Messages

1

Reviews / Re: Incapable of posting to the adorama thread money still not returned

« on: June 12, 2013, 05:27:04 PM »

All's well that ends well

BTW...what's a "Cheque"?

Yea, it's a quandary, spellcheck for USA, or Spellcheck for the rest of the world, tough decision.

But your right, it ended well, could have ended better, but still ended well.

Spellcheque

2

Reviews / Re: Incapable of posting to the adorama thread money still not returned

« on: June 11, 2013, 05:01:42 PM »

I just don't like the way you bash Adorama, as it's clearly not their fault. You would do much better to grime about the US banking system which lags 10+ years behind compared to rest of the world.

Repeated calling Adorama is not going to get you the money back. Calling your bank will help much more.

+1

3

Lenses / Re: Aperture Sweet Spot

« on: June 10, 2013, 05:41:03 PM »

There are websites that give data for various lenses, but not all. Slrgear.com has lots of quantitative data. http://www.reikan.co.uk/focalweb/index.php/online-tools/lenscamera-information/ has some limited data.  The-digital-picture is comprehensive for Canon lenses but you have to peer closely at the photos of the charts. 

4

Lenses / Re: LensRentals.com Tests the EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x

« on: June 07, 2013, 06:32:15 AM »

This is just one set of measurements under sub-optimal conditions. It is remarkable how the data on the 400mm f/5.6 conflict with Canon's own MTF charts and measurements by Photozone.de and SLRGear.

Yeah I always noted that the 400 f/5.6 MTF from Canon always looked solid but not amazing and yet over the years people have posted some sample shots, 100% crops, that looked pretty remarkably super-tele-like crisp.

It all depends on how much of the frame the subject fills. The big white prime superteles can get a sharp image from 700x700 pixels. I need about 1400x1400 pixels or more from the 100-400mm to get equivalent sharpness. If I then post a 100% crop at that level it can look stunning. But, I need to be at half the distance away that the 200-400 or the 400mm f/2.8 would have to be.

5

Lenses / Re: LensRentals.com Tests the EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x

« on: June 06, 2013, 06:44:06 PM »

This is just one set of measurements under sub-optimal conditions. It is remarkable how the data on the 400mm f/5.6 conflict with Canon's own MTF charts and measurements by Photozone.de and SLRGear.

Here is a collage of Canon's MTF charts, The 200-400 is pretty remarkable, to say the least.

6

Lenses / Re: Why Does the 100-400L Sell So Well Still ?

« on: June 06, 2013, 06:07:36 PM »

the 400mm prime is no better than the zoom

1. According to TDP the prime lens is better at mid-frame and MUCH better at the edges

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=113&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=7&API=0&LensComp=278&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

2. You can also check:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml

I had a borrowed 100-400 and a borrowed 400F5.6 to do some side by side tests about a year ago. The 400F5.6 was obviously the sharper lens so my recommendation was to buy it.... but they went with the 100-400 zoom instead because it zooms.... despite the fact that it gets used almost exclusively at the 400 end... SIGH!

I'm hoping for a version II of the 400F5.6....

Seriously, it’s ridiculous that the current version doesn’t have IS!  Brace yerselves and crank yer ISO’s mateys!

Here are the actual quantitative comparisons of the 100-400mm L vs the 400mm f/5.6L from MTFs measured by Photozone, presented by Canon,  and the blur tests from SLRGear. You can see from all three that the zoom is at least as sharp at the centre. I have had both lenses and can vouch for it first hand as well.

7

Lenses / Re: Why Does the 100-400L Sell So Well Still ?

« on: June 06, 2013, 06:21:26 AM »

Focal reports accuracy and reproducibility of focus of different lenses and bodies. On the 7D, the 100-400mm is very poor, which I can confirm.
http://www.reikan.co.uk/focalweb/index.php/online-tools/lenscamera-information/

On the 5DIII, the focu is excellent, which again I can confirm. The 100-400mm is in general much better on the new FF.

Adding a 1.4xTC III is no better than increasing the pixels by 1.33x in PS so it is not worth using it with an extender.

My 70-200mm L IS with a 2xTC III on the 5DIII has about the same IQ etc at 400mm as does the 100-400mm.
Trouble is, once you have used the 300mm f/2.8 II with 1.4 and 2xTCs (hand held), you are spoiled for lesser IQ.

8

Lenses / Re: Why Does the 100-400L Sell So Well Still ?

« on: June 05, 2013, 07:49:48 PM »

I have a 100-400mm L and have used it a lot. It's a handy lens for travel because it packs up small. But, it is only an OK lens, and my enthusiasm for it has waned. For animal life and safaris it is very useful. But, the IQ isn't very good and it's too soft for serious bird photography unless you get close as it can't resolve fine details of plumage at a distance. In practice, a 300mm prime, f/4 or f/2.8, is so much better that it beats the 100-400mm despite the shorter length (the 400mm prime is no better than the zoom). I wish people would stop buying it and force Canon to produce a more modern lens with better IQ and IS.

9

Reviews / Re: Horrible experience with Adorama camera

« on: June 05, 2013, 06:49:41 AM »

...I live in NJ and they charge NJ sales tax on all orders, so I also have a financial reason not to buy from them online these days.

You are not going to buy from them because they support your local economy???  Funny how nobody wants to pay tax and yet everyone wants to have their streets paved or to have the police come when they call 911.

Governor Christie would just buy some more cheese burgers with my stipend!  :-)
(BTW...I pay PLENTY of taxes...i live in NJ ..we are taxed to death here..toll roads, bridges, tunnels, pay beaches, etc..etc..etc...I do not need to be chastised for making a perfectly legal choice to keep more of my hard-earned cash in my pocket..just like Apple or Mitt Romney..It's the USA..I look for loopholes...I take my power back wherever possible!)

Bob Dylan wrote about the morals of NJ in Tweeter and the Monkeyman

Jan had told him many times "it was you to me who taught:
in Jersey anything's legal as long as you don't get caught"

10

Reviews / Re: Horrible experience with Adorama camera

« on: June 05, 2013, 05:17:33 AM »

From many of the postings in other threads, it seems that some buyers are far less principled than the retailers. Particularly selfish was the report about someone who would order from different vendors several copies of a lens so he could choose the best and send the rest back. To order one copy and send it back because it is unsatisfactory is perfectly reasonable, to order several with the deliberate intention of sending all but one back is simply unfair by wasting other peoples postage, time and possibly lowering the value of the goods for subsequent sale.

The response in this thread is overwhelmingly annoyance with the OP who is getting pretty close to trolling by mentioning names etc.

11

EOS Bodies / Re: 7d2 v 1D4

« on: June 03, 2013, 11:13:06 AM »

Seemingly pointless thoughts are the best ones imo ,

-1

12

Lenses / Re: The EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Has Arrived!

« on: May 31, 2013, 01:23:02 PM »

"The difference between men and boys is the price of their toys." Doris Rowland

13

Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 (original)

« on: May 29, 2013, 06:17:19 AM »

I can see why it is maligned.

14

Lenses / Re: Anything shot with 70-200 f4 IS USM + 7D

« on: May 28, 2013, 01:18:50 PM »

All the quantitative measurements show that at 200mm there is nothing to choose between the 70-200mm f/4 IS and the f/2.8 IS II. At 70mm, the f/2.8 is nigh perfect sharpness at the centre whereas the f/4 is very good/excellent. On Sunday, I AFMAd my f/4 with the 2xTC III. At 400mm with a real life target (a very exciting brick wall), it wasn't much different from my 100-400 L on the 5DIII.  But, everything is relative when discussing sharpness. The f/2.8 300mm II is so much sharper that it blows the the two zooms away - you can rezz it from 300 to 400mm in PS and it is still far, far better at picking out fine details and contrast. 

15

Lenses / Re: Help with Long Lens + Backup Body choice for Iceland

« on: May 27, 2013, 01:32:45 PM »

You should buy the 500 or 800. They'll go well w/ your equipment. In fact get both so u never run short.

They don't have Sherpas in Iceland.