October 22, 2014, 05:06:39 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 - hendrik-sg

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Canon General / Re: More Canon Lens Mentions [CR2]
« on: October 10, 2014, 12:01:51 PM »
To get a FOW this wide, the use of 8-15 fisheye at about 11mm on FF (with black corners) and correct with the hemi correction tool gives quite nice resultes. Compromise is, ist not exactlly rectangular projection and sharpness suffers at 180° FOW.

- it's 180° and not 120°
- it's 1000$ not 3000$
- the look is more natural than strongle recangular in my opinion.

For 3000$ one gets both (8-15 and 17TS) lenses, which gives all Fisheye Options, give UWA TS, 11mm rectangular with stitching for static subjects, and 180° FOW with correction in compromised quality.

All this together is more for me, than a 11-24 zoom for the same money.

To get compositions acceptable with lenses this wide, needs (at least for me) lot of time and patience, then using the tripod and maybe a lens change to take home all options is no problem and may get better results than a single shot with the zoom

The 17 TS has soft Corners fully shifted and lots of vignetting, thats true, but stitching gives a 40MP 11mm pic, which downscaled is really fine, and any other 11-12mm option has to prove her benefit first.

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera to Come in Two Variants? [CR1]
« on: October 10, 2014, 06:04:57 AM »
That would be nuts.

Imho this isn't the point, people buying all kinds of premium products can be called nuts.

But with the 5d3 release and the multiple delays for lenses and cameras, many Canon users have proven to be rather resistant against "jumping ship". Probably simply because they like their long-term brand, Canon service, Canon usability, Canon whatever and are as conservative as Canon themselves. If you have €25k lenses, another $1000 more or less for a camera that actually makes use of their potential resolution is a minor expense w/o running into compatibility issues with adapters.

That is not really the point. Existing users may be committed to a particular brand, but new users are not. By not competing effectively in the market Canon might think that their current user base will keep on buying their stuff, and that may be correct, but new users are going to buy the best tech available now, which is not Canon. And those users are going to show life long loyalty to whatever choices they make now as well. So, the damage done to Canon's market share might not show up tomorrow, but in a decade or so from now the effects of their short-sightedness is going to manifest itself.

My expierience is the oposite: i know 2 new Canon users, who bought a xxx Line with kit lens who told me, that Nikon would no be on a good Level to date, and a Canon cam would be better. New users often are uninformed and buy what their friend have or wat they see most frequent.

Therfore the market leader is in a Position which is quite comfortable and Canon uses this and is for sure the less innovative photo brand at the Moment, but the most profitable (wich means nothing else than that we pay to much)

To Friends who asked me for advice (for Safari/wildlife) with around 1000E Budget bought 24MP Nikon 5100 with 18-55 & 55-300 tele instead of of Canon xxx with 18MP and 18-55 & 55-250 tele, which gives much better Resolution on distant subjects

For them ist not a question if there is a 17mm TS, or a 8-15 fisheye zoom and which 600mm 4.0 is the better one

Means, this politics (of non inovation) is dangerous and the user opinion can Switch, like about Nokia, Long time they were told to have the most user friendly mobiles) even if there Situation is different in detail

ist really sure we will see 50MP FF cams, as we will see 50Mp APSC cams and as we will see 50MP phone cams

question is when and what is the benefit we get

Timing may be 6 month after Company leaders have decided, main benefit may be for the Producers of disk space

Business of Photography/Videography / Re: 4K, 5K, 6K and Up Video
« on: October 09, 2014, 06:30:22 AM »
One limit is the resolution of our eyes. If you look at a 42'' Screen from 4 meter, between 720p and 1080p there is no visible difference.

To fully enjoy a 4k Screen i have to be 1.5m in front of a 55'' screen. That's not the normal living room configuration.

4k Needs a 80'' Screen at 3m viewing distance, and it is a aestetical question if y want to have a TV in your living room, which is so domitating optically, otherwise its not giving much benefit.

What i would realy love is a 8k Computer Display for stills, as i am sure soon even we Canon shooters will have at least 32MB resolution, but from the limitaion of our eyes, that must be a huge screen where we are standing and mooving in front of to see the details, wo won't overview such a screen (or print) in full resulution.

Lenses / Re: Is This a Canon EF 11-24 f/4L?
« on: September 18, 2014, 02:06:58 AM »
Maybe this lens is at the limit of what is possible with reasonable IQ and for acceptable price.

Maybe the question is, "have this lens without IS" or "not have it at all", just because there is no room for the IS unit or because of other restrictions.

The same may be true about 2.8 opening, it may be impossible, or unconvienient in weight, size or price...

So lets hope it is real, and has good optical performance

Lenses / Re: When will we see a replacement for the 100-400?
« on: September 10, 2014, 05:03:06 AM »
a new 100-400 will not canibalize the 200-400, thats a completely different Price league and the handling is completly different. Nobody will carry a 200-400 exept for a exactlty planned shooting, or for a special photo tour.

Nikkon seems to have a really good 80-400 lens, and the tamron 150-600 seems to be not bad as well, then there will be a new Sigma.

Maybe 100-400 Looks Little boring compared to the other offers. maybe Canon can strech the range to 450 5.6 with 82mm filter thread, or maybe they have to go for 6.3 opening, without extender compatibility then

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye - Durability?
« on: September 09, 2014, 05:44:22 AM »
Lens cap and shade are 2 pieces, where the cap is cliped on the shade. As generalle known this Connection tends to release unwanted, in the bag for example.

I blocked this release by thooth sticks, which works perfecty. I keep the lens closed, exept when effectivly in use, and remove the shade with the cap on.

If one does not want to see the lens anytime later, i would bond the two parts together

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: SIGMA 150-600!!
« on: September 05, 2014, 09:48:12 AM »
Tha 300 2.8 ii is in a different Price league, nobody can expect the zoom to rival this one. Whats the good News is, that it will put some pressure on Canon..... and offer an alternative to the Tamron.

Interesting will be, which one has better autofocus, better IQ at the long end and what Canons response will be

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 12-24mm f/2.8 L - Constructing the Enigma
« on: September 05, 2014, 09:34:54 AM »
I think 12-24 2.8 may be impossible, at least with good IQ. Lenses tend to get bulbous and big when wider and when faster.

The 14 2.8 is bulbous and the 17tse which has a medium format coverage is bulbous and huge. The Nikon 14-24 is a monstrous lens, and bulbous. the Sigma 12-24 s bulbous, slow and has mediocre IQ which nobody dreams about. The 17tse with a hypothetical 1.4x speed Booster may be a 12mm 2.8, but it's huge, expensive, bulbous and a fix focal lengh.

My unscientific guess is, that the patented 11-24 f4 is the maximum strech which is possible, and we know nothing about it's IQ. I am sure, if it would be producable for acceptable kost, and if IQ would be good, Canon would release this killer lens. If they don't, i think it's because of poor IQ or other unknown reasons.

« on: August 27, 2014, 07:33:18 AM »

Will a 60D do?


If there is sufficient of light then then 60D might do that, just as the 7D or the 70D could do it over there. there is however no guarantee that you can do it from Canon, as it is not build in in the design of the camera. I am not aware which firmware this even might block, but I think Canon could have done this. Did you look at the quality of your link to digital picture? even in the center the sharpness is gone when you compare the 560mm with the 400mm.

It may be interesting from a technical Point of view if it works or not. But:

(My expierience is based on a 50d, with 300 2.8 IS (original one) and Ext 2x iii)

with extender one needs 3 stops more light, 2 stops get lost by the extender and with 2x maginifcation one needs 2x faster shutter Speed.

in a situation where ISO 400 works ISO 3200 would be necessary. this ISO value is already quite bad for a crop camera. Next the quality reduction by the extender and poor AF performance comes to the equation.

With all of this, in my expierience, the lighting situation must be really great that the extender gives a really better result than cropping, but the risk to completely loose the shot (by to finding the subject in the viewfinder until ist gone, by motion blur, by trying to low ISO, by poor AF, by bad framing, etc) is much higher.

means, for my use, i would ot nmeed a long reach tele combination with F8 opening on a crop camera, F5.6 is bad enough. Maybe with lots of practise, there may be a benefit in a 840mm F8 combination, but this needs lots of skill, ond if one has These skills, one knows how to handle the difficulties, and taping the extender may be the smallest difficulty

Canon are market leader.

There is no need to have the best products, to have the highest prices is enough to guarantee exclusivity.


Shot with 6D and ef 70-200 f/2.8 mk2 at f/6.3 1/320 ISO 12800. (Yes, I know f/6.3 was a poor choice, should have gone with f/4.5, my bad).

may i ask you, why you stop down a 2.8 lens to 6.3 and use ISO 12800 to compensate. you could have used ISO <3000 at f=2.8? at ISO 12800 you have a lot of loss in details even with a 6d, use the len wider open at less ISO would give you better quality technically.

If you want to shoot stopped down to 5.6 or less (to have more DOF for example or to be less critical with focusing, why not use a 100-400 lens for even more versatility in focal lengh? Maybe use some of your budget for a 5D3, which has much better autofocus. you 6D you can use as a 2nd cam with a normal zoom, to get wider shots.

Canon General / Re: Another Canon Medium Format Mention
« on: August 11, 2014, 12:25:10 PM »
On a sensor doubled in size by a factor 2 (crop factor 0.5) a lens 100mm f 2.8 delivers the same picture like a 50mm f1.4 lens on FF.
No, it'll be like a 50/5.6.  The light is spread out.


50mm f1.4 on FF is like
100mm f2.8 on MF with crop factor 0.5

Both lenses have opening of about 36mm, and yes on the 100mm lens the light is more spread out :). The equivalent you propose (50 f 5.6) has a opening of about 9mm

Canon General / Re: Another Canon Medium Format Mention
« on: August 11, 2014, 11:47:01 AM »
Could they do this with a built-in reverse speed booster so EF lenses would work?

This would just be a teleconverter. Magnifying the Image just behind the lens to project it on a bigger sensor magnifies all, image, aberrations and diffraction in the same amount. This would only be useful if they could not produce sensors with higher density, which is not the case.

On a sensor doubled in size by a factor 2 (crop factor 0.5) a lens 100mm f 2.8 delivers the same picture like a 50mm f1.4 lens on FF. The question is, which lens can be done better? This is no easy question, as lens design is more difficult with larger image circle (means a 100 2.8 Macro FF Lens will not cover the MF sensor).

One of the core problems of MF is, that FF lenses are that good and that nice speced, and as sensor density is no problem. The key for more resolution is improving lens design and sensor density towards the diffraction limit. Impressive example is the development of astronomy telescopes, there a large opening and sophisticated post Processing are the key for best results.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50 f/1.2L Goes Missing at Canon Germany
« on: July 31, 2014, 12:49:41 PM »
On lensrentals.com is a good comparision of different 50mm lenses, even the most expensive Leica 50 f0.95 is among them (but not yet the Sigma Art and the Otus)

Its clearly visible there that there is a compromis to be accepted between fastness and sharpness, which may be pushed by accepting high costs but not until perfection. the Leica 50f0.95 is average sharp and may have average bokeh. the best lens was a moderate fast Leica lens.

Reading this, it may be an illusion that canon CAN manage to combine best bokeh, higest speed (1.0-1.2), image stabilisation and having the sharpness of the Art and Otus lenses. Beside that physics may prevent the existence of the hoped for lens, Canon would never bring this one in the price range of sigma if they have it.

If Canon had a lens like the Sigma or the Otus, they would price it below the Otus, but way above the current 1.2L.

I dont know, if IS can be easily added to a cheap gaussian design like the 50.1.8, but i assume a 50mm f2.0 IS lens can be realised for acceptable costs.

50 1.8 > 50 2.0IS for maybe 250$ with build like the other new IS primes. This fits most needs (not wishes) in an economical way.
50 1.4 > 50 1.4L with similar performance like the art lens, for 1.5x price. This will be a top product for professional use, it may be better (in a non mystic way) than the 50 2.0 IS

50 1.0-1.2L as a luxury portrait lens, maybe for 3k$-5k$. Expensive wedding Pro's, Fanboys, amatuers with deep pockets and collectors will buy this one. The optical quality may be better than the 1.2L, but worse than the 50 1.4L. Production cost, and quality wise this one may be in the same range as the noctilux, just more sold units.

50 2.5 macro. Did anybody ever bought this one?  I guess will stay as it is or die

This allignment would respect the physical possibilities, mirror the trend of bringing replacement products on a higher (price) level than the precedors, give all owners of the current lenses a logical upgrade path...

Lets see what happens, and to be clear, this is some well reflected speculation and no rumor

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5