mrklaw said:

How did you get on? Some of my favourite shots were when I temporarily had a canon 100-400 at the farnborough airshow. Sadly my son couldn’t deal with the noise so we had to leave after about 15 minutes

Click to expand...

TFGB said:

I'll let you know tomorrow when I've had a butchers at the pics.

Big mistake taking a few bottles of wine with me...I started drinking early and was twatted by the time the Typhoon arrived lol. I'm just glad I didn't lose anything as I don't even remember getting home and that was apparently before 3pm! :/

Click to expand...

JadedWriter said:

Did you use a monopod?

Click to expand...

TFGB said:

No as I've seen other togs ditch their monopods at air shows out of frustration. Maybe okay if all you're aiming to do is take panning shots from planes at a relatively constant distance and height, but when planes are coming overhead and soaring skywards a monopod is more of a hindrance than help.

Click to expand...

JadedWriter said:

Ok this makes more sense. I just figured that's a lot of lens to be hand holding, but I know nothing about aerial photography.

Click to expand...

jokkir said:

Has any purchased any portable printers like the Instax one or the HP Sprocket? I was thinking of going to cons then selling on the spot photos to people who want it.

I was looking at this:
https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B01LBWEMP4/

Click to expand...

jokkir said:

Has any purchased any portable printers like the Instax one or the HP Sprocket? I was thinking of going to cons then selling on the spot photos to people who want it.

I was looking at this:
https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B01LBWEMP4/

Click to expand...

404Ender said:

I normally use my iPhone for day-to-day photos, but I take a Sony RX100 on trips with me. I want those photos to have GPS coordinates in the EXIF data just like those taken with my phone do. What's my best option?

Are there iOS apps that can sync up location to pictures by time? Would that drain my phone battery super quickly?

Click to expand...

RuGalz said:

I prefer using a standalone logger. Phone works but it will drain battery fairly quickly. Here are some examples of standalone ones: http://www.semsons.com/datalogger.html

I just turn it on in the morning when I go out and recharge it at night and geotag my photos in lightroom after I get back from the trip. I'm using AMOD 3080 (pretty old) that can save about 30 days worth of tracking.

Click to expand...

opticalmace said:

Fun little blind image test: https://www.dpreview.com/videos/9193994762/blind-portrait-shootout-sony-a9-vs-canon-1dx-mark-ii-vs-nikon-d5

My results:

1Dxii -

Spoiler

29

A9 -

Spoiler

24

D5 -

Spoiler

19

Kind of surprised me a bit which one I preferred.

Click to expand...

Bitmap Frogs said:

At the end of the day, Canon reigns. Unless you're Michael Bay and like people to look orange in which case get a Nikon.

Click to expand...

opticalmace said:

Fun little blind image test: https://www.dpreview.com/videos/9193994762/blind-portrait-shootout-sony-a9-vs-canon-1dx-mark-ii-vs-nikon-d5

My results:

1Dxii -

Spoiler

29

A9 -

Spoiler

24

D5 -

Spoiler

19

Kind of surprised me a bit which one I preferred.

Click to expand...

Bitmap Frogs said:

At the end of the day, Canon reigns. Unless you're Michael Bay and like people to look orange in which case get a Nikon.

Click to expand...

Bitmap Frogs said:

At the end of the day, Canon reigns. Unless you're Michael Bay and like people to look orange in which case get a Nikon.

Click to expand...

curiouscharles said:

meh, loves my Nikon gear.

but i under-saturate all my photos and just colour balance to my preference anyway.

[i've just always shot Nikon so i'm used to it]

Click to expand...

404Ender said:

Are there any iOS apps you'd recommend, or have you only really worked with standalone loggers?

Click to expand...

Astral/H3X said:

This discussion is funny to me as all the Canon lenses I've used were distinctly yellow.

Click to expand...

opticalmace said:

Fun little blind image test: https://www.dpreview.com/videos/9193994762/blind-portrait-shootout-sony-a9-vs-canon-1dx-mark-ii-vs-nikon-d5

My results:

1Dxii -

Spoiler

29

A9 -

Spoiler

24

D5 -

Spoiler

19

Kind of surprised me a bit which one I preferred.

Click to expand...

Miniature Kaiju said:

Canon's default color rendering pulls reds and oranges a tad towards pink, though. All that said, if you actually care about color rendering, you should profile your camera and that will make all cameras render pretty much the same.

Click to expand...

Ty4on said:

It can make a difference if the HW is different (no camera has perfect color representation) and for people with busy workflows it is nice to have less to care about.

Click to expand...

Astral/H3X said:

What are you guys referring to by profiling?
Isn't that handled by Lightroom automatically? Or are you talking about something else?

Click to expand...

Astral/H3X said:

This discussion is funny to me as all the Canon lenses I've used were distinctly yellow.

Click to expand...

While shooting Raw helps poor white balance issues, it’s not a panacea for a disagreeable color engine. Putting aside for a moment the convenience of using straight-out-of-camera JPEGs, Raw converters like Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) include camera-specific profiles that emulate the manufacturer’s various color modes, so if they’re not to your taste to begin with, the Raw conversions are also unlikely to be palatable.

Furthermore, ACR can’t emulate the multitude of non-linear, scene-dependent adjustments camera JPEG engines perform. Even the same colors are not necessarily processed in the same manner in a landscape as it is in a portrait. It’s hard for Raw converters to emulate these complex adjustments unless the manufacturer works directly with them to directly share what they’ve learned over decades of color research.

Click to expand...

opticalmace said:

Fun little blind image test: https://www.dpreview.com/videos/9193994762/blind-portrait-shootout-sony-a9-vs-canon-1dx-mark-ii-vs-nikon-d5

Click to expand...

StopMakingSense said:

D850 announced

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/dslr-cameras/d850.html

Click to expand...

captive said:

9fps? That's absurd. The processing on this thing has to be insane.

No compact flash is disappointing. But other than that looks great.

Click to expand...

jongkookie said:

Like sure Nikon is a little more

Spoiler

yellow/warmer

but I feel that a lot of people prefer a

Spoiler

warmer tone

anyway than the

Spoiler

cool tone

Canon has. It's actually pretty funny coz I could actually tell immediately which one was A9 and D5...

Spoiler

Sony in general is warm but not super warm like Nikon, though as RuGalz mentioned they can be interchangeable.

Click to expand...

StopMakingSense said:

Renting a Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art and Nikon 85mm 1.8 for the week for some art work for my wife. Already totes in love with the Sigma.

Click to expand...

LuuKyK said:

Guys quick question: given the choice which one would you pick? Canon 5D Mark IV or Sony a7R II? Iam struggling to decide which one is best even after doing a lot of research on both.

Click to expand...

LuuKyK said:

Guys quick question: given the choice which one would you pick? Canon 5D Mark IV or Sony a7R II? Iam struggling to decide which one is best even after doing a lot of research on both.

Click to expand...

giga said:

Nikon finally adopts an AF joystick. And illuminated backside controls is fantastic.

I would switch from Canon if I wasn't already so embedded. Not just lens collection. My workplace also uses Canon so it wouldn't be easy to switch. Let's drop that 5D4 price now, please.

How much are we expecting the D810 to drop in price?

Click to expand...

JadedWriter said:

I got my refurbished for about 2200. So if that becomes new price then that's pretty good. What does your work place have to do with this? You could technically sell most of your stuff for the Nikon offerings and just send your 35 into Sigma and they'll change over the mount to Nikon. I always find it weird that jobs or event shooters demand that you work in Canon when for the most part it's just a different type of file.

Click to expand...

giga said:

I guess it's not a requirement but it's convenient if I want to use some of the canon lenses or bodies we have in our studio for myself.

How did you swing $2200? I see it's 2400 now. Does Nikon have refurb sales like Canon?

Best equivalent for the Canon 17-40 and 85 1.8 in price and quality?

Click to expand...

LuuKyK said:

Guys quick question: given the choice which one would you pick? Canon 5D Mark IV or Sony a7R II? Iam struggling to decide which one is best even after doing a lot of research on both.

Click to expand...

Astral/H3X said:

So you’ve been trying to pick out a camera, not sure what to get, but you have heard of these hot new Sony and Fuji “mirrorless” cameras, eh? What makes these new Mirrorless cameras so popular? I thought DSLRs were better? All the pros use DSLRs right? Well, let’s go over what it means for a camera to be a DSLR or a Mirrorless (Mirrorless Interchangable Lens Camera, or MILC).
First off, let’s jump straight to this point: There is absolutely no difference in image quality between a MILC or a DSLR. None. Zilch. Nada. In fact, many MILCs have superior image quality to DSLRs (this is mainly attributed to the fact that everyone and their mom gets their sensor from Sony, and Sony saves the best for themselves). The only defining factor between a MILC and a DSLR is in the name… the Mirror. When a DSLR takes a photo, that mirror flips up out of the way, meaning that it has ZERO impact on the actual photo taken. All the same settings are there, all the same photos are possible, all of that is the same. The only things that change are the bits that happen before the photo is taken.
So what does change? First, foremost, and arguably most importantly, the viewfinder. A DSLR uses its mirror to reflect the light away from the sensor through a piece of glass that you look through – you see the actual light passing through your lens. With a MILC, instead, it hits the sensor directly, then reprojects that image from a little screen on the viewfinder.
So what are the consequences? Well, with a DSLR, you’re not looking at pixels. That can make the image clearer, and not prone to pixilation. In low light, *in general* (not always the case) a DSLR will fare better, as your eye will be able to adjust better than the camera. That’s not always the case, as the A7S cameras can fucking see in the dark because they are built from goddamn Predator technology.
Now, I can reasonably assume everyone has at least *used* a DSLR and has used a viewfinder, so it’s probably easier from here to describe an EVF (aka the MILC viewfinder) as a comparison. With an EVF, it is a *screen*, so it is done with, well, pixels. Imagine how your phone screen displays, but it’s coming through a viewfinder instead of just the rear of the camera. But, there’s some major advantages that come with using an EVF – First and foremost is exposure preview. What does that mean? Well, it means that you can see the effects of your exposure settings before you take the shot. With a DSLR, changing your shutter speed and ISO have zero effect on your viewfinder, so you’re left to either use the Light Meter and your imagination, or take a test shot. An EVF shows you, more or less, the photo you’ll get at the correct brightness, so it really helps to show you what effect the settings you have are making. Personally, I really loved learning on MILC, as I could really know what effect the shutter speed was having, or the aperture, etc.
This next point is mainly an advantage if you’re interested in vintage or manual lenses – namely, MILCs kick fucking ass when it comes to these. Firstly, a MILC can use almost literally any lens designed for any DSLR or Rangefinder camera. Found a random Canon AE1 in a garage sale? You can use that lens. Grandpa left you a Leica? You can use that lens. Have a modern Canon DSLR? You can use that lens. You can use fukken anything. It’s amazing. And not only that, but any manual focus lenses ARE BETTER on a MILC, because a MILC can use Focus Peaking to show you what’s in focus! Seriously, it’s amazing.
But it’s not all sunshine and roses. There’s no clear, flat out winner between MILC and DSLR. While MILC’s are a lot smaller body wise, lenses largely don’t get any advantage out of that – a 70-200mm 2.8 is, ultimately, going to be a 70-200mm 2.8 regardless of whether it’s made for a MILC or a DSLR. This is two fold – some people say that the gigantor lenses are better “balanced” on a large, pro DSLR body (think of a giant cinderblock, with a camera in it), and prefer that; it feels better in the hands to match a large lens with a large body. But, conversely, a 50mm prime can’t shrink down a pro DSLR body – but a full frame Sony camera with a 50mm lens on it is freaking tiny in comparison. Personally, I lean towards feeling that while a Sony camera with a pro zoom can become large, a pro DSLR can *never* become small, but this is just personal opinion.
Another plus to DSLR is that they have larger room for batteries – they put that size to work. They also only need to energize the sensor when taking a shot, which leads to further battery life. A DSLR will pretty handily have the advantage in battery life, and it’s not a small margin. On a MILC this can be *managed*, either by choosing when to have the camera on, and when to have it off, or by using the saved space to pack an extra battery, but ultimately if battery life is king, you’ll want to lean towards DSLRs.
Another plus for DSLRs is that they have an advantage in native glass. While MILCs can use fucking any lens they want more or less, they aren’t native – old vintage lenses obviously don’t have Auto focusing or other conveniences, and adapters for newer lenses are expensive and often not quite perfect. DSLR’s have been around for a long time, and have built up a collection of lenses for anything and everything, and have even had the time to become cheaper in most cases. As MILCs continue to thrive and exist, this advantage will start to wane however, and for *most* cases they’ll have a lens to suit your purposes – it’s mainly in the super zoom category that you’ll be left wanting on MILC side.
Autofocus is a tricky subject – MILCs are still very much in a rapid progression, so what was true two years ago isn’t true today, and AF is VERY much a prime example of this. You’ll REALLY need to view this on a case by case basis, as even just going from the A7II and the A7RII, there’s a large difference in AF capability. Just know that, unless you’re already used to pro DSLR levels of AF, you probably won’t be disappointed with MILC AF on the latest bodies. Hell, I think the A9 actually matches those blow for blow.

TL;dr
DSLR pros: lotsa (native) lenses, ‘more natural’ viewfinder, better battery, possibly better ergonomics when using large lenses
DSLR cons: Viewfinder doesn’t show how your settings affect the image, a DSLR can never be small, manual focus is a pain at best and vintage lenses don’t really work IMO
MILC pros: Near infinite vintage lens compatibility, viewfinder shows you your exposure, manual focus is piss easy
MILC cons: AF can suck on older (2~ years old) cameras, eats battery if you’re not careful, native lenses are still a WIP

Click to expand...

QualityPixel said:

I'd dare say Nikon is done with CF. The XQD cards are nice tho, really fast. Plus the 2nd card slot is SD which are common and cheap. The U3 SD cards are pretty quick to.

Click to expand...

StopMakingSense said:

Renting a Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art and Nikon 85mm 1.8 for the week for some art work for my wife. Already totes in love with the Sigma.

Click to expand...

captive said:

yea its just disappointing. I have compact flash for my d800 and i have XQD for my D500. Its just annoying to have to buy new cards when my compact flash work just fine.


the Sigma 35 1.4 is fantastic. Had it for almost a year now.

dont know what jadedwriter is on about, it follows my young kids just fine.

Click to expand...

JadedWriter said:

My 18-35 and 17-50 had god fucking awful AF on my D7100. They were pretty much only accurate stopped down to F4 with a flash. It's either that or they were slow or something cause I missed way too many shots during events with those things with the main offender being the 17-50. I traded those things in with no regrets. If the 35 is good then fine, but I think I'm done with Sigma.

Click to expand...

RuGalz said:

AF problem with Sigma is very lens and to some degree body specific. 18-35 seems to be problematic across the brands. That's just a problem with 3rd party lenses in general is that they are not official lenses and often are just pretending to be one of the OEM lenses so the communication between the camera body and the lens may not be optimal.

Click to expand...

JadedWriter said:

Makes sense. It got to a point that the only one that wasn't trash was their 70-200, though once I got the Tamron G2 it got shelved. So which Sigma lenses have the better AF accuracy?

Click to expand...