December 21, 2014, 09:27:17 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 - Steb

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
Lenses / Re: Shootout: EF 16-35 f/4L IS vs EF 17-40 f/4L
« on: October 01, 2014, 03:49:34 AM »
He mentions needing thin UV filter preferably with double threading so lens caps stay on. But he doesn't recommend any.

Anyone know which brands/models work without adding to the vignette?

I can recommend the Hoya HD line of filters. They are very slim, don't do any vignetting and they work with the standard lens cap. AFAIK you need a special lens cap for the B+W slim filters.

2
Lenses / Re: Advice on drop-in filter (PL-C 52)
« on: May 12, 2014, 11:47:43 AM »
Got the WII filter this weekend. Fits perfectly and works great. The slight color mismatch is even less noticeable than I expected, so not an issue at all. Thanks again for your support.  :)

3
Lenses / Re: Advice on drop-in filter (PL-C 52)
« on: May 08, 2014, 09:59:09 AM »
Great... then I just get the new WII version and save some money. I don't care about the color too much. Thanks for your help!

4
Lenses / Advice on drop-in filter (PL-C 52)
« on: May 08, 2014, 05:16:34 AM »
Hi,

I am about to buy a polarizer filter for my Canon EF 300m f/2.8L IS prime lens (old version, not the new version II). I noticed there seem to be two versions out there of the PL-C 52. Some have the addition WII. They are cheaper and more easily available. I guess it is an updated version of this filter?

My question now is, will the WII version be compatible with my older (non II) telephoto lens? Of course I would prefer to buy the WII, but maybe I have to lookout and try to get one of the older versions?  :-\

Thanks and best regards,
Steb

5
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« on: February 07, 2014, 12:35:02 PM »
My experience with the 300/2.8 II + 2xTCIII having poor AF speed and hunting on the 7D has been duplicated by others.  Many of us have found poor inconsistency of AF in general.   Lensrental has somewhere on its blog showing the AF consistency of the 7D being far worse than the 5DIII.

The series II telephotos have a different feedback loop system from the series I and required the series III TCs to be developed.  I have no idea how the series I telephotos AF perform with the 7D plus TCs.  By all accounts, the 300/2.8 I takes an IQ hit with the 2xTC.

Ok, I expected some IQ degradation with a 2x TC anyway. I think I will go with the 1.4x for a start. I hope this will still give some great quality pics.

6
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« on: February 07, 2014, 11:18:49 AM »
As I posted earlier, the big difference is in AF.  The 7D's AF is far more erratic and has real difficulties on such combinations as the 300mm f/2.8 II with 2xTC.  This has been corrected with the 70D, which is why I sold my 7D and bought the 70D. The other differences between the two are minor. N

Ahh, I don't like to hear that!  ;)
I expected the 7D AF to be better than the 70D AF. At least the 70D lacks the spot AF mode afaik.

Is there a specific issue with the 7D and 300mm f/2.8 II? I own a 300 f/2.8 myself (the old one, not the mkII) and I am planning to invest in some converters. Do I have to prepare for problems with such a setup and the 7D?  ???

7
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« on: February 05, 2014, 12:01:33 PM »
For me it was the other way around. I decided end of last year to buy a 7D after comparing it with a 70D. I already own a 5D3 and from an ergonomic point of view the 7D body is a perfect match, the 70D clearly has a reduced feature set here. And since I only use the raw files I don't care about the better processing with newer DIGIC. Raw noise performance is no different between the two models. IMHO the only real advantages for the 70D are the new video features and the sooc picture quality. If you don't need any of those you get better build quality and better ergonomics with the 7D.

8
Canon General / Re: Canon's Fiscal Year 2013 Financial Results Released
« on: January 30, 2014, 08:27:03 AM »
..., the EOS 5D Mark III and 70D advanced-amateur-model digital SLR cameras ...

Did they just call the 5D3 an advanced-amateur-model?  :o

9
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Any reason to choose a 7D over a 70D?
« on: November 18, 2013, 10:57:56 AM »
Stills - 7D
Video - 70D

I bought a 7D couple of weeks ago. Tried both the 7D and the 70D and as long as you don't need any of the new 70D only features, the 7D is still the superior camera. Better ergonomics, build quality and same IQ. Trying to select an AF point without joystick is not fun. At least not when speed is important.

10
Canon General / Re: Canon LP-E6 Product Advisory
« on: October 09, 2013, 09:51:56 AM »
In essence, does this mean Canon tried to embed a non-genuine battery detection into the charger and screwed it up?

To me it sounds like they have trouble to supply the internal electronics sufficiently when the battery is deeply discharged. I don't think this is related to their security stuff.

11
I like the idea... interchangeable sensor means removable sensor. Now you can clean it in the dishwasher.  :)

12
As I have enough for the 70-200mm f2.8L IS II, this seemed like a no-brainer by reading all the rave reviews online. However, I tried it out in the store yesterday, and found it to be quite heavy compared to the 70-200mm f4L IS. I am afraid that I might buy it, but don't use it as much as it deserves because of lugging around a 1.4kg lens and a 0.7kg camera a full day might be quite tiresome on my arms and back.

In this case I would recommend to postpone the decision for one of those lenses and start with a 300mm f2.8 first. Use it for some time, then go and try the 70-200mm f2.8 again. It will feel like a toy.  ;D

Anyway, the 70-200/2.8 is one of my favorites and I would definitely miss the 2.8. Especially if you want to shoot people, f4 or slower would not be my first choice. If you go for a lighter solution you have to choose between constant aperture and more reach. The 70-300 is very compact compared to the internal zoom lenses. So if size is most important for you, this is the lens. I don't think there is much difference in IQ when you compare the 70-300 with the 70-200 f4.

13
Technical Support / Re: Not Windows
« on: July 30, 2013, 09:35:42 AM »
I do all my processing in Linux. I have DPP running in wine but actually I am not using it.

My tool of choice is Corel's Aftershot Pro. You can download a one month evaluation version and try it out. It's available for Linux/Mac/Win.

Other really good tools are RawTherapee (also multi platform) and Darktable (Linux/Mac).

The only feature I am missing from time to time is automatic CA correction with predefined camera/lens profiles. Still there is a plugin for Aftershot Pro that can do it after some manual training.

14
Lenses / Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« on: July 12, 2013, 10:22:51 AM »
The Sigma 50 1.4 is very good on the Canon 5D3 body. Something about the 5D3 focus system that just makes the Sigma work perfectly. I say this because the same Sigma lens on my old 7D had the usual focus shift inconsistency.

Naaa, you are just lucky...  ;D

15
Lenses / Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« on: July 12, 2013, 08:42:22 AM »
I suspect a large percentage of the AF QC complaints are actually related to the challenge of shooting wide open and nailing/keeping the plane of focus where you want. With a Canon L fast prime the gut reaction is "what am I doing wrong", but with a 3rd party fast prime it's "what did the manufacturer do wrong."

I'm sure that is not the only reason (but it might contribute to the Sigma's reputation). I own the Sigma myself, bought it with huge focus shift issues, sent it in for calibration, got it back in much better condition. But still the AF is not that reliable. Sometimes it just fucks up, sometimes it is slightly off in one direction, sometimes in the other.

I shot a Canon 1.4 for one afternoon and had a completely different experience. It was always spot on and I could trust the AF much more. Without any AFMA adjustments.

The Sigma is very useable after the calibration, but there is still a difference to the Canon. That said, I don't like the build quality of the Canon 1.4 and the Sigma has great IQ.

Pages: [1] 2 3