September 20, 2014, 07:59:57 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 - YuengLinger

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 16
Lenses / Re: EF11-24mm F4L listed on a Japanese site
« on: September 16, 2014, 01:13:27 PM »
Looks like fake. Front element from 14-24 Nikkor and the rest from 17-40.
Canon will never put a red ring on a hood, it will be on a body, even with integrated hood.

Great catch!

Lenses / Re: EF11-24mm F4L listed on a Japanese site
« on: September 16, 2014, 11:01:33 AM »
Fake.  F/4 makes no sense.

Makes perfectly sense... People photogs (the only ones that need 2.8) would never use 11mm, because it distorts the image too much. For them, a new 16-35/2.8 is much better, which this lens would leave space for. Then Canon would have three wide angles to choose from, but to have all FL's and apertures covered, you gotta at least buy two of them... ;)
Besides, I don't think you could do 11mm/2.8 that easy. But looks like a nice supplement for the already great lens lineup! :D

Hmm...Reasonable. I was thinking too little differentiation after release of newest 16-35 f4, and Nikon has done so well with its 14-24mm...And you know Canon wants another $2500 L in the lineup.

I still say the image is a fake.  Too ugly.

Plus the website OP says this is "listed" on looks like a shady electronics dumping ground.

Lenses / Re: EF11-24mm F4L listed on a Japanese site
« on: September 16, 2014, 09:56:32 AM »
Fake.  F/4 makes no sense.

The image is good PS, but still looks like PS.

I was excited at first, but I really like the extra 5mm at 35mm and the bulbous front that precludes (or makes it a a pain to use) filters is a non-starter for me.  I am very happy with my 16-35 f/4 IS and after taking some shots in really dim lighting the other night, I realize I don't miss f/2.8 all that much.

Samples???  Please!

Lenses / Re: Need some advice - lens calibration
« on: September 07, 2014, 08:43:24 AM »
CPS is definitely great, but, no, this is not free maintenance.  My guess, from almost three years using them, $300-400 before 20% discount.  They'll let you decide before charging.

Only you can decide cost benefit.

Photography Technique / Re: Getting photos home from overseas
« on: September 06, 2014, 08:36:41 PM »
I don't mind the postage - potentially a variety of interesting stamps when I get home - but the adventure of finding a post office could well turn into a chore pretty quickly.
In some countries, even in Europe, mailing an USB stick without using some special expensive services or a courier, it's the best way to 'lose' them. Post offices may not be open all day or weekends.

A local 4G SIM can be fast, but 4G may not be available everywhere, and usually there are monthly or daily limits far below 16GB.

How many USB sticks have you lost?  Which countries?  Are the mail clerks just lying in wait for them?

Portrait / Re: Feedback on these headshots
« on: September 06, 2014, 08:31:52 PM »
You've learned enough from HURLey.  Now move on!

Lenses / Re: Need some advice - lens calibration
« on: September 06, 2014, 08:25:46 PM »
Let Canon repair give you an estimate.  Useless wide open, as you said.

Lenses / Re: Ultrawide Canon?
« on: September 05, 2014, 12:29:42 PM »
When will Canon announce a fast ultrawide?

Nikon has the great 14-24mm f2.8.
Canon only a 16-35mm f2.8 that shows weakness at the borders and a slow f4 version.

Any chance for a Photokina announcement?

Always a chance, but I am not sure the time is right yet.  The 16-35 f/4 IS still is new and they may want to "double dip" people who buy that lens on a 16-35 f/2.8 III a year from now for more profit.  A wider option is also a possibility, but recall that the 14mm f/2.8 prime already exists.

Finally, while the 16-35 f/2.8 II shows weakness at the borders, it is still optically superior to the still-in-production Nikon 17-35 f/2.8.  The 14-24 f/2.8 is great, however it has a bulbous element and cannot do 35mm obviously; so it is also possible that the 16-35 f/2.8 II will remain in the lineup for some time and be complemented by an 11-24/12-24/14-24.

Most people who are truly worried about sharp corners do not need f/2.8 (i.e., landscape and probably would prefer the ability to use a front filter).  Most people who are worried about f/2.8 do not need sharp corners (i.e. event photographers, photojournalism - human subject near center of frame to avoid perspective distortion at this focal length, corners mainly out of focus background).  Because of this, it makes this a less pressing lens for Canon IMO.  It would be nice to have a non-bulbous 16-35 f/2.8L III that did it all, though - sharper corners for landscape (or at least less CA) but also f/2.8 for people.

Perfectly stated early on, and then kind of repeated throughout the thread!

Yeah, the bulbous front end is definitely a deal breaker for me, as I'd be just too worried about it.

The new 16-35mm f/4 is attractive, but as I do so much low light portraiture/event photography, I am holding out for the imaginary 16-35mm f/2.8 III...  (I still occasionally use my old version one of the 16-35mm, but I'm so in love with my 24-70mm 2.8 II that I do my best to make it do in tight, dim rooms.

Photography Technique / Re: Getting photos home from overseas
« on: September 02, 2014, 06:44:06 AM »
After all that shooting, are you going to be too tired at the end of the day to use DPP to scan through your harvest and winnow out the chaff?   Wouldn't that cut down significantly, perhaps 25% or more?

Doesn't seem too practical without a laptop, and if you have that, you have at least 1TB of internal, plus you can have a 2TB external.  Now, except for theft or other calamities, you have standard coverage. 

If you also back up on a daily basis to something like a Corsair Flash Voyager Slider 128GB USB 3.0, you could mail it when full (once a week or so?) back home.  That would mean only six or seven trips to the post office (where you do get to mix with the locals, at least).

Jim, I'm glad you posed this question.  It's an important one, and I'm also glad so many good suggestions are being posted.  When our new daughter gets a little older, say about two years old, we do plan to go back to China for a long visit, and I'll be in some very remote areas.  I'll be facing much of what you will be, but for some stretches without the benefit of reliable post offices.

Portrait / Re: Feedback on these headshots
« on: September 01, 2014, 02:31:03 PM »
3413 is your keeper.  I'd crop a little tighter--esp the head.  Exposure looks very good on face and background.  Next two, poses not flattering, background a bit unpleasant as light falls off.  Last one ok, but little stray lock of hair is a no-no.

Smiles look slightly tense...Did you have little time with subject?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII dual cards
« on: August 31, 2014, 09:04:53 PM »
3kramd5 - I shoot JPEG with the various adjustments and RAW in the hope that I've got something to work with if I cock up.  Also, as you are probably aware, the SD card slot is crippled and it's faster to save JPEGs to SD.

I used to have the same thought, but you might want to test if "it" is really true. With "it" I mean: is the JPEG-conversion plus writing to SD card really faster than writing a larger RAW file away to the SD card?

I did this test a long time ago, but I think writing RAW files to the SD card was faster, because the camera doesn't need to convert to JPEG.

However, I still use the SD card as the place to store the JPEGs and the CF for the RAWs. Not only for backup reasons, but also to have the JPEGs immediately available for easy sharing to others and I also really like the quality of the in-camera processing.




Same results for me--faster writes just with full size RAWs than with jpegs as backups to the SD.

And I can't imagine a scenario where I'd be so eager to show a picture that I'd rather have a jpg straight out of camera than a RAW processed even in DPP.  JPGs as backups would be a big step down in creative possibilities for the gems from a portraits session or wedding, should that rare crash or loss of the CF card every happen.

I really see no reason to crank out both jpgs and RAWs, but that's just my workflow.  A newspaper friend does everything in jpg, then quick edits in her vehicle before uploading to the paper.

Will admit I've never shot sports except for skateboarding, and in that case, short bursts were all I needed, and I had no problem with writing lag.

Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: August 29, 2014, 10:18:25 AM »
Who the heck would want a FF lens that only goes to f/5.6 at 105mm? 
Not me, but people that want a light, cheap lens for landscape, travel, & studio use where shallow DOF is never used.  6D shooters would likely be the target for this lens.

Your logic makes about as much sense as saying who would want a crop sensor, or would want a camera any less tough than the 1D X.

There's this little thing called market segmentation.  It's how big companies make money.  Reference Canon's profits on the Rebel line vs. the 1D line.

I think the logic is ok.  You are talking about what people will accept, not what they want.

I'm thinking about how dSLR's continue losing ground, and that putting out mediocre lenses which will produce disappointing results for new buyers accelerates that.

I'm committed to Canon.  I'm satisfied with my gear, in some cases extremely pleased.  I'd recommend Canon.  Their CPS is fantastic.

But I do think it is ok to point out blunders and express disappointment. 

Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: August 29, 2014, 10:12:32 AM »
Update to the 45mm and 90mm TS-E lenses.

A 50mm 1.2 without significant focus shift issues, and sharp edge to edge.

The endlessly missing ~14-24mm 2.8.

I guess these are lusted after by too few...

Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: August 29, 2014, 09:16:19 AM »
Who the heck would want a FF lens that only goes to f/5.6 at 105mm? 

For years I've been saying American businesses are under a curse of stupidity.  The Japanese might be under the same spell.  What a waste of marketing and manufacturing time.

PATHETIC if this rumor proves true.

Ok, now come the slavish apologist RemarkS.

Consumer demand tells a different story; price is an important factor meaning the glass is slow - which is fine for most people anyway. Check out all the Canon EF f/x-5.6 consumer zooms from the film era:

I think distinguishing dSLR's from smartphones makes better sense than making a lens with relatively deep DoF as a starting point at the long end.

I'm not sure going back to the good old days of film, flash bulbs, no radio control, no AF, and on and on is a great plan either.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 16