Slower is better. At f/2.8, you're getting both motion blur and OOF blur in the background. Here's one from a sunny day where I should have brought an ND filter, 70mm (with the 24-70 II), 1/40 s and f/18 (so the blur is all motion).
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.
No but i have been doing indoor high school sports and getting into wildlife. Thought I would try is it aince my 70-200 makes me crop too much. I bought it for that purpose but just trying to justify if its worth it or if I should get the 300mm f4 which is cheaper.
I do not say that I have the answer to the original question, but as very often in this forum, the discussion tends to focus around the US. The US customers have had, and still have really cheap prices offered for Canon gear. I just got back from NYC and bought two 600ex rt plus a st e3 at full price at B&H, and that price is two thirds of the price in Norway. Before the limit on price was put in effect, a professional nature photographer could get the 800mm for approx 3000 USD less than in Norway, which meant that you could fly over and have a weekend there, and still save money. Thus I argue that the camera stores catering to the professionals in other countries than the US had a really hard time staying in business when B&H decided to lower the prices.
Which is the whole point. With the 5D3/1Dx/1D4/1Ds3 etc., you don't have to use focus/recompose. Focus/recompose sucks hardcore.
We have an almost 2-year-old toddler who can move about as quickly and randomly as these piggies, and the AF with my 6D and 50 f/1.4 and 85 1.8 does just fine under f/2.0 using the center point. Overall, my hit rate for moving kid shots is in the 75-80% range, and I'm happy with that. I know a 5D3 or 1Dx would do much better, but for my overall use (kids/landscapes/portraits/macro and a little high school golf and cross country) the 6D is a great camera.
What does that say about the validity of your statements regarding the 5DIII and 1D X?
I don't go into the 1DX thread and spew hatred for the 1DX. Yet you and your butt kissers feel the need to come into a 6D thread to bash it. What does that say about you?
I wasn't passing off the image as "usable", as in professional quality. It was merely an experiment. Only a fool would imply otherwise. No need to get defensive just because the experiment worked. At the very least I would have used exposure compensation and shot in RAW, if it were meant to be printed or something (and yes that would have pushed to ISO 50k or higher). When I have said in the past, that the 6D's center AF point aids tremendously in low light autofocusing, I'm using positive exposure compensation (usually a full stop, sometimes more), in order to get the RGB curve to go farther toward the right side. And in those situations, the ISO I would consider "usable" for good professional quality, is not above 10,000. "Usable" for acceptable pro quality, could be 20,000, but not 25,600. If that means the available light I'm shooting in, is brighter than -3 EV, so be it. But that alone, does not mean this center point, is not still very usable, when compared to an autofocus point that is only rated for -2 EV. It just means that for a "normal exposure" at -3 EV (as in, a very black image), the necessary ISO combined with the lack of any significant recorded signal in the entire upper half of the RGB curve...there is not significant dynamic range from the sensor, or the file's 14 bit format itself, to produce anything other than a dark noisy image. Again though, digital photographers learn early on, that you look at the RGB curve, and expose for that. I deliberately did not do that in this case, because I wanted it to look similarly dark to what my eye saw. It still looks brighter than what my eye saw, though.
The back half of the bubble level, is within the focus plane. The index mark you keep harping on, is ABOVE the plane of the plate that the bubble is mounted in. And the camera, is angled diagonally to the plane the plate exists in, both left-right and front-back axis. Stop ignoring that. That alone explains why the index mark is near the plane of focus. What about the right side of the plate? It's in the focus plane. Draw a diagonal line perpendicular to the sensor, and it runs right through the rear half of the bubble level. You can say it's not because the focus plane is "infinitely small", and thus exists between the subatomic particles that make up the atoms of the plastic of the bubble. But that just smacks of desperation. The plane of focus is effectively more than 1 pixel in width on this sensor (due to the limited resolution of the lens itself, but also the high ISO). And since there is motion blur, it's more like 4 pixels in width. That's a lot bigger than "infinitely small". I know one thing that's infinitely small though, and you keep compensating for it, lol.
Since you say your 1DX could autofocus in -2EV light (as you claim this was)...how about trying it on a similar black object with a tiny light colored object for contrast, and posting the results? Make sure to shoot only as a jpeg (with no in-camera NR), that the exposure is not faster than 1/13 second, there's no image stabilization, and that you are hand-holding it while bending over a bit, and that your subject distance is ONLY 4 inches in front of the front lens element. Also, make sure to select ONLY THE OUTERMOST side autofocus point (don't use any groupings). Your results had better be better than mine, because you won't be needing to focus recompose. Make sure the available light in the room, is equal to 3 lit candles (with no reflectors), placed 8 feet away from the camera.
What about the LensCoat BodyBag - it says it fits the 5DIII and they have ones that cover the lens (regular or telephoto, too, and ones that cover the body with any lens. See here.
I'm in the same boat. I want a new tripod to hold the gear I'm using but I seems to not be able to find the balance between lightweight and holding capacity and price. Although all of these combined usually equal expensive.
The guy is losing his job anyway... the least he could do is throw you a bone.