November 28, 2014, 04:06:45 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 - Plainsman

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
The new 100-400 looks good on MTFs but when we get the reviews I suspect it will be reported that image quality falls off "slightly" at 300-400 just like the Nikon 80-400VR.

In fact with your 70-200 you've actually covered the range from 70 - 280 with a very good optic. For 280-400 get the current 100-400 classic (second hand or stock clearance - taking advantage of the price reduction).

The 135 f2 is only one stop better and could be replaced soon with an IS version. So maybe you need to have a rethink and certainly not make a move until you see some reviews.


OK, I know it's versus a Nikon, but even so: the Sigma 150-600 at 600mm easily beats the Nikon 300/2.8 + 2xTC!

Looking at the Sigma's superb MTFs measured by lenstip on a 5DIII, I can believe that. If only it wasn't so heavy, it seems a remarkable lens.

ps more detailed in

They also noticed some focus breathing...I am hoping at longer distances, this will not be much of an issue.  That is one item I am watching (I have not yet canceled my pre-order).

Also, I know it is heavy, but the way I look at it:
EF 300 f/2.8 plus 2x TC with hood: 100 oz
150-600S: 101 oz

Bottom get to 600 mm, you will be carrying some weight. That does make the Tamron and, assuming here, the 150-600C, remarkable.

The reviewer states specifically that there is focus breathing at 9 feet, and the Sigma is only on a par with the Nikon at that distance. But, at 50 feet there is insignificant breathing (as yu would expect) and the Sigma beats the Nikon.

I can't wait to see side-by-side comparisons of the new 100-400L ± 1.4xTC, Sigma 150-600 S and C, Canon 300/2.8 II + 2xTC and Tamron 150-600mm.

Actually it said at 40ft and 600/6.3 it is razor sharp i.e. a huge improvement from the close focus (9ft) readings. So extrapolating beyond 40ft this could be an exceptionally sharp lens for mid/long distance photography BIF, aircraft etc. Hope so!

So reviewers please try and check this lens out at more realistic distances.

Lenses / Re: Preorder: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 14, 2014, 11:40:00 AM »
Throwing this out there for the sake of discussion, but is anybody worried about the performance of this lens?

My thought process is this.
- 4x on a lens does lead to some inherent difficulty in getting an ultra sharp shot throughout focal range
- extended time in between lens generations, including a delay in what was supposed to be the debut date earlier this year, suggests that there might be manufacturing QC issues, or at least difficulty in improving IQ

Canon publishes the MTF curves of this lens as well as the old one, and you can clearly see the curves are better on the new one.
The IS has been modernized, lens coatings are now updated to eliminate reflections off digital sensors, even if IQ wasn't a whole lot better, it has a lot more going for it.
That close MFD means I can put on a 1.4X TC and get some close ups of small creatures, flowers and birds like Hummingbirds that are not so shy.
The major US camera stores have a 30 day return policy, and often longer for Christmas items, so there is no risk except for return shipping cost.
Unlike a body that is obsolete in 2-4 years, this lens will be the current model for 10 years, probably 15.

...have you looked a the MTFs for the 400/5.6?

Not very good are they - yet this is a highly rated little lens even today.

My point is you should not judge a new lens which is not even in the shops yet by its MTF

Lenses / Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II Sample Images
« on: November 14, 2014, 06:08:20 AM »
...we should not get to excited about this lens before a lenstip type review.

Basically this is the Nikon zoom in white - expensive and I guess not all that sharp.

Technical Support / Re: 60D Front Focusing
« on: November 12, 2014, 11:58:49 AM »
Since you're wondering, my lenses are (all Canon) 35 1.4, 50 1.4, 85 1.8. The issue seems consistent across all of them.

Gotcha! With thin dof (i.e. probably more expensive) lenses, Canon wanted you to use a more expensive camera body like the 7d and removed afma on 50d->60d. Thanks, Canon!

They re-introduced afma with the 70d. If all your lenses show the same behavior it seems they are rather Canon-"standard" and your camera body is off. You can ask Canon service for a cost estimate, but with the 60d it's probably not "worth it". An equivalent solution would be to sell your 60d (to people with slower lenses) and rather put the service cost into buying a 70d.

...or buy the 50D (real bargain)...or sell the lot and switch makes.

It was the most stupid thing Canon ever did to deny the the 60D AFMA - marketing nonsense.

Samsung crop camera NX1 is on 28Mp. Sony/Nikon have several on 24.

There seems to be a high res sensor Mp war out there which is passing Canon by. I wonder what their logic is.

Lenses / Re: Preorder: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 11, 2014, 08:11:12 AM »
...keep calm and wait for a lens tip review!!

Let's see if it's better than just a scaled-up version of the 70-300 which it might well be.

Lenses / Re: Critical View of 70-200 f/2.8 mkii+2xTC III
« on: November 08, 2014, 05:48:15 PM »
I often hear people citing the Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8 Mark ii with the 2X TC III as a serious option as a wildlife lens and I don't quite agree.

I believe that the setup is touted as you end up with the best 70-200 out there which can double as a telephoto but I find the image quality to be a compromise.

The images I have seen, has me place both the 100-400 and definitely the 400 f/5.6 as better options.

Now an admission: I'm not a technical guy and cannot breakdown my feelings on the TC'd 70-200 into tech-talk but I find the overall IQ as poorer.

Am I wrong? Is the 70-200 f/2.8 Mark ii a match for the 100-400 and the 400 f/5.6?

I'm interested in hearing opinions on this but let's keep it sentiment free ie "I own that setup and I love my photos"...

Thanks peeps

Rather than listen to "opinions" just take a look at the iso 12233 crops on digital picture.

They are a pretty reliable guide and clearly show the hit you take when mounting a 2xTC on this otherwise excellent zoom.

Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 08, 2014, 11:37:45 AM »
I just look at the 100-400 now that is ages old and $1600.  While of course there will be a new premium on the new version....I'm not seeing Canon go up 40% - 100%.  Original 7D $1500.  New 7D2 $1800.  20% premium.  So I'm guessing $1999-$2200 (high side being where the 70-200 is now)  I think making these same priced where one gets you constant aperture while the other gets you longer focal range is a good trade.

I suspect your prices are wishful thinking.
Take a look at prices for the 1+ year old Nikon 80-400mm lens, and then add $300.

Your figuring would be correct a few years ago but now we have the Tamron 160-600 (which BTW is very good up to 500mm) and two Sigmas arriving before the Canon.

No, Canon will have to factor down their pricing expectations on this one for sales to get some early traction.

Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 07, 2014, 04:16:58 AM »
I quickly did a superimpose of the 70-300L over the 100-400LII. Size comparison is based on the size of the sealing gasket on the lens mount.

Looks like it won't fit 'standing up' in most lens bags, so the 70-300L still holds its value as a travel lens for that purpose.

I've attached the psd too if you'd like to play around some more with the image.

..unlike the 70-300 no focal length markings on the "new" 100-400 photo...rather odd.

Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 06, 2014, 11:51:59 AM »
...price correlates closely to optical quality for Canon - so lets hope it's not to cheap then!

For Canon its position in the lens hierarchy has been carefully calibrated from way back.

Interesting looking at the lenstip reviews with their MTF50 lpmm charts.

At the centre @ 600/8 the Sigma S is (well??) ahead of the Tamron also @ 600/8 (38 to 36 on the charts)

But the Tamron @ 600/8 is however very slightly ahead of the Canon 100-400 @ 400/5.6. i.e. not the significant fall off indicated by Lens Rentals.

The lenstip tests have been carried with different cameras but they say that sensor densities are approx same so should not impact the result. I haven't checked that out.

Also of interest the ephotozone bar charts indicate that the Tamron @ 600/8 holds up very well in line with lens tip.

So the Tamron @ 600/8 is maybe better than some make out but as expected the Sigma S is the winner @ 600.

Lenstip has reviewed the Sigma 150-600 S.

Be aware that they received the lens they tested from Sigma.  To me, receiving a test lens from the lens manufacturer means that:
1.  The lens has probably already been tested by the manufacturer, and selected as being one that is the best possible. 
2.  You will never be able to get one as good as the one tested thru a store.

This is an urban myth and I'm sure that I've read a response to this somewhere that goes along the lines of "We (manufacturer) don't have the time to test 100 different lenses and pick the best one to send to a reviewer."

I would say it is pure marketing that the lenses are not carefully selected. if you consider what developpement and marketing of such a device costs, the cost to select the best one out of 100 costs nothing, and a good review is  miles more worth than any Marketing campain....... because the reader believes the test is independant.

Despite of this lenstip does the best and most scientific tests available for free (and i donated them a nice sum for reading the tests). Lens Rentals is a good addition, as they can test the sample variation

It would take a lot of effort and money to test rigorously 100 lenses!

Even a jpg at each aperture from 150, 200,300,400,500 and 600 and then examine them all at 100% mag would be a hell of a task and all you would find is say 80 approx all the same and 20 sub par. So you send out any 10 from 80 to 10 reviewers!

The major problem with Sigma is it has quality control issues and the question for the 150-600 buyer is - is Tamron's qc any better?

Lenses / Re: More EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Talk [CR2]
« on: October 29, 2014, 12:32:02 PM »
As it is supposed to be very similar to the 70-300 I wouldn't be the least surprised that it was also designed at the same time by the same team!!
So if they've missed the boat on this one tough titty but humble pie if it turns out as sharp as the Sony @400.

Lenses / Re: More EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Talk [CR2]
« on: October 29, 2014, 10:34:13 AM »
I believe we will see a 5DMkIV, a 6DMkII, a 1DxMkII before we see 100-400 II. Not to mention a 7DMkIII  ;D ;D ;D ;D

I would like to ask CR if this proves yet another BS to refrain from mentioning it again and to stick to more plausible rumors please.

100-400 II rumors are good only for laughing!

...I think this is the real thing, both Sony and Nikon have had new ones and with a total of three low priced 150-600 zooms available in the next month or so it's now or never for Canon

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8