July 23, 2014, 10:48:21 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 - Canon1

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11
Software & Accessories / Re: Rain protection for 5D3 and lens
« on: July 14, 2014, 06:43:07 PM »
OpTech is ok and nice to have as a backup.  Best I have ever used is Lenscoat.  Works great, durable, waterproof, access to the controls....

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 1.4x II vs EF 1.4x III
« on: July 13, 2014, 10:43:43 AM »
I plan to use the teleconverter on a 400mm f2.8L IS II and 1DX, 5DIII, etc.

I shoot a lot of sports, so fast and accurate focus is important. You don't often get a second chance. The speed and accuracy is supposed to favor the 1.4x III. I've seen the claims that it's faster, but no numbers to back them up and the 1.4x II works quite well.

For this particular application I am not too concerned about the corners. Sharper corners is better, but not a priority.

To my eyes, looking at the center and mid-frame, this comparison on tdp favors the 1.4x II, but they are close. Unfortunately, they don't have a comparison, using the 400mm. I guess it could be my eyes, or maybe tdp the setup needed a bit of AFMA. That's why I am hoping to find more examples.


$200 is not a lot of money in a relative sense and I'll probably bite on the 1.4x III, but am just trying to make an informed decision, before I commit.

Since you are using it with a II lens.... don't hesitate.  I don't have a number to back up my claim, but the VIII Tele is a world of difference with regard to AF speed and responsiveness over the VII TC. 

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 1.4x II vs EF 1.4x III
« on: July 12, 2014, 10:46:29 PM »
This isnt exactly a field comparison, but I ran a FOCAL test comparing these two TC's with a 500mm IS version I lens.  Graphs are below.  My tests (repeatable) showed that the version III was about 2-3% sharper then the version II.  Hardly worth the cost with this older lens. 

If you are pairing with a Version II supertele then the cost to upgrade is well worth it, not for the IQ, but rather the AF performance is far far superior with the III.

From strictly an IQ standpoint I don't personally believe it is worth it. 

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 12, 2014, 04:09:59 PM »
Rotating zoom ring

Bummer.  :(

You'd prefer one that wouldn't rotate?   :P

Despite the controversy, I rather like my push pull 100-400.  Never had a dust problem...  I would welcome faster AF.  That's the only downside I have experienced with mine.  I would be (pleasantly) surprised if the price is $2400.

...it is not linked to my home-owners policy, so if I ever have a claim it won't jack my rates elsewhere.  It's a no questions asked policy that covers theft, damage, loss, etc...

I wouldn't be too sure about that.  While it's true that the State Farm personal articles policy is 'standalone' (not a rider or endorsement), claims against it are still reported to CLUE, and insurers use that database (and your credit score, etc.) to determine your rates and eligibility.

I should clarify.  It wouldn't cause my other CURRENT policies (including the personal articles policy) with State Farm to suffer increased premiums if I make a claim.  (I have this in writing).  I don't know if/how it would impact future policies with either State Farm or elsewhere should I have a claim.  I am not the type of person to shop insurance every year to save a buck so for a customer like me... CLUE reporting is irrelevant (Most companies only have a three year look-back anyway).

First, I agree, you should only insure what you absolutely have to.

I insure everything.  If someone grabs my camera bag there are thousands of dollars worth of gadgets and "cheap" lenses.  I've got almost $1,000 in just memory cards and spare batteries! It all adds up, and the insurance costs to cover everything is well worth the peace of mind. 

Many years ago, I was given the advice that you insure yourself only against events that happen very rarely and are too expensive for you to cover. If you can afford to replace your gear, then don't insure it...

The OP mentions having $45,000 worth of gear – that's about what I have, and I'd find it difficult (if not impossible) to replace that amount in the short term.

But a good reminder is that you should consider carefully before filing a claim, at least for US policies covering personal (not business) use.  Those are generally linked to homeowners'/renters' policies, claims against them go into the same database (CLUE), and can affect rates and even eligibility for home/rental coverage. 

I view my policy as 'catastrophic' coverage.  If I drop my 135/2L to the pavement and it shatters, I'll buy a new one.  If my 1D X + 600/4L IS II fall off a cliff, or if my house is robbed and all my gear taken, I'll file a claim.

I insure all of my gear under a Personal Articles policy with State Farm.  Cost is $1.25/$100 of coverage.  No deductible, and it is not linked to my home-owners policy, so if I ever have a claim it won't jack my rates elsewhere.  It's a no questions asked policy that covers theft, damage, loss, etc...

EOS-M / Re: Cheap 400mm advice
« on: July 06, 2014, 04:21:43 AM »
Thanks for all the info at least now I have a better understanding of what's required. Think I'll leave this endeavor for now, don't have any money to spare for gear for at least another 6 month. Damn residence tax came in this month, gonna be poor for a while.


How do you intend to share your images, or view them?  Online? If so... there is nothing wrong with cropping.  Don't worry about it and enjoy a nice clear night when you get one.

Software & Accessories / Re: Tripod centre column - yes or no
« on: July 05, 2014, 09:35:22 PM »
by the time you get the legs finally set perfectly the scene is gone and some slightly undamped whatever is infinitely more damped than a scene totally missed too

No center column. Instead of a tripod with a center column get a tripod without one and put a leveling base on it. Then you just get the legs close and use the base to quickly set level. Then if you move a few feet you can adjust level without changing leg extension.

Very fast, very stable.

PowerShot Cameras / Re: G1x vs. G16 vs. ??
« on: July 04, 2014, 03:19:09 PM »
I wouldn't get a G1X.  The AF speed is pretty weak and it has a hard time acquiring focus in lower light.  Also, Min focus distance is not that close.  IQ is pretty decent though.

I sold mine and got a G1X2 when it came out.  Its a great little camera.  Much better AF, much closer min focus distance, and really good high iso.  They fixed everything I didnt like about the G1X.

Couple of cons though:  The new screen is just annoying.  I preferred the articulating screen that could reverse to protect the LCD.  Also, the socket for the mounting plate is right next to the battery door, so I am having a devil of a time finding a plate that will stay mounted AND allow me to access the battery and SD card,  I will probably modify my own. 

Animal Kingdom / Re: Common MYNA
« on: July 02, 2014, 07:58:48 AM »
Nice looking bird Anil.  What lens and camera body were you using? 

The images all look pretty soft, which may have been due to the high ISO or if your lens was not calibrated... or depending on what your focal length was too slow a shutter speed/instability.

If you were using a fast lens you could have easily widened your aperture to achieve a faster shutter and lower ISO. 

Compositionally I suggest you try to de-center your subject a little.  You can either crop some off the left side of the image or compose in camera with your center point on the head of the bird.   It is generally appealing to allow more space in front of where a subject is facing.  This is just a general rule and in many cases is broken successfully, but with your images I think it would be beneficial.

Looking forward to more!

Happy shooting.

Photography Technique / Re: The definition of insanity
« on: June 25, 2014, 05:43:54 PM »
They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome… I don't know how many times I have to be taught the same lesson: photographers and non-photographers are like oil and water.

I just returned from 3 weeks on the big island of Hawaii with my wife. We had a great trip, but I once again schlepped way too much photo gear along thinking I'd have the time and quiet to really focus--pun intended. Instead, I should have left the bulky, heavy, expensive, theft-prone camera pack (replete with 2 bodies, 6 lenses, tripod, filters, timers, flash, etc.) at home, and simply taken my 5D3 and 24-105. Nothing else was really used.

In my experience, when I travel alone or with another photog, there always seems to be time to set-up and shoot, but when I'm with one or more non-photographers, all of that "nonsense" takes too long.

Can anyone relate?

I can relate, however I can also make a suggestion.  When I travel with non-photographers I make a point of waking up well before sunrise to shoot.  I generally get out on location in the dark.  Then I shoot for a couple hours and I am back to meet the family for breakfast.  The rest of the day is not great for shooting, so I bring a camera but just for record and memory shots.  Then I always try to plan for a day or two where I can sneak out for a nice sunset. 

I get my fill when the light is great... and I don't "waste" non-photog's time during the day... when the light is poor anyway.

EOS Bodies / Re: What do you hope-for MOST from Canon in 2014
« on: June 22, 2014, 04:45:48 PM »
7d2 and 100-400 mk2. (Preferably together) 8)

You could put a spacer between the camera and whatever foot you like so that the door has room to open.


Thanks Jim. It would need to be a really big spacer as the hinge side is right against the plate mount. Sort of would defeat the purpose of being a small (relatively) p&s camera. Thanks for the thought.

Really right stuff made a plate for the mark 1 version. I called them about the mark 2 version. They said they wanted to gauge the market before making a plate. If everyone can request it from them they are likely to produce it.

I already asked RRS about it. They informed me that they were not going to make one. Time will tell if they change their mind.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11