March 05, 2015, 09:43:15 AM

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 - well_dunno

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 24
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T5i Leaks
« on: March 19, 2013, 08:05:33 PM »
if one boils the cam in water blended with some chemicals it improves sensor performance I hear...  ;D

now tell us how your brain makes the connection from boiling a LENS to SENSOR performance.

the same way comments on the link make the connection to D600? Lacking sense of humor, are we? :)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T5i Leaks
« on: March 19, 2013, 07:36:15 PM »
if one boils the cam in water blended with some chemicals it improves sensor performance I hear...  ;D

I kid I kid!

Let's wait until we see some images? Now that DR wars seem to be over, I will be happy to do some bashing  ;D


Third Party Manufacturers / Re: errr
« on: March 19, 2013, 09:02:54 AM »
Yep - boiling D600 to fix the sensor dust issue entertained me quite a bit last night...   :D


Lenses / Re: Suggestions for Zoom Lens for Canon Mark 5D Mark iii
« on: March 18, 2013, 01:40:34 PM »
+1 for the 70-200.

Also, as it was mentioned earlier, Tamron 17-50 is for crop cameras even though it has EF mount. Hence it is not an option for 5D mk3...


Lenses / Re: best NON L long lens
« on: March 12, 2013, 08:27:55 PM »
prime or zoom, doesnt bother me, probably 300mm+ on a full frame.

Sigma 120-400, 150-500 or Tamron 200-500? Not sure about the USD price but I dont think they are significantly cheaper than the 10-400 L...


Technical Support / Re: A Film Look
« on: March 12, 2013, 12:50:47 PM »

I don't have first hand experience either with the exception of trying it at a store but resolution characteristics of the Tamron seem to be it's weakness, especially at the long end. One cannot expect anything stellar out of a super zoom at that price point though... I would expect the 24-105 to be significantly sharper in the comparable focal lengths...

Lenses / Re: Photozone spanks the 24-70 F4 USM L IS
« on: March 04, 2013, 05:58:56 PM »
Which of those options offers a high quality weather-sealed compact mid-range zoom with built-in macro?  None.  There are substitutes, perhaps better for some applications, but no one-lens equivalents.

Good reasoning but does being a unique one-lens option provide that sort of value?   One could think of it in the opposite direction too; it is only f/4, not a true macro at 0.7, and neither much (if) better than the competition optically.

After all, I guess we all agree,  it is worth for those who purchase and not worth for those who do not. If the market consists mainly of the latter, the price goes down and vice versa... This lens might become the kit lens replacing the 24-105 eventually which would be unfortunate for us who like the 24-105 and would like to see a v2 of it. I recall even calls for a f/2.8 version of it...


Lenses / Re: Photozone spanks the 24-70 F4 USM L IS
« on: March 04, 2013, 03:15:43 PM »
This lens was DOA @ 1499$. IQ wouldn't of mattered at that price.
Cannot really see the point with this lens, one could get tammy 24-70 + 100 mm non-L macro lens for that amount and these two are f/2.8 lenses after all...


Video & Movie / Re: Timelapse of the Aurora in Finland
« on: March 02, 2013, 06:23:11 PM »
Hi Kernuak,

Amazing... Also checked the images - great stuff...

in "Road Aurora" was it in part red or is it an illusion due to the main colour being lime?


EOS Bodies / Re: Will the 70d have a new sensor?
« on: March 01, 2013, 06:01:42 AM »
I voted "yes" but I am highly inaccurate in my guesses about what Canon will do so prepare for diappointment  ;D

Technical Support / Re: Weird bhavior of my EF 24-105 L
« on: February 25, 2013, 05:58:04 AM »
The manual states that IS should be switched off when using a tripod, so my results and therefore your result reflect what the manual says. 

Thanks for your reply. I have read the manual and it states that IS should be switched off on a tripod in order to preserve battery power, because the IS on a tripod is not useful. But it is really weird to produce such a blur, isn't it ?

I think that either handheld or not, the IS should help achieve better results with the low speeds and not make things worse, so sth is not OK here.

I will agree with many others that a service is in order if this is occurring for handheld shots . With regards to IS on tripod, 24-105 does not sense tripod and might try to correct camera shake causing blurry images instead (not always but quite frequently in my experience).


Lenses / Lens purchase strategy
« on: February 25, 2013, 05:51:21 AM »
Hello all,

I imagine many of us are having a kind of strategy to purchase lenses that cover our needs for the shooting style we have. My approach was to get f/4 zooms (back problems) and combine them with fast primes for low light and better sharpness (even though latest f/2.8 zooms seem to nullify the latter) when needed. Then, probably some of us are basically going for more of a lens to lens evaluation for the purchases, considering + & - of getting in in addition to or replacing one or more lenses in the current lineup.

What is your approach and why?


Lenses / Re: 70-400/ f4.0-5.6 Zoom ... Canon, where are you?
« on: February 20, 2013, 07:45:26 AM »

And one could argue it is Sony who finally woke up as Canon has had that zoom on the market for more than a decade...if anything, Sony is the one catching up here! And whats more, even Sony opting for the white barrel smacks of a Canon they say, imitation is the best form of flattery. ;)

Sony had the version 1 of this lens on the market for a couple of years now though. Flattery remaining all the same regardless ;)


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 24