October 23, 2014, 08:39:49 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 - Dutchphotographer

Pages: [1]
1
Lenses / Re: AFMA - Is is really necessary?
« on: June 19, 2013, 12:23:33 PM »
Yes I use Focal Pro.
Some of my lenses need little to none AFMA, some like my 85mm 1.8 need +8.
I once returned 2 sigma's 30mm 1.4 that needed more than +20.

Focal pro also allows you to test lens sharpness and plots a graph per aperture. It's quick to set up and verify your lenses are work as expected. Also included is a focus consistency test.

2
Lenses / Re: Help with Long Lens + Backup Body choice for Iceland
« on: May 28, 2013, 05:42:57 PM »


200mm on the 7D, Puffins do start to notice you once you crawl up to them...

3
Lenses / Re: Help with Long Lens + Backup Body choice for Iceland
« on: May 26, 2013, 03:29:02 PM »


It seems that most of the discussion resolves around the zoom range you need for the Puffins. If you go early July, you can get to them at the cliffs edge as close as you dare....


4
Lenses / Re: Help with Long Lens + Backup Body choice for Iceland
« on: May 24, 2013, 03:01:08 PM »
Hi,

I visited Iceland last year with my 7D and took only 17-55IS 2.8 and 70-200 f4 L IS.

I could get as close to puffins as 2 meters. Just go to an area that allows that, like the Guided tour at Ingolshofdi.
Instead of a large collection of primes, why not take versatile zoom like the 24-105 instead?
I had 2.5 weeks of great weather, but if its rain and wind as is not uncommon, I wouldn't wanna be changing primes all the time when hiking. Just put he 70-200 f4 on the crop body and enjoy the holiday...

Thansk for the advice, I take it you did not miss at all any more reach than 200mm (with crop body). But was you 17mm wide enough in crop for the icelandic landscapes? you see, I'm leaning towards option 1 in my original post but my big fear is loosing the wide angle capability in case the 5DIII fails and I have to rely on the APS-C only.

Btw, i'm not taking all the primes, probably the 21, 35 and 85 only. The 4th lens will be either the 70-200 F4 or the 70-200 2.8 II or the 100-400, base don your recommendations  ;=)

On wide angle, there where no subjects that wouldn't fit into 28 mm full frame equivalent, composition wise you may prefer wider of course, like your 21mm.

If your really afraid of camera failure, yes I would take a second full frame. Never had a camera die on me, but twice while on holiday In the USA my standard zoom died....

Really you can always take along as much gear as you want, question is if its a problem lugging around all day.....
In that regard the 70-200f4 is a lot lighter than the 2.8 or 100-400.

Some non photography related advice, consider camping ( rented an RV), saves a lot of travel and some campgrounds are amazing, like the one at Godafoss. Due to the extreme lengthy daytime, you can do a lot of photography in the evening without bothering to drive to hotels/guesthouses, that may not be near in some cases.

Also, every town has a warm pool open till 9 PM, that's almost for free, so we never bothered to use the camping showers.

5
Lenses / Re: Help with Long Lens + Backup Body choice for Iceland
« on: May 24, 2013, 02:09:35 PM »
Hi,

I visited Iceland last year with my 7D and took only 17-55IS 2.8 and 70-200 f4 L IS.

I could get as close to puffins as 2 meters. Just go to an area that allows that, like the Guided tour at Ingolshofdi.
Instead of a large collection of primes, why not take a versatile zoom like the 24-105 instead?
I had 2.5 weeks of great weather, but if its rain and wind as is not uncommon, I wouldn't wanna be changing primes all the time when hiking. Just put he 70-200 f4 on the crop body and enjoy the holiday...





6
Hi all,

With all the talk about inconsistent focus of camera bodies like the Canon 7D (that i own) I decided to buy Focal Pro which allows you to self test to autofocus consistency of your body.

It runs a series of 10 test shots and calculates the Quality of Focus based on the consistency.
I selected to run it with automatic defocusing (max far) and no defocussing betwen each shot.
Results with the 17-55 2.8 IS at 55mm:

 - Defocus Far Quality OF Focus: 97,6 %
 - No defocus: 97.4 %

I am curious what other people have found for result for the same or other bodies.

Note that this test confirmed that my body/lens combination focusses relibaly and accurate.

Also note that the Reikan Focal site has an expirimental report (http://www.reikan.co.uk/focalweb/index.php/online-tools/lenscamera-information/) that allows you to browse uploaded results for tested lens and body combinations, but is not clear to me how these focus statisctics are related to the Focal Pro test reports (with only outputs the QOF percentage).

Therefore the request of people with to share some of their test results directly.

Regards
Marco

7
Canada / Re: Camera calibration/checkover
« on: April 11, 2013, 08:00:41 AM »
You want only the camera to be checked, not the camera lens combinations?

You can also do a lot yourself. I use Focal pro to Micro adjust focus and also check AF accuracy and consistency for my lenses as well as test the sharpness of my lenses at all apertures. Doesn't take more then a couple of hours.

Pages: [1]