Messages

1

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deals: EOS-1D X & EOS 6D w/24-105 f/4L IS

« on: May 14, 2013, 10:52:36 AM »

Promoting eBay scammers now? 

2

Lenses / Re: EOS 1V and new EF L II lenses. Match made in heaven or ziltch?

« on: May 12, 2013, 10:26:49 AM »

Good day. Owing a 5D2 I have some nice opportunity to get a 1V for shooting B&W film whenever situation arises. I own a 24/1.4L II and 70-200/2.8L II which I understand are calibrated for digital cameras, for example subwavelength coating (SWC) on the former. Based on your experience are these lenses a performance improvement for a 1V or mismatch?

I don't think you lens choice will make a huge difference - there isn't any combination of film/processing/scanning available for 35mm that will even remotely maintain the superb optical quality of the new lenses through to your end result.

3

Lenses / Re: Canon Tele lenses vs Nikon tele lenses ( both with converters )

« on: May 12, 2013, 10:24:24 AM »

I've used both Nikon and Canon glass over the past several years, and there's really no comparison when it comes to the super-teles... Nikon's current lenses are at a performance level comparable to where Canon was back in 1999.

Nikon may have an edge when it comes to picking sensor suppliers (would they still even be in business without Sony?) but Canon has a huge lead when it comes to lens design (the Nikon 14-24 notwithstanding,...)

4

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 1.4 compatibility with future canon cameras

« on: May 03, 2013, 12:27:03 PM »

I think this is mainly made-up to cut into the sales of 3rd party lensmakers. It would be possible to make a DSLR body, that only accepts EF lenses. But to do so, there should be something in the lens that lets them identify as an EF lens. I do not think that Canon has anything like this in their older EF-lenses.

So if Canon likes to keep its compatibility to their old lenses, then the Sigma lenses will also keep working on EOS bodies.

It will be interesting to see, if we will get 3rd party lenses for the EOS-M or the Nikon 1, or it Canikon buildt this "feature" into their new mirrorles cameras.

Nikon has already patented a technology that could - potentially - prevent the use of third-party lenses on Nikon cameras:

http://petapixel.com/2013/04/14/nikon-patent-shows-password-protection-for-lensbody-combinations/

5

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D7100 ... Will Canon meet this specs?

« on: April 28, 2013, 12:39:57 PM »

It's unlikely that Canon would cripple any camera that much and hope that the noobs only look at the megapixel count before buying... 

6

Lenses / Re: TS-E 17mm or 24mm

« on: April 24, 2013, 08:21:58 AM »

If I was going to use it as a true walk around lens I'd get a second lens cap and cut the top off to make a custom hood, this won't vignette if you don't shift, if you do shift you have the time to take the "hood" off.

Using the bottom of the lens cap converted to a Lee filter holder does cut down on flare when you just use it as a hood (as I do), although it doesn't really offer very much lens protection.  You can shift about 7mm on the short axis and about 5mm on the long axis before you run into vignetting, and tilting doesn't cause any vignetting from the hood.

7

Lenses / Re: 17-40 F4L or Wide Angle Prime?

« on: April 23, 2013, 10:03:31 AM »

Well, the title says it all, that's my debate.
More than likely a prime under 40mm that has IS (like the 28mm F2 IS for example.)
ORRRR the 17-40 F4L.
Being used mainly for video (on tripods and dollys) and on a 5D MkIII.

If you're planning to use the lens mainly for video and will be using tripods and dollys, why are you concerned about having IS?  For this type of use, I'd be looking at the Zeiss ZE primes.

8

Lenses / Re: canon 5d mk3 what lens ?

« on: April 23, 2013, 10:01:22 AM »

The EF 24-105 f4L is a nice lens, and very versatile - if I had to choose just a single lens, that would probably be the one I'd pick.

However, once you try the 24-70 f2.8L II, it's difficult to settle for anything less... 

9

Lenses / Re: Trading my Canon 70-300 L for a 70-200 2.8 L ?

« on: April 23, 2013, 09:57:45 AM »

The 70-200 f2.8L IS would be a noticeable step up in image quality from the 70-300L, and would give you a much nicer background blur as well, but it is definitely bigger and heavier, so you would have to consider whether or not this would suit your shooting style.

If you don't mind the size and weight of the f2.8 zoom, then you should really look at the newer 70-200 f2.8L II IS - it's a big improvement over the previous 70-200 f2.8L IS (and a huge leap above the 70-300L - even if you use it with a 1.4x-III extender).

10

Lenses / Re: Budget lens for birding ?

« on: April 23, 2013, 09:51:04 AM »

The push me pull me is a dust hog. Birding is field photography ergo I find the 400 prime a better selection.

The "dust hog" or "dust pump" nonsense is just that - a silly internet myth propagated by people who have never actually used the lens.

If the OP is planning to buy a newer lens, he shouldn't worry about getting a "soft copy" - the early problems with quality control were cleaned up about 10 or 12 years ago (this lens has been in production since 1998).

11

Lenses / Re: TS-E 17mm or 24mm

« on: April 23, 2013, 09:41:32 AM »

I have both the 17mm f4L and 24mm f3.5L II TS-E lenses, although the 24mm has mostly been sitting in the camera bag since I got the 17mm (even thought the 24mm is the sharper of the two, by a tiny margin).

I like the 17mm TS-E lens because it's sharper and has less distortion than any other lens of comparable focal length (with the possible exception of the Zeiss 15mm f2.8, but it won't accept graduated filters).  The tilt and shift features are just nice bonuses, and I use the lens shifted more often than not.  I also like that I can use the same Lee and Singh-Ray filters on both TS-E lenses, and both lenses work surprisingly well with the Canon extenders.

12

Lenses / Re: Open your eyes

« on: April 17, 2013, 09:38:45 AM »

You better get used to the fact that CR is not a private hobby anymore. It is a business that wants to make profit. 15k visitors per day according to http://digsitevalue.org/s/canonrumors.com . Advertising is the way to fund such a website. As long as the site can still inform and/or entertain you, it is fine. Just don't be naive and expect somebody else's altruism funding it for you. And yes, it is still you who has to compare prices before you buy.

I hope CR is not making any income from this site, because I couldn't find a copy of their US FTC Disclosure statement anywhere...

possiblly because they are not a US site........

This site is hosted by a US company, so it is a de facto a US site and as such, are required by US law to disclose any financial consideration they receive for reviewing or recommending gear or stores.

Just sayin'...

13

Lenses / Re: Open your eyes

« on: April 17, 2013, 08:57:27 AM »

You better get used to the fact that CR is not a private hobby anymore. It is a business that wants to make profit. 15k visitors per day according to http://digsitevalue.org/s/canonrumors.com . Advertising is the way to fund such a website. As long as the site can still inform and/or entertain you, it is fine. Just don't be naive and expect somebody else's altruism funding it for you. And yes, it is still you who has to compare prices before you buy.

I hope CR is not making any income from this site, because I couldn't find a copy of their US FTC Disclosure statement anywhere...

14

Lenses / Re: I have just lost confidence with Canon Rumors & B&H

« on: April 17, 2013, 08:52:31 AM »

We get these same pricing scams from the same dealer every time there's a Canon rebate.  Most of us know better, but the OP is obviously new to this...

15

Technical Support / Re: Which RAW processing software do you use?

« on: April 16, 2013, 03:07:46 PM »

Are there any others that I missed?

You missed several others, but the only one worth mentioning (IMHO) is Capture One.