removing the EOS mount and putting the adapter

directly in place should be more of the same.

Regardless, good luck with the project. Keep us posted on how it goes - it certainly sounds like a fun exercise :)

Vandit

Bill, I am not sure I follow. In your first post, you say that you dont need the resolution of the 5D2. Then you say that you

prefer the greater resolution of the A900 (although I am not sure how great a <15% resolution increase really is, in practical

terms).

As for 12 min clips - a lot of people shoot short clips and put them together into a cohesive video. 12 min of unedited,

continuous footage is a lot.

Vandit

I am not sure on this, buy I do recall reading that FD lenses have focusing issues on EF mounts - the FD to EOS

converters usually have some glass in them as well, which acts as an effective TC. That is something you'll have to

contend with.

Why dont you put a Nikon mount on the EOS instead? That'd be a fun project and would get you working focus to boot.

And you can break the hearts of both Canon AND Nikon fanboys with your blasphemy :)

Vandit

Bjoern -

First off, if you are just learning to dive, I would suggest waiting a bit before buying a housing for the 5D. Diving with a

housed SLR is not a trivial thing - it challenges your diving skills and situational awareness in a way that you simply will

not be ready to handle as a new diver. I say this as both an underwater photographer and a fairly experienced dive

instructor.

Second, before making the plunge, consider what sort of diving and photography you plan to do. I have an article on this

subject here:

http://www.diveindia.com/uwphoto/dslr_or_compact.html

Now, re housings - the brands to consider are Ikelite at the entry level range; Aquatica, Sea&Sea, Hugyfot in the mid-end

range and Nexus, Subal in the top range, Ikelite makes the housings of polycaronate while the others are all aluminium

(including Sea&Sea). Material isnt a big thing - choice of ergonomics is. I find Ikelite boxes to be terrible for

photograph - the controls are awkward and hard to reach.

With the aluminium cases, ergonomics tend to be a lot better. The more expensive housings are a little smaller and fit

a little better.

Another factor to consider is availability and prices of ports and accessories. I use Aquatica and the main reason I went

with them was that all lenses can be used with just 2 ports - a flat port for macro and a dome port for wideangle - using

spacer rings. Other brands may require different ports for different lenses, which can get awkward for traveling. Lastly,

prices of various accessories - which are bordering on felony already - vary significantly between brands.

Backscatter is a good source, as is Ryan at reefphoto.com. Yuzo at info@naturephoto.co.jp is another good person to

buy from. A 4th choice is David at scubacam.co.sg (maybe com.sg?).

I would *not* buy in Thailand, We have a trade account for dive gear there, and still prefer to buy retail elsewhere - the

reason being: prices are very high, stocks are limited and selection is poor. Buy from one of the 4 sources above and

have it shipped to wherever you are.

For used gear and more info on all things u/w photo related, try www.wetpixel.com.

Vandit

Look, you can argue about the efficiency of social spending all you want, but that doesnt make it correct to start giving

kids freebies. There are plenty of agencies which do stellar work - next time you are in India, drop me an email and I'll

put you in touch with them. And you are aware that begging is actually a very big organized industry, right?

Yes, beggars will be begging, but you ever wonder why they throng onto foreigners so much more? Ever see them act

like that with Indians? I remember hikes in remote parts of the Himalayas where, 10 years ago, kids were happy to see

you and wanted to chat. Now, after less than a decade of those routes opening up to tourists, they come with their

hands sticking out, the first things out of their mouth being "money/sweets". Why do you think that is?

And then people wonder about coming to India and being mobbed.... just last week, I was in Delhi and noticed a few

street kids *mobbing* these 2 hapless tourists who had absolutely no idea what to do, but who were very uncomfortable

with the pushing, pawing and demands for money. How do you suppose these street kids learned to associate tourists

with freebies?

And this is not just an India thing. There have been numerous studies documenting the ill-effects of tourism, and giving

freebies is on top of most lists of irresponsible behavior. Don't take my word for it - hit Google and do your research.

Here's a few to get you started:

http://news.mongabay.com/2006/1127-interview_greenwald.html

http://www.responsibletourism.org.nz/travellers/index.html

http://www.selectiveasia.com/responsible-tourism.aspx

Just because you think it is ok to do so doesnt make it so. Like I said, it may make you feel better and certainly, if 1

person is to give a gift to a few kids, it isnt the end of the world. But the problem is, it isnt 1 person. A lot of tourists do,

and generally with the best of intentions. And the result is not good.

Quite frankly, there really is very little to debate here. You are simply wrong in your assertion that this is acceptable.

I realize that my posts may come across as being overly aggressive to you. Be assured that I really dont mean it as a

personal attack.

It was nice to hear about someone taking a trip to India where they tried to be a participant, rather than a voyeur. But

this is one of my hot buttons - I have seen far too many previously-untouched places deteriorating because of well-

meaning actions such as this. And some of it is guilt, because when I too was one of the people who shared my hiking

rations with the kids in the Himalayas.

Vandit

Go to Nehru Market. Any taxi driver can take you there. That's the place to get all things computer-related. It is about 20

minutes from Connaught Place, and you'll get much better choices & better prices there.

Vandit

Well, I have a problem with:

"the little, cute, begging kinds are not just pretending - them and their entire extended families live in rooms smaller then

a bathroom in an average house in the States. it's good to buy some chocolate and just give it to them."

No. It is definitely NOT ok to buy some chocolate and give it to them. It may assuage a visitor's conscience that s/he

is doing something useful for the children, but:

(a) you really are not doing anything useful and worse,

(b) you are teaching the children that foreign tourists are a good source of freebies. This is bad for the next tourist who

comes along and who gets harassed, and it is further propagates a culture of dependency.

I run trips to various parts of India and I have seen the harmful effects that well-meaning tourists have when they start

giving out pens, money, sweets, etc. Dont get me started on this. There is a reason that EVERY source of

responsible travel urges you to avoid practices such as these.

If you want to contribute, there are plenty of social welfare agencies who will can use your money and put it to better use

(such as medicine and essential supplies).

I dont meant to come across as overly harsh. I am glad you enjoyed 4 months in India - by the sound of it, you made an

effort to connect with the country, which a lot of people forget to do in their hurry to see the sights and check off the

lists. But please be a little more aware of the social consequences of some of your actions.

Vandit

Probably not, but atleast it will AF. Can you imagine trying to shoot manual focus video with a handheld camera at f2.8 (let

alone 1.4)? That is a joke.

Vandit

Well, Nikon released a rose-pink version of their highly-regarded ED50 scope. It was about 30 pounds cheaper than the

regular one and apparently, sold quite well (there is a multi-page thread dedicated to it at Birdforum).

So why not a pink camera? Would match well with the scope :)

Btw, can we start an official "What lens for the 50D" thread?

Vandit

There is 1 big reason why Canon will compete with the 1Ds3: Nikon is soon going to release a D3x or whatever, based

on the 24MP Sony sensor (and they will probably do so 1 day after the 5D replacement release, given recent history).

So at that point, Canon needs to release their answer to this body - as no way do I see them sitting back and handing

over the resolution edge to Nikon so meekly. So in their product blueprints, they have a 1Ds4 in the works already.

Now what does reduce the business equation when it comes to releasing a 21MP 5D replacement with the ISO

6400/12800 options:

PROS: Keeps the FF bodies one big leap ahead of all of Nikon's bodies, and prevents haemmorraging

CONS: Cannibalize sales of the 1Ds3, which are already getting munched on by both the D3 and the D700 - this is not

as bad as it may seem, because you can bet they'll sell more than 1 5D2 for every 1Ds3 they dont sell

From an economics point of view, no doubt they'd prefer not to cannibalize, but NOT competing with Nikon for fear of

internal cannibalization is very poor business sense - they'd rather have people stay in the Canon fold than defect over.

And make no mistakes - a $3000, 21MP FF body is a swift and decisive kick in the nuts to both the D3 and the D700,

and will not only staunch the defection but reverse the tide (I am sure the plan is for the 1Ds4 to do to the 24MP Nikon

what the 21MP 5D2 will do to the D3/D700).

Lastly, from a corporate point of view, Canon HAS to respond with something intimidating and earth-shattering, which

demonstrates what they are capable of... they have lost a lot of face in the past season, and will want to gain it back. I

fully expect them to do their best to achieve this.

Vandit

PS: To argue that the 5D is a poor seller is simply laughable. You dont launch a product and give it a 3-year lifespan if it doesnt sell. It

flies in the face of all business logic. The 5D was a revolutionary camera when it was launched and even today, 3 years later, it matches

the latest 12MP FF cameras in IQ at up to ISO 400. There really isnt a whole lot more to say here.

Lowepro's customer service, the few times I've had to use it, has been exemplary. They've couriered me spare parts via

Fedex to India at a cost of over $100 for no charge when I had a problem with their belt bag while on a trip.

It is unfortunate that the bag broke, and hopefully, they'll fix it. But I dont think they will fix the lens. That is pretty

standard - most warranty provisions cover just the product sold by the company and do not cover other damages or

costs incurred due to failure of said product. For example, if an airlines cancels a flight and I miss a vital meeting, they

will not reimburse me for the business cost of that missed meeting. Same principle here.

I own both Lowepro and TT and am affiliated with neither - and while TT has some nice designs for traveling with gear, I

think the Lowepro bags are better designed to keep your gear safe. I use TT to shed some weight in my carry-on bags

and to keep them only moderately above the weight limit. But I really miss the extra locking facilities and padding of the

Lowepro bags.

I can understand your being hissed off with Lowepro. However, I encourage you to look carefully at both TT and

Lowepro before deciding on your next bag. Don't make a hasty, reflexive decision. Both brands have their pros and

cons, you need to decide what matters most to you.

And reliability, IMO, is a non-issue. My Lowepro gear has been abused in a way few people abuse their kit (50+

countries, lots of rough travel, heat, rain, dust, bovines, chickens, dogs and more), and has shrugged it all off. When I

care about protecting my gear, Lowepro gets the nod ahead of TT.

Ye gods, I sound like a Lowepro shill. Hey LP, if you are listening, I could use a Pro Trekker :)

Vandit

The principle of "it is your work of art, do as you please" is certainly a cornerstone of how one chooses to treat their

image.

However, art does not exist in a vacuum and people do have certain perceptions, etc. as to what is and what is not

acceptable. I just wrote a blog entry on this a couple of days ago here which I feel is germane to the topic:

http://www.vanditkalia.com/VanditKalia/Blog/Entries/2008/8/30_Why_digital_manipulation_matters.html

I'd be interested in hearing what people think of it.

Vandit

Just manage the stuff that affects your images - ie, sensor dust. Everything else is par for course. Cameras are meant to

be used - they should accumulate dust, dings, scuff marks, etc. if they are being used to the fullest.

If you are having serious problems, visit the Canon service center in Gurgaon (Delhi) - they have superb service and will

sort out your camera while you wait.

Vandit

If you are snorkeling and you want to do breathhold dives, you want the smallest camera/housing setup possible, to reduce

drag when underwater.

Go with one of the new Oly waterproof mjus. The camera is small, the housing is small and the camera is waterproof in its

own right, so when you flood the housing, you'll likely be able to save the camera.

Vandit

IIRC, there is a decent camera shop across from the FNAC on Placa Catalunya. There is also a dealer down the Ramblas,

near the statue of Columbus.

Vandit