October 22, 2014, 05:49:14 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 - 2n10

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 28
1
Lenses / Re: 100-400 with 1.4x teleconverter on crop body
« on: October 20, 2014, 01:49:16 PM »
These were taken with my 7D on the 100-400 with a Kenko 1.4TC.  You must use the outer 2 middle row focus points to get decent focusing ability.  Focus is slower, you need greater light and contrast.

Question is if at this magnification, you'd see a difference with a tc and the bare lens.

To the op: I've just got a 70-300L with the Kenko (you get a working but sloooooow f8 af), so take it for what it's worth - but it's about the same iq or even a bit better than the older 100-400L. Basically, forget about using this on a crop body, you're cutting 1.6x times 1.4x away from the glass and it really shows with these midrange lenses.

I only use it to zoom in on sunsets and the like nowadays that need even more cropping, but for anything that require sharpness it's not worth switching the tc on.

I'd say the IQ is a little worse but definitely not killer loss up close.  As the distance to target increases then the loss increases too.

2
Lenses / Re: 100-400 with 1.4x teleconverter on crop body
« on: October 20, 2014, 08:57:51 AM »






These were taken with my 7D on the 100-400 with a Kenko 1.4TC.  You must use the outer 2 middle row focus points to get decent focusing ability.  Focus is slower, you need greater light and contrast.

3
Reviews / Re: Scott Kelby 7D Mark II Real World
« on: October 18, 2014, 07:55:38 PM »
I know this may be a stretch but how likely would it be for the bodies that Scott tested to not be like the bodies that will be released? I forget the key words that were used something like AS Tested...how likely Canon could/would give him a couple of bodies that have cleaner out put than the ones that come off the production line?

He received a beta camera so it wasn't off of the production line.  As to cherry picked for excellence...?

4
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Shipping October 30, 2014
« on: October 17, 2014, 10:24:13 PM »
I just checked canon.com and their own online store has it shipping 10/30/2014. So I think it's pretty much confirmed.

Very nice.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark 2 Preorders "sound off"
« on: October 17, 2014, 12:00:06 PM »
OK... how come no one  is talking about this????

If you had read the posts in this thread you would see that it has been discussed.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark 2 Preorders "sound off"
« on: October 17, 2014, 07:20:47 AM »
did you cancel your preorder from beach camera? if not, i would just keep it and then cancel in the future if/when you are able to get a camera in hand from another store.
i don't understand how 1 day shipping is "super slow." it is what it is, 1 day. if you cannot wait the one day for shipping then you should absolutely go to NYC on the release day and buy it in person....
Probably due to the large number of pre-orders not all get processed in one day therefore the poster has decided it is slow.

7
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7Dii AF performance
« on: October 16, 2014, 09:02:59 PM »
There is a chance that your 120-300 will not work with the 7D2.  Apparently this has happened in the past.  You may need to get the lens re-chipped to work with the 7D2.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D MkII RAW sample images
« on: October 16, 2014, 01:29:00 PM »
Not far, but at least 1/2 a step better?
It is - no question. I've seen it very clearly in the conversions I've done.

I've owned a 70D (which I frequently use, to great effect, at high ISO - I know what I'm doing) for some time, and have converted a number of high ISO 7D Mk II Raw files (from Imaging Resource), comparing them with equivalent 70D files from the same site.

The 7D Mk II is better - and that's before the best converters have officially caught up with it (Photo Ninja converts 7D Mk II files already, even though it doesn't officially support them).

I've also compared it with the "best of the rest" in the crop camera world (Nikon D7000/D71000, Pentax K-5/K-3) - I'll take the 7D Mk II's results any day.

Once Photo Ninja and Capture One catch up with the 7D Mk II, things are going to be really good. DPR's Raw conversion examples are crap (how many more times? ACR (and Lr) are not "state of the art" converters any more, especially used as badly as they've been here) - but hey, they do give The Usual Suspects something else to fixate on and whine about, so they've got some value...

Seriously - download some 7D Mk II files from Imaging Resource and convert them yourselves  - the latest DPP (which I don't regard very highly at all as a converter) supports the 7D Mk II, and gives better results than these DPR monstrosities.

I find DPP works quite well as a converter if you zero it out and only adjust color, exposure and apply lens correction.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Variable Diffusion Focusing Screen
« on: October 15, 2014, 09:10:37 AM »
Very cool.

10
Reviews / Romy Ocon (liquidstone) reviews the 7D Mark II
« on: October 13, 2014, 11:35:18 PM »

11
Reviews / Re: Arthur Morris' blog - Birds as Art
« on: October 13, 2014, 04:46:33 PM »
I agree on his comments about himself. 

I was quite intrigued by how well the AF system stayed with focus in spite of his attempts to foil it.  That bodes well for a much higher keeper rate.  I do not have quite as intricate a process as he does but I do some masking for the sky and background noise in my pictures.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: More 7D mk ii samples
« on: October 13, 2014, 02:43:57 PM »
These samples still don't seem very sharp to me.  Even the low ISO shots seem a bit smeary.  I gotta think its something to do with how the camera processes the jpgs.  The NR looks good but everything seems just a touch OOF even when its obviously not.

ACR is able to extract more fine detail then DPP. When I've tested this I've actually been surprised at how much more. Conversely, I think its algorithm ends up emphasizing noise.

I've never noticed a difference between DPP and ACR wrt detail but the noise difference is pretty obvious.  When I switched to using DPP to convert, I could definitely use less NR and more detail extraction, sharpening, contrast, etc without going over the edge into that weird watercolor world.  Photos I converted from DPP and processed in PS were definitely sharper and more detailed than ACR conversions processed similarly.

Thanks for the observations.  I'll need to look into processing this way.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark 2 Preorders "sound off"
« on: October 13, 2014, 02:41:12 PM »
I ordered through Adorama.  They had the Canon release date of Nov 28 when I ordered.  I check a few days ago and now they say just November 2014.

14
Reviews / Re: Canon EOS 7D MK II Field Review of THE APS-C DSLR KING .
« on: October 13, 2014, 02:37:27 PM »
When Ken Rockwell shoots, he turns Chuck Norris into a pixelated low-res statue with oversaturated colours.

When Chuck Norris kicks Ken Rockwell... Nah, he wouldn't even bother. He's not worth it.

When The Most Interesting Man In The World hikes, with ease and without even breaking a sweat, through 30 miles of rough Amazonian terrain and comes across a glorious sight under the most magnificent sunset that the world has ever seen and pulls out his DSLR.... the landscape asks to take HIS picture instead. And the picture is the better for it.

LOL 8)

15
Reviews / Arthur Morris' blog - Birds as Art
« on: October 13, 2014, 02:30:17 PM »
Here is his findings on the 7 d Mark II AF.

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 28