August 20, 2014, 05:23:02 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 - candc

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 33
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM
« on: August 18, 2014, 11:01:16 PM »
here is a one shot hdr b&w with the new lens

Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM
« on: August 18, 2014, 10:58:16 PM »
1. Old Chevy half-ton being used as advertising prop by towing company
2. Farm fields and fence

nice one of the truck

Reviews / Re: Quebec City and the new Tamron 28-300 VC as a Travel Lens
« on: August 18, 2014, 08:47:35 PM »
I think I might get this lens as a take along/do it all canoe tripping and hiking lens on the 6d. Have you tried it on a crop camera? I wonder how it compares IQ wise compared to the 16-300? I know it has less range on the wide side but I would prefer it if the IQ is better on a crop body as well.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D or 7D mkII?
« on: August 16, 2014, 04:59:54 PM »
i have a 6d and a 70d, in good light there is not much iq difference. the 6d is of course much better at high iso. paired with the new 16-35is you have the ability to shoot landscapes at small apertures in low light. if you are normally shooting in good light it doesn't matter much. below is a comparison between the 6d + 16-35 f/4 (16mm) and the 70d + sigma 8-16 (10mm) i have taken about 100 comparison shots just to see what the difference is and in good light you have to look really close to see anything and then sometimes it's not clear. don't get caught up thinking there is some massive iq difference between the formats that just jumps off the screen at you.

Lenses / Re: Help deciding on going full frame
« on: August 16, 2014, 12:54:42 PM »
if you are trying to consolidate and streamline your gear and go ff then i would skip the 24-105. the fl gap in between the 16-35 and 70-300 is not a big deal and you have a 50 already. i am also interested in the new tamron 28-300 for a do it all lens, dustin abott says its pretty good.

Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM
« on: August 14, 2014, 10:56:06 PM »

Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM
« on: August 14, 2014, 10:54:24 PM »
picked mine up today and here are a few test shots. my initial impression is that it everything you want in a landscape lens. the color and contrast is really good. canon must have done something with the coatings to accentuate the blues, it looks like it has a built in polarizer. my sigma 8-16 is like that too. the sharpness plenty good across the frame.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 F/4L IS -- Reviews are trickling in...
« on: August 14, 2014, 10:35:13 PM »
flash bulletin. the canon 16-35 f/4 is pretty good. i picked mine up from the ups service center (adorama requires in person sig nowadays).

the first picture i took was in the parking lot and it was love at first sight.

ups parking lots are not the most scenic of locals but hey, when you have sharpness, contrast, and color like that?

EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 7D Replacement Info [CR2]
« on: August 12, 2014, 09:22:29 PM »
I have a 70d and really like the touch/swivel screen and the WiFi function but I can understand why canon would omit these from the 7dii. It is being built to suit wildlife and sports photogs. The touchscreens are nice but they don't work when wet, really cold, or with gloves. Even sony is ditching it on their latest cameras.The WiFi is good for transferring downsized jpegs but its not very fast. You have to set your device to network with the camera to transfer and then back to an internet connected network to upload. Its faster to just pop the card out. The remote shooting is really laggy and not suitable for sports shooting.

Canon said they are building the 7dii to be a pro level camera and it sounds like they mean it. The WiFi and touchscreen are more consumer features. If I was designing an "all business" camera I would not incorporate those features either.

EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 7D Replacement Info [CR2]
« on: August 11, 2014, 10:08:12 PM »
I like where they are going with this. All metal body, armored screen, suitable for military use. Get a 70d if you want the flippy touch screen and WiFi but get the 7dii if you are dropping behind enemy lines or shooting Tasmanian sea bears! I respect it when a company puts out a truly purpose built product instead of trying to incorporate everything and please everybody.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Quick and Dirty AFMA
« on: August 10, 2014, 11:51:27 PM »

It shouldn't be dependent on light level, per se, except that with brighter light, you and/or the camera are typically using a smaller aperture, resulting in more depth of field, so small errors in focus have less of an apparent impact on the photographs.

You should always do AFMA in manual or aperture value mode, with the lens wide open.  Otherwise, you're likely to undercorrect.

I used full manual operation all the way with aperture kept at f1.8 for my 85mm for example. Only shutter speed and ISO was changed. It was just a feeling that light-level had a bearing on AFMA value but I have no scientific proof. Could be something else but definitely not aperture or DOF related.

there are lenses that focus differently under different light. i have a sigma 18-35 that is impossible to calibrate because it front focuses more as the light and contrast go down. i have pretty much given up on using standard af wide open in poor light and low contrast conditions. i just use live view instead. still better than manual focus i reckon?

Lenses / Re: 6D+70-300 DO *vs* 70D+55-250 STM
« on: August 10, 2014, 11:36:58 PM »
i think the d.o. would be better? Certainly lighter and more compact.

The DO is certainly compact, it's about the same size as the 24-105L, and about the same diameter but 1/2" shorter than your new 16-35/4L IS.  It's pretty 'dense' and weighs ~4 oz more than the 16-35/4. 

As a landscape lens, it would likely be a decent choice as the IQ improves quite a bit with stopping down.  As I said, it needs TLC in post.  Also as I said, buy it used!  I bought it used, kept it for several months, then sold it...for the same price I had paid.  Free, long term rental...   :)

I checked on eBay and there is one for $769.00 with a heliopan polarizer. Seems reasonable. I looked at the comparison between it and the 70-300l on tdp. The latter looks a lot sharper straight away but it sounds like the d.o. lens takes well to sharpening in post?

Lenses / Re: 6D+70-300 DO *vs* 70D+55-250 STM
« on: August 10, 2014, 10:00:48 PM »
If you want to shoot up to ISO1600, so 70D + 55-250 STM clearly wins.

The 70-300 DO is crap.  Worst Canon lens ever.  I've got at least $20K tied up in Canon glass...

I'd like to ask – is that based on personal experience with the 70-300 DO, or based on review sites (e.g. TDP's ISO 12233 crops)?  I think a lot of bashing comes from those who have never used the lens. (Not that it means anything, but since counting seems important to luckydude, I own over $30K in Canon lenses...   ::) )

The 70-300 DO doesn't fare well in standardized testing.  It does produce softer images than other lenses, but I believe that's due to the nature of the optics, and I found that images actually take more sharpening than other lenses (analogous to the D800 vs. D800E, where standardized tests treating images from both identically show the -E as much sharper, but in practice you can apply more sharpening to the D800 before seeing artifacts, so they are not so different as testing would predict). 

Similarly, the DO lens needs the contrast boosted in post.  Nothing in post will help the odd bokeh, though.

I owned the 70-300 DO for several months, and in some testing I performed, while the images processed with a 'standard' workflow weren't great, proper application of sharpening and contrast enhancement gave images of nearly equivalent IQ to the 100-400L or 70-200/2.8L IS II + 1.4xII at several focal lengths in the overlapping range.

I have always been interested in the 70-300do but it gets a bad rap in reviews. I just ordered a 16-35 f/4 and want to get a lens in the 70-300 range to take along with it on backpacking and canoe trips. I already have the tamron 150-600, sigma 120-300, and a sigma 80-400. The first 2 (especially the sport lens) are too heavy and bulky for lightweight backpacking. The older 80-400 is pretty good to about 300 but its clunky and still a bit heavy for what i want use it for.i think the d.o. would be better? Certainly lighter and more compact. I would be using it mostly for landscapes. What would you suggest? Tamron has a new 28-300 but I think a 70-300 would be better in the overlapping range?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Quick and Dirty AFMA
« on: August 10, 2014, 10:19:03 AM »

BUT, even with Canon lenses, what is spot on with recommended AFMA distances can be a couple of points off when doing portrait work.  Really only critical when shooting below f/2.2, but annoying in such cases.

And I think over time, maybe with temperature and humidity, values change.

Constant battle, ain't it?

Same experience here as I often shoot portraits at f2.0-f2.2. I was guessing that was due to higher outdoor light level but not sure.  Take the filter off  and the AFMA value will shift a few points too.

Now Canon has got the dual pixel sensor focusing technology. In theory, future cameras should be able to auto calibrate the phase dect focusing while u shoot!  This can be done by the camera constantly comparing the results of the conventional phase dect focusing module with that of the dual pixel sensor phase dect circuit, and
make automatic adjustments to AFMA or better yet a full blown Canon in-house type calibration.

Hopefully we will eventually get rid of  manual AFMA altogether :)

That's a great idea,

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Quick and Dirty AFMA
« on: August 10, 2014, 10:16:32 AM »

ps. i used this method to adjust a 70d and 50L combo yesterday. i was able to get it adjusted and focusing with a +13 afma value in a matter of 2 minutes or less without any computer.

2 minutes is really impressive for a value of +13 candc! How many iterations did u go thru during the 2 minutes?

I could tell it was front focusing quite a bit so I went to +10, not enough,+15 too much, +12 not enough,+13 spot on. so 4 iterations. I think if you go about it that way then you can always get it zeroed in with 4-5 iterations

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 33