February 27, 2015, 12:00:54 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 - AlanF

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 86
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: Today at 09:39:26 AM »
There are now many reviews repeating each other, and omitting crucial details. The tests here were done on a 1DsIII only, not a crop. This reviewer, without even testing it on a crop, states that improvement in the corners of the new lens won't be so noticeable on the smaller format. My old 100-400mm was OK on a 5DIII but was soft on a 7D or 70D because a crop sensor with smaller pixels is much more sensitive to the quality of a lens.

You can see from the TDP site that the new and old lens are similar in the centre of a 1DsIII


But, on a 60D, the new 100-400 II is much better than the Mk 1.


THe new lens is much better at shorter focal lengths.

« on: Today at 05:26:22 AM »
The OP posted in another thread http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=375238

"What does AFMA mean??? "

People join the forum to learn, so it is great that he has asked. But, it's somewhat tough on B&H when people buy a camera from them and return it because they haven't read the manual.

« on: Today at 02:54:57 AM »
He is not saying crop is crap, he is saying that the statement that a 300mm lens is a 480 mm lens on a crop is crap.

Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM
« on: February 26, 2015, 09:39:41 AM »
I wasn't disappointed with it at first, it was just that the extra 1.4x on crop gives a fov equivalent to 900mm on FF, which is not the easiest to use hand held and you lose a stop of light as well as focal points other than the centre. You don't see the gain in resolution unless your subject has the fine detail that is just beyond the resolution of the bare lens. The 1.4xTC III is beautifully matched to the 100-400mm II, and any loss in IQ is more than compensated for by the gain in length. What hammered it home was that the 2xTC III gave great results, using liveview to focus.

But, in good light and where you can home in more easily, the 1.4xTC III does give excellent results. So, if I am in a hide or the likes and a bird is far off, or a raptor is hovering in the sky, I would put on a TC. But, otherwise for walking around, 1 think 400mm is optimal on the crop.

I don't like using tripods. I find that the 300mm/2.8 II + 2xTC III rather too long for the 7DII and prefer to use the 600 mm combo on the 5DIII for hand held work.

Lenses / Re: 400 DO II continues to test out as superb
« on: February 24, 2015, 01:39:05 PM »
Thanks for posting and leaving EXIF data. There is a halo around the beak of the bird, suggesting significant sharpening. How much did you sharpen?

Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM
« on: February 24, 2015, 05:49:07 AM »
Best apertures
Should we use f/5.6 or stop down on the 5DIII and 7D2 (or other FF and crops) at 400mm? Canon MTF charts have f/8 slightly sharper and contrastier but they don't help as they are theoretical and don't allow for diffraction effects. Photozone has tested only the 5DIII and f/5.6 is best. ePhotozine in contrast has f/8 much better on the 5DIII, with no data on the 7DII. Bryan, in his excellent review in TDP has done careful image comparisons on both FF and crop and finds nothing to choose between f/5.6 and f/8 apart from f/8 being better for vignetting. However, it's difficult to find small differences from his images, so I have a done a whole series for my own lens on iso12233 charts at further distances.

For my copy of the lens, on both the 7DII and 5DIII, the 100-400mm II at 400mm produces its sharpest and cleanest images at f/5.6. The 7DII + 100-400 II is virtually indistinguishable image-wise from the 5DIII + 100-400mm II + 1.4xTC III, albeit a little noisier.

Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM
« on: February 23, 2015, 05:56:04 PM »
Further, adding the TC to the 100-400 on the 7DII is a waste of time as the degradation of image and increase in noise nullifies any increase in resolution.

Thanks for your analysis, AlanF. Question: I find the 7D2 + 400 f/5.6 prime + 1.4x TC III to yield quite acceptable image quality. Have you experimented with this combo? I ask because I'm considering the 100-400 II and may trade my 400 prime as part of the deal. I could use my 5D3 + 100-400 + 1.4x, as you do, but would hate to lose the use of my 7D2 (higher FPS, better AF, etc.) when employing the TC. I'm shooting wildlife, including birds.

Sorry, I missed your post. I recant somewhat. The 7DII + 100-400mm II + 1.4x TC III does work very well, and I have posted some birds in flight etc in another Topic.  Even the 7DII + 100-400mm II + 2x TC III works very well in liveview, and every increase of 1.4x in TC does give increased resolution. However, for much of the time, I prefer to use the bare lens for the extra stop of light and the wider field of view etc.

Lenses / Re: Please give me an advice for an prime lens 300/400mm
« on: February 23, 2015, 12:00:12 PM »
Last weekend I tested the new 100-400 II extensively, If you would be on budget, then I would take the 100-400 II above the 400 5.6 or the 300 4.0.

+1 - the lens is fantastic, as sharp as the prime and with all the versatility of a zoom and IS.

Lenses / Re: which telephoto for travel?
« on: February 21, 2015, 08:14:48 AM »
The 100-400mm II is a must for nature and useful for some landscape and architecture etc. For, travel, it beats the Tamron 150-600mm, being significantly shorter for packing, lighter and looking less like a bazooka when carrying in urban situations.

The 70-200 f/4 is a lovely lens for travel, but lack the length for nature.

Lenses / Re: Please give me an advice for an prime lens 300/400mm
« on: February 20, 2015, 06:43:29 AM »

One thing I have learned is to improve technique and do your homework on your subject. 2-3 steps = 100mm getting closer ....!

2-3 steps = 100mm? How on earth do you justify that statement? It all depends on how far you are away and the focal length of your lens. If you are 50m away, 2-3 steps makes close to zero difference, 2-3 steps if you are 5m away gives a factor of 2. Adding 100mm to a 20mm lens gives you a 600% magnification, adding 100mm to a 400mm lens gives 25% magnification.

Lenses / Re: Please give me an advice for an prime lens 300/400mm
« on: February 19, 2015, 11:33:30 AM »
If I was buying right now, I would strongly consider the 400 DO II.  According to the handful of reviews out there, the lens is excellent and has the best IS of any Canon lens yet.  300mm can seem a bit short at times and unless you're shooting large animals (deer, bears, etc.) you'll probably want the 1.4x and 2x all of the time.  I had the 400 f/5.6 and it's an excellent lens but the lack of IS makes it much harder to use.  Here's a review of the 400 DO II and you can compare it to the 300 f/2.8 II - pay particular attention to their notes in the IS test.

400 DO II

300 f/2.8 II

See also: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/01/more-canon-400m-do-ii-comparisons

Lenses / Re: Please give me an advice for an prime lens 300/400mm
« on: February 19, 2015, 09:34:18 AM »
I am getting very tempted by the 400/4 DO II. I'd be using it with the 2xTC, having seen the resolution the 100-400mm II gives, but at an inconvenient f/11 and liveview. So, any first-hand reports would be most welcome.

Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: February 19, 2015, 07:31:12 AM »
The lens hood by all accounts is also heavy, unlike the carbon fibre one on the 300 2.8 - the published weight of the lens doesn't include that hood, which also protrudes out very far..


"... my arm was shaking under the weight of the lens while I took these images. "


"When I said "massive super-telephoto lens," I meant it. This lens feels huge and heavy, and it's probably the largest lens I've ever had the opportunity to shoot with."


"It should be clear at this point that the 150-600mm Sport is bigger and heavier than most alternative propositions. That said, it's not impractical - I squeezed it into my F-Stop Loka pack with some other gear and even managed to do some handheld street, bird and sunset shooting with it. But it's not a lens you'll want to handhold for long, and neither is it one that you'll forget about carrying around. If you're upgrading from the earlier 150-500mm you'll really notice the difference, especially if you're hiking to shoot wildlife."

Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: February 18, 2015, 06:52:04 PM »
I think a discussion of the 150-600 VC remains very germane to this topic.  A decision between these two lenses is still the biggest one for most Canon tele shooters on a budget.  The Sigma (which should be on its way to me shortly), is reportedly quite excellent optically, but is a true beast in terms of size and weight.  Not many people are reporting much interest in shooting it handheld.
I routinely shoot my 300/3.8L II plus 2x III hand held, so the Sigma (S version) which is just a fraction heavier would certainly be possible. And for less than a third of the price who wouldn't give it serious consideration!? It may even focus faster without the handicap of the Extender.

Based on what I've learned from two friends who have/had the Tamron (one has returned it), the optics are very good but AF in AI Servo mode is not very good making it a disappointing lens for BIFs etc. Very good for static shots where maximum reach is needed though.
The Sigma is much longer than the 300 + 2xTC and by all accounts that makes it much more difficult to hold because of the greater torque. Just about every review complains about the difficulty of holding it. 

Lenses / Re: Please give me an advice for an prime lens 300/400mm
« on: February 18, 2015, 03:40:43 PM »
The 7D1 doesn't AF well with the 300mm f/2.8 II + 2xTC and I would not recommend the combination. It does work well with the 6D. There are insufficient reviews of the 400mm DO II. I love the 300mm f/2.8 II + 2xTC with the 5DIII and am very happy with the new 100-400mm II on both the 5DIII (including + 1.4x TC) and 7DII although it isn't a prime. You really need to try out all three. The 300mm f/4 with an extender is not as good as the 400mm f/5.6 or 100-400mm II.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 86