December 21, 2014, 07:12:45 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Cinto

Pages: [1] 2 3
Lenses / Re: What happened to the "flare-cut diaphragm"?
« on: November 04, 2014, 10:54:47 AM »
Has a list of lenses with flare-cut diaphragms. Some current lenses on there are the 17-40L, 135L and the 180L macro.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II
« on: October 29, 2014, 03:51:08 PM »
Here's the correct link to the patent (the patent link above points to a 55-250mm patent).

The patent shows 10 elements in 8 groups, compared to the current 35/1.4L which has 11 elements in 9 groups. 

I like my 35L, and I'd probably preorder a 35L II if/when one comes along.

Hi Neuro,
What are the weak points in current 35L? I would like to add fast 35mm in near future.


Slow and poor low light focusing. It is after all much older technology...
Actually it focuses faster and more surely in low light than the Sigma(I've owned both). It does have tons more CA and is less sharp over the outer 2/3's of the frame(35mm)

I think its from the flash as Images taken from the exact same place only show it when the veiling flare becomes intense.

Sorry i was away, I was using an after market flash extension cord, I was around 120th I think and yes I had a B&W pro filter on.

A reflection of the diaphragm blades. 5D2, off camera flash.

Reviews / Re: Canon EOS 7D MK II Field Review of THE APS-C DSLR KING .
« on: October 09, 2014, 12:10:11 PM »
Chuck Norris doesn't shoot photos anymore, the day he did they almost went extinct.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: An introduction and a dilemma
« on: October 05, 2014, 03:29:50 PM »
One suggestion I would make is to give Magic Lantern a try. It will expand the creative possibility's of your camera for free. A used 17-40L can be picked up fairly cheaply right now to replace your 10-22 if you go full frame and want an ultra wide. Your 85mm can be used quite well with extension tubes if you want to go macro cheaper. When I get stuck, I like to try some niche photography\video stuff, time-lapse, Long ND or night exposure, focus stacking(which is quite easy with photoshop), HDR(Magic Lantern dual-iso works pretty good for single shot HDR). Right now I've been doing a lot of scanning of flowers with a Canoscan 8800F, mixing back-lit transparency scans with regular flatbed ones. Next I think I'm going to try some cinegrams.

Good Luck.

Macro / Re: Flower macros
« on: September 18, 2014, 12:55:20 AM »
1 more ;)

Macro / Re: Flower macros
« on: September 17, 2014, 11:11:00 PM »
I got inspired to do another tonight. Cheers.(Canon 8800F scanner)
P.S. Thanks Mr Bean.

Macro / Re: Flower macros
« on: September 17, 2014, 12:32:33 PM »
It's a scan with a Canon 8800F scanner. Scanned twice and overlayed, once in flatbed mode then in transperancy mode.

Taken with Magic Lantern Focus stacking, 5D MarkII and Sigma 150(non-IS). It is quick to do a stack, probably good for insects.

That is an incredibly good Image, well done, honestly one of the best I've seen on CR, completely wowed me.

EOS-M / Re: EOS-M and Magic Lantern
« on: July 18, 2014, 01:53:04 PM »
It's pretty buggy, and the interface turns off after 5 seconds but the Frames Per Second feature is useful, plus focus peeking, zebras

Taken with Magic Lantern Focus stacking, 5D MarkII and Sigma 150(non-IS). It is quick to do a stack, probably good for insects.

Lenses / Re: Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART questions
« on: July 10, 2014, 11:14:50 AM »
Some lens repair data. I have had both the Sigma and the Canon. I found the bokeh on both to be good for a wide angle but worse than most fast lens 50mm or above. The Canon has terrible CA and LoCA and not great aperture shape, the Sigma is nervous. The Canon focuses faster in good light and much faster in low light, in the dark I could get the Canon to focus sometimes, Sigma not as much. In decent light my Sigma focuses accurately(5D MarkII I mostly use centre point then crop, or slight recompose)The Sigma is sharper, noticeably. The Sigma "feels" well built and mine has been working just fine, but the Canon feels and works a little quicker and lighter in the field, plus it's weather sealed I think.

Canon EF-S and EF-M Lenses / Re: Canon EF-M 11-22mm f4-5.6 IS STM
« on: July 05, 2014, 05:26:13 AM »
I have been doing some night shooting with my 11-22. Compared to the 17-40 on a 5d2 it's a little sharper, but it doesn't deal with the lights in the frame nearly as well.

Pages: [1] 2 3