| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/14/2014 01:31:38 PM · #26 |
all the files are that large now, its the MP count, sure you can shoot smaller, the camera will have that option, but im not sure why you'd want to, you can always down save to a smaller file size and blow away the Raws after you edit.
the raws out of my litle sony rx100 p&S are 25mb... :) |
|
|
|
08/14/2014 03:06:25 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by Mike:
I'm pretty sure you need to use the new STM lenses to get video AF. So none of your lenses will autofocus video.
there may be only 11 AF on the 6D but all are cross type and the center is sensitive down to -3EV! |
Ackkk. Totally missed that about the lenses! Can you explain the advantage of the 6D's AF points? I don't think I realized they were different types. |
|
|
|
08/14/2014 05:21:14 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by JRalston:
Ackkk. Totally missed that about the lenses! Can you explain the advantage of the 6D's AF points? I don't think I realized they were different types. |
A "cross type" AF point is sensitive to both horizontal and vertical edges, as opposed to just one of those. The center-point sensitivity on the 6D is pretty much class-leading. I can attest that it will focus on stuff I can barely see in the viewfinder.
Disclaimer: I don't shoot lot of moving subjects. I have done some shooting in AI Servo with the 6D, however, and found that it tracks quite well. I have only done this using the center point, however, so I can't attest to performance with more active points.
|
|
|
|
08/17/2014 01:45:41 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Mike:
all the files are that large now, its the MP count, sure you can shoot smaller, the camera will have that option, but im not sure why you'd want to, you can always down save to a smaller file size and blow away the Raws after you edit.
the raws out of my litle sony rx100 p&S are 25mb... :) |
I tend to save every single thing I shoot, that is why I ask. It is probably totally unnecessary and a waste of space. LOL |
|
|
|
08/17/2014 01:46:08 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by JRalston:
Ackkk. Totally missed that about the lenses! Can you explain the advantage of the 6D's AF points? I don't think I realized they were different types. |
A "cross type" AF point is sensitive to both horizontal and vertical edges, as opposed to just one of those. The center-point sensitivity on the 6D is pretty much class-leading. I can attest that it will focus on stuff I can barely see in the viewfinder.
Disclaimer: I don't shoot lot of moving subjects. I have done some shooting in AI Servo with the 6D, however, and found that it tracks quite well. I have only done this using the center point, however, so I can't attest to performance with more active points. |
Thanks for the clarification. :) |
|
|
|
08/18/2014 01:34:16 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by JRalston:
I tend to save every single thing I shoot, that is why I ask. It is probably totally unnecessary and a waste of space. LOL |
I save RAW files for everything as well, with the exception of stuff that I find, on import, that is hopelessly OOF, mis-exposed, or otherwise of no real use to me. The fact that I use Lr to import and preview makes this culling process painless. I normally don't cull more than 20-30% of what I shoot, though, so I still save a large fraction of what I shoot.
I figure storage is cheap and if I ever want to re-edit something I really want to start with the original RAW file.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2014 11:46:24 AM · #32 |
If the choice is between 60D and 70D, go with the 70D if you can at all afford it. I just bought a used 70D from my local brick & mortar camera shop for $899. Primary reason I'd say to go with the 70D is that it has many, many more focal points than the 60D, plus several types of focusing, plus it is all much faster. I can't speak to the FF discussion.
On the computer side, IF you go with a Windows PC, just be thoroughly aware that Windows is going through a time of transition right now, and can't make up its mind what it wants to be when it grows up. As a result, it does many things much more poorly than it used to. IF you go Windows 8, I strongly suggest a touch screen - not sure where that will take you in the area of good quality monitor & price, but I'd guess it isn't pretty. XP is old enough that you'd really need to upgrade the OS, and Win 7 is a good choice, but it isn't where MS is going in the future. I'd suggest a 256G SSD as the main drive, with a 3T storage drive internally. The SSD makes a PC oh so much faster - as you've probably seen on the MACs.
The USB external high capacity (3T) drives are great for storing archives of pictures, but keep in mind that you need to have a good backup of your archive - otherwise, if your external HD dies, you are hosed!
I have had a poor experience with the WD Live Book network drive - virtually useless due to transfer rates. Access to a networked drive from any pc on your local network is nice, but if it can't maintain a network connection long enough to transfer 4G... Sigh!
Low light - the 70D allows you to select 12800 ISO, which was high enough to allow me to shoot f/7 and 1/120 inside a roller rink (lights "down") with decent, if high grain, images of my kids roller skating. If you want to badly enough (and are willing to live with the graininess), you can go up another level to 25600 ISO.
From reviews online, they're saying you can go up to 6400 ISO with good results, with the first onset of graininess setting in at around 1600.
FWIW - IMO The tools just keep getting better and better. You're going to love the newer cameras.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2014 01:27:06 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by dtremain:
The USB external high capacity (3T) drives are great for storing archives of pictures, but keep in mind that you need to have a good backup of your archive - otherwise, if your external HD dies, you are hosed! |
Huge drives are a pain to back up. I'd rather get two smaller drives and duplicate the data; ideally keep one off-site and back it up every week or so. Or use one hard drive and back up to CD/DVD every time you have a disc-worth of data accumulated. I have smaller files (my camera only captures in JPEG), so it is pretty simple for me to copy files to a CD every time I fill a 500MB card; until the CD is made I keep the files on both the card and the hard drive, so there are always two copies on separate media. As a bonus the files burned to CD should be valid as DPC "originals" ... ;-) |
|
|
|
08/19/2014 02:58:24 PM · #34 |
Hee hee, I would get about 32 RAW files on a CD! Of course I could use DVDs, but even that would only get me 220 images!
|
|
|
|
08/19/2014 03:53:02 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Hee hee, I would get about 32 RAW files on a CD! Of course I could use DVDs, but even that would only get me 220 images! |
Time to get a Blu-Ray writer, or more hard drives.
There is a reason the cost to maintain archival "original" footage for a Hollywood movie shot 100% digitally is estimated to be about ten times the cost of a similar picture shot on film. Digital photos are not "free" ...
BTW: one set of a single Landsat image (package of all bands at full resolution) runs over 1GB (I think put a link in the Astro thread) ... lotsa fun (and bandwidth) ... :-)
Message edited by author 2014-08-19 15:56:23. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/24/2025 01:11:29 PM EDT.
