December 19, 2014, 05:26:17 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 - KarstenReis

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
Lenses / Re: Hands-on With the Canon EF 400 f/4 DO IS II
« on: September 17, 2014, 08:45:59 AM »
Touched "everything?"

I suppose he is seeking his 15seconds of fame and people seem to be lapping it up.

Matt Granger has proved to be nothing more than a tool.

I thought it was a nice quick overview of a new lens.  Don't know why he's a tool.  I'm not familiar with his other work but this seemed just fine to me.

2
"The teleconverter technology is used in Canon's broadcast-TV lenses, too, but it's possible Canon could bring it to more EOS lenses"

Interesting. More built in TCs coming?

3
Canon General / Re: Neutral Density Filters - HELP !
« on: July 31, 2014, 04:11:21 PM »
I too would also echo what others have been saying about the Lee filters. I just purchased the 24-70 2.8 II and had a similar decision to make.  I ended up going with the Lee 100mm system. While more expensive I think in the long run I will use it more and it will produce better images.  So far I have the Big Stopper and a 105 mm polarizer that uses an adapter to screw on to the front of the system.  I will be getting a neutral density grad filter soon.  Will update when I use the system in a few days.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]
« on: June 18, 2014, 08:10:45 AM »
I would like to believe this, but at this point it seems more like a wishlist than anything else.
If someone were to design a 7D mkII in a vacuum I think this description would be what goes into the camera.


Canon holding back 7Dmk2 for a reason. I suspect 100-400 mk2 announcement, or some other coinciding situation.


Is this Canon Rumors suspecting the 100-400 mkII announcement or is this the direct quote from the source?

5
EOS Bodies / Re: More EOS 7D Mark II Talk [CR1]
« on: June 16, 2014, 12:32:34 PM »
If true, the 7D Mark II's viewfinder will be the exact same size as the 5D Mark III:

5D3 - 1.00 / 1.00 x 0.71 = 0.71
7D2 - 1.00 / 1.60 x 1.15 = 0.71

Crop sensor fans would be elated.

Without other changes, that would make it 2.56x dimmer (or, 39% as bright, if you prefer).

I don't know anything about viewfinders.  Could you elaborate on why it would become dimmer?

The sensor in the 5D is 2.56x bigger, which means so is the mirror and thus the portion of the lens' image circle you are viewing.  At the same f-stop (f-stop controls "brightness" or "light intensity" [technically illuminance]), more area means more light.  Likewise, less area means less light.  If you spread that reduced light over the same area of your vision (subtended solid angle), it's going to be dimmer.

Thanks for the explanation! I forgot about how the difference in sensor size makes in how bright the viewfinder appears.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: More EOS 7D Mark II Talk [CR1]
« on: June 16, 2014, 11:03:56 AM »
If true, the 7D Mark II's viewfinder will be the exact same size as the 5D Mark III:

5D3 - 1.00 / 1.00 x 0.71 = 0.71
7D2 - 1.00 / 1.60 x 1.15 = 0.71

Crop sensor fans would be elated.

Without other changes, that would make it 2.56x dimmer (or, 39% as bright, if you prefer).

I don't know anything about viewfinders.  Could you elaborate on why it would become dimmer?

7
Lenses / Re: World Cup started - no sign of 100-400L Mk2
« on: June 15, 2014, 10:55:53 PM »
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2009/01/teleconverters-101

That's the article.  It's from Roger at Lensrentals.com and links to anther post about the difference between f/5.6 and f/8 autofocus for cameras

8
Lenses / Re: World Cup started - no sign of 100-400L Mk2
« on: June 15, 2014, 10:43:29 PM »
Do you think that canon engineers are literally wizards that just need to invoke the correct incantations to allow the tiny daemons that live in the mirror box to focus at f/8?  You do understand that AF systems are hardware, right?  And that the limitations are physical?  Neuroanatomist wrote a pretty good breakdown of how AF systems actually work which I'm sure he'd be happy to link you to.

And are you assuming that newer Canon bodies will not have newer hardware that will allow focusing at f8 that is on par with the 5D3?

I need to find the article somewhere explaining why Canon limits most of their bodies to autofocusing with a max aperture of f/5.6. But if I can remember correctly, I think it comes down to the physics of the light gathering ability of the sensor.  If we are talking about a 7D mkII (which will be APS-C) then it's very likely that the pixels are going to be physically smaller than on a full frame camera like the 5D mkIII or 1DX.  While it would be cool to have a built in TC, I just don't think making one with a max aperture of f/8 is going to happen.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: June 11, 2014, 04:27:59 PM »
Personally, I'm kind of excited for it the step up to a pro body...although I am finding all of the "Waaaaaa, it won't look like my pre existing APS-C body!"  comments highly amusing! Particularly the ones that say it will be a deal breaker, no matter how good it is, if it doesn't have the body format they expect and want.   8)

I think Canon wants to differentiate this from the existing APS-C bodies in a variety of ways, given that it is going to be more expensive in than any other APS-C body ever.  I suspect it will be a different kind of animal than we've ever seen from any APS-C camera, in terms of AF, Speed and buffer (although I suspect it will only be a moderate improvement in IQ over the 70D, but time will tell).  I think Canon is seeing if they can redefine what an APS-C camera CAN be--and I'm very excited to see how that pans out!

That's my thoughts anyway.  :D

It is a deal breaker, because when I am slogging through the bush with a camera strapped to my back, having a massive body is a decided detriment. Big bodies are for studio use primarily, where size doesn't matter. And if you are in a studio you don't need a crop sensor. If you are out and about, where mobility is important, a large camera body is a problem.

I'm not trying to troll... but have you tried to slog through the bush before with a 1D style body?  That extra inch or inch and a half sticking off the camera, in my opinion, don't make a big difference. 

Also I don't think an integrated vertical grip is just for studio.  It's such a great feature when mounted to a lens with a lens collar that attaches straight to a gimbal or ballhead. It make rotating to portrait very quick and easy to take a photo.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: June 11, 2014, 11:51:36 AM »
I like the idea of a 1D style top plate. I rarely change out of M mode and if I do it's to Av or Tv.

Also I think it would be cool to offer an option of two body styles. One vertically integrated grip and one without.  That way both camps of people would be satisfied.  I personally would very much like an integrated vertical grip after having the chance to play around with a 1DX recently.

11
How quickly "new" Sigma's reputation went downhill.  The 35A was hailed a great lens and now a lot of forum members seem to be bashing the 50A before they get their hands on a copy.  And now some are already saying that this will have poor autofocus performance.  I am quite excited for this lens for night and astro as the Canon 24L has more coma than I would like for star shots.

The key words there are "forum members", and those vocal few who think their complaints change the state of the game represent a very small portion of the market.  The gap between what people want and what people get creates suffering for them, and people express pain as anger...   I supposed its best to cut the complainers some slack though, since they have it hard enough already... poke poke lol ;-)

As to the lens, this is the Sigma I've been waiting to hear about.  I passed on the 35A and bought the 35 IS, and will also be passing on the 50A in order to wait for the 50 IS.  If the sharpness wide open and coma are good on the 24A I might actually get it like you say for star shots...

Haha.  I agree 100%.

I bought the 35A and absolutely love it.  It worked pretty well for some star shots but I would like a little wider FOV.  I was considering selling it when the 24A comes out but I think I may just keep it and purchase the 24A when it comes out if it is sharp wide open and the coma is good. 

12
How quickly "new" Sigma's reputation went downhill.  The 35A was hailed a great lens and now a lot of forum members seem to be bashing the 50A before they get their hands on a copy.  And now some are already saying that this will have poor autofocus performance.

That's mob mentality for you.

Is there a problem with people discussing a potential flaw?  I think Roger has already summarized what we are seeing....just with the prerelease copies hitting reviewers it may be happening a bit ahead of schedule.

 http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/12/a-bit-of-a7r-sanity

No problem discussing a potential flaw in a rumored lens as this is what this site is for.  But, and this is a big but, already dismissing a 24A because of one review seems a bit premature to me.  It would almost be akin to dismissing the rumored 7D Mk II due to poor autofocus from one review of a about to be released new Canon body.  I agree with Roger's post and find his writing quite funny.  I think the forum stoops down to this level sometimes... http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/03/hammerforum-com

13
How quickly "new" Sigma's reputation went downhill.  The 35A was hailed a great lens and now a lot of forum members seem to be bashing the 50A before they get their hands on a copy.  And now some are already saying that this will have poor autofocus performance.  I am quite excited for this lens for night and astro as the Canon 24L has more coma than I would like for star shots. 

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L IS
« on: March 12, 2014, 09:41:24 AM »
These look like zooms based on the focal lengths and the zoom ratios listed.   I don't know much about how these patents work but I thought that primes usually only have one focal length listed.   Am I reading these wrong?

15
Here is a good article from RED that explains it a bit better with some visuals.

http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/global-rolling-shutter

Pages: [1] 2 3