January 27, 2015, 08:49:48 PM

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 - docsmith

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 23
More charts that make the lens appear more favorable:


Compared to the Tamron:

Still waiting for TDP ISO 12233 test results.  I get a kick out of the numbers and they sometimes illustrate something I can not distinguish on the ISO 12233 results....but, at the end of the day, TDP chart results correlate best with my real world experiences.

Thanks for the link.  Looks like the 150-600S is handily beating the Tamron at 150 mm and 300 mm.  Too bad I think most people, especially considering the size and weight, will want this lens for 600 mm.  Thus, if this result holds true with other reviews, I would favor the 100-400 II or 70-300 for 150-300 mm range as they have distinct size and weight advantages.  And the advantage over the Tamron @ 600 mm is limited with the Tamron being half as expensive and lighter.

I'm interested to see what other reviews, such as TDP, show, but the 150-600S continues to be "Highly Recommended" (Camera Labs, Ephotozine, a bunch of others), but in the last year some very tough competition has entered this range.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF Lens Technology Video
« on: January 14, 2015, 04:20:02 PM »
was awesome..

just me or does he sound like Kai in serious mode?

It sounds like the guy that stole Kai's lunch and made him such a Nikon fanboy ;)

EOS-M / Re: Why do I keep my Eos M?
« on: January 09, 2015, 01:01:52 PM »
Same set up, 5DIII is my primary camera and I bought the EOS-M a couple years ago.

I use it when I want a small and light camera, when I want a "second body" (say, when shooting birds, have it for the occasional wide-angle shot), or when I do not want to stand out as "a photographer."  I also think I have found another use for it.  I think I will get an EWA-Marine housing, a filter adapter and use it for underwater photography.  I could also use my 5DIII, but I feel better taking something I spent $300 on underwater.

I've been impressed by the IQ.  It could be better and I honestly hope that Canon releases a very good M3.

But, I do use my 5DIII >95% of the time. 

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III Replacement Talk [CR2]
« on: January 09, 2015, 06:42:39 AM »
Works for me.  A true replacement for the 5DIII (which I would consider) with similar price and image file size and then the "3D" but called the 5Ds that essentially are answers to the D800.  I would expect the 5Ds to be lower production higher priced cameras compared to the 5DIV.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 150-600 sports testing
« on: January 02, 2015, 02:47:42 PM »
Thanks for the offer Sanj.

I also have the 150-600S (and shot with the 5DIII).  I have been using it for a month.  Once you get used to the weight (about 2-3 times out shooting with it), I have become more and more impressed with it as a lens.

But I do wonder about IQ and AF speed with the 1.4x TC.  I currently only have the 2x III.  I am considering getting either Canon's or Sigma's 1.4xTC if I start hearing reports that the IQ and AF are good.  Thus far, I have heard one such report.  So, I would love to hear your opinion.


Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: December 31, 2014, 11:08:23 AM »
If you can afford it, get both.

The thought has crossed my mind more than once.  ;)

I am also waiting on more reviews of the 400 DO II.  So far all we have is Roger's quick test, but, at least the resolution, looks exceptional. 

But, for now, the 150-600S will suffice.  I can fit it in my backpack, but am using a Pelican Storm iM2500 with it when traveling.  But it is great that the 100-400II seems to be such an exceptional lens.

Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: December 31, 2014, 07:09:06 AM »
Mr. Carnathan certainly loves Canon!

Too bad this lens is sharpest at the wide end.  I have a 70-200/2.8 II that fills that need.  I was hoping for very sharp at 400mm.  The new Sigma is looking better and better.


Just about everyone who has reviewed the Sigma has complained that it is too heavy for hand-held use - not only is it heavy but the heaviest part, the front lens elements, protrude out very far unbalancing an already heavy lens. The beauty of the Tamron 150-600mm and now even more so the 100-400 II is their portability combined with pretty good IQ.
I wouldn't say they complained that it is too heavy for hand-held use.  Actually, they used it hand held and certainly noted its weight.  I am one of the few with the 150-600S and have only used it hand held.  Sure it is heavy, but I've gotten used to it.  It is a heckuva lens.  Believe me, I am tempted by the 100-400II because of its size and MFD, but so far I am sticking with the 150-600S. 

Bryan's reviews are almost always reflective of my own experiences.  If he loves the lens, I have little doubt I would too.  My only issue is that I really wanted more reach than 400 mm.  So, I am watching the IQ and the AF performance of the 100-400II +1.4TC.  But all that time, I am shooting and liking the 150-600S more and more.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms Development of High Megapixel Camera
« on: December 30, 2014, 11:48:42 AM »
I haven't read through 19 pages of comments...

But I believe if this is the 5D4, a lot of people will be using the 5D3 for a lot of years to come.
The 5DIII was nearly perfectly aimed at event photographers.  I don't get why they would change that with the 5DIV unless it had two modes, one for ultra resolution/large file size and another that maybe used pixel binning to create smaller higher quality images that allow it to be an improvement over the 5DIII for event photographers. 

But, barring something like that, I think you are right. 

Lenses / Re: 400mm DO II
« on: December 19, 2014, 06:21:58 AM »
Huge improvement over Mk 1.  The fact that Roger is using new test charts makes it impossible to really compare it to other lenses, but, still, it is significantly better than the 100-400 II and 400 DO I.


Lenses / Re: EF 100-400mm II - first impressions
« on: December 18, 2014, 06:04:14 PM »
Hi Alan

Thanks for the test shots. Any impressions of the AF speed and accuracy with the 1.4x TC?


Lenses / Re: Lens as a gift. Non Photographer buying... :)
« on: November 25, 2014, 06:39:33 AM »
On a crop, 100 mm L macro would give you the ff equiv of 160 mm.  Little long for portraits.  Good for macro.  I never used my 100 L for portraits when I shot crop.  On FF it is an amazing portrait lens.

I would go with the 85 f/1.8 if you want tight portraits or the Sigma 50 f/1.4 for a general portrait lens.   The 70-200 f/4 or a 24-105 f/4 (Canon or Sigma) are other thoughts for a "mid-range" zoom on a crop.  What is your budget?

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 23, 2014, 07:23:50 AM »
I browse this website quite often since 2012. I have never seen so many negative comments about Canon these days in comparison with before.
Does Canon really not satisfying its customers lately or is it that there are new members in the forum who like to put down Canon in comparison with other companies?

I am a very satisfied customer.  I also think canon has set he pace and innovated in other ways besides the sensor.  I do hope to see sensor improvements in the next xD body, especially in low ISO read noise.  But, that said, my 5DIII is so amazingly good.  It is a better camera than I am a photographer.  Sure 3rd party lenses are getting better, but Canon is releasing some interesting lenses and I am happy to have competition.  But this year alone Canon has released 3 lenses I am considering adding.

I've been around CR since 2010.  I actually don't see the switch in the negativity you mention.  This site has always had a very healthy dose of criticism and negativity.  There have been a few more conflicts over the negativity as I believe certain people are getting fed up with it. Before, it was often unopposed.   And perhaps the negativity has manifested itself more specifically on the sensors (mostly) and mirrorless (lesser).  But the most positive response I can think of to a Canon dSLR from this site was the 7DII.  The 6D was absolutely shredded here.  Delays in the 1DX, Big White lenses, etc too.  The 5DIII, a complete disappointment and minor upgrade at best over the 5DII which would result in waves of defections to Nikon and the D800 if you were to read the original threads on CR. 

There is some very interesting content on this site.  But I guess I disagree with your premise.  To me, the interesting content is actually growing more frequent.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5DIV: 36 MP US $ 3799 TBA in March 2015
« on: November 23, 2014, 06:58:42 AM »
Viewfinder 98% coverage????

Flash sync 1/200???

Shutter rated for 150,000 cycles???

Canon currently calls the 5DIII viewfinder "approximately 100%"  Why would they backtrack?

The flash sync and shutter cycles are the same as the current 5DIII and less than the 7DII.  I would expect the 5DIV to have a better flash sync speed than the 7DII, if not at least the same.  Shutter life, perhaps you could make the argument that the size difference, but still, I'd expect the 5DIV to be the same or better than the 7DII.

Specs seem like bunk to me.

Just saw reference in another thread to a mixed response of 2 CF cards and then a few lines down, a reference to SD card.  This rumor is a poorly put together wishlist. 

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: New Sigma Lenses Coming Q1 of 2015 [CR1]
« on: November 17, 2014, 10:09:57 PM »
I would be very interested in what a 24A could deliver. No interest in a 14-24 f/4. I'd just get the canon 16-35 f4 IS. The 16-20 f/2 would also be interesting. As said above, minimal coma, vignetting, and sharp at f2-2.8, that would be an excellent nightscape lens.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 23