Messages

31

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Kenko teleconverter questions

« on: May 19, 2013, 03:19:41 PM »

1.  No effect on MFD. Max mag increases by TC factor (1.4x or 2x).

2.  You won't have that problem with a Canon TC. The body will treat lens + TC as a separate 'lens' - which it should, because a TC can (likely will) alter the needed AFMA.  Some models/versions (versions as in 'blue dot' or 'green dot') of Kenko TCs have that issue - Kenko releases versions with new firmware (dot color) to work around such issues, no idea of there's a fix but I don't believe there is - one reason I've stuck with Canon TCs.

32

Lenses / Re: Purchasing a used 135mm f/2

« on: May 19, 2013, 03:08:27 PM »

You can't have mine. 

You might try the buy/sell board on fredmiranda.com.

33

Canon General / Re: Beach Vacation in a month... & I'm scared for my gear.

« on: May 19, 2013, 12:42:49 PM »

+1 on the insurance.  When I go to the beach, my gear does, too - else, what's the point in having it?  I don't generally wade into the water with it - I'd get a waterproof housing for my S100 for that.

34

Lenses / Re: Telezoom lens (70-300L vs 70-200 vs 100-400)- Advice

« on: May 19, 2013, 11:49:52 AM »

The only thing I didn't like was no tripod ring, which I would need.

Just curious as to why you'd need a tripod ring for the 70-300L (and not the 70-200/4L?)...

Either way, Canon does sell tripod rings for both, and there are cheaper 3rd party options, although quality varies.

35

Lenses / Re: Telezoom lens (70-300L vs 70-200 vs 100-400)- Advice

« on: May 19, 2013, 09:11:37 AM »

In your place, I'd get the 70-300L.  I have both the 70-200/2.8L IS II and the 100-400L, both are excellent, but I'm considering getting the 70-300L as a travel telezoom.

36

Lenses / Re: Canon 70 - 200 f2.8L version 2

« on: May 18, 2013, 01:52:39 PM »

Get the MP-E 65mm. Or the TS-E 17mm.  Wait...you don't want to shoot macro or architecture?  Well then...what do you want to shoot?   

37

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: F/8 Autofocusing impressions

« on: May 18, 2013, 01:35:42 PM »

Further to what Doug stated, it's always been possible to 'trick' Canon's f/5.6 AF points into focusing with an f/8 max aperture, with pin taping or a TC that doesn't properly report.  Canon did not allow the functionality because it wasn't completely reliable.  Their recent firmware, possible coupled with higher density line sensors on the 1D X/5DIII (which is how the past 1-series bodies achieved f/8 AF), allowed them to enable it with confidence.

I also suspect they built the capability into the 1D X/5DIII sensor, but left it disabled in firmware until later.

OK, and now for my next dumb assumption ... at f/11 the focus needs to be less accurate than at f/2.8 due to the greater depth of field (front & back) of the former over the latter.

Correct.  The smaller the baseline of the sensor, the less accurate. But, the narrower the selected/available the aperture, the deeper the DoF and the more inaccuracy tolerable in terms of focus.

38

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: F/8 Autofocusing impressions

« on: May 18, 2013, 01:10:29 PM »

...because what I can't understand is if the 6D can AF down to -3EV, then it should also be able to AF with an f/11 lens (in bright daylight, that is).

Because it doesn't work that way.  The f/5.6 limit isn't all about the amount of light, it's about the incoming rays being phase-separated with enough resolution to determine focus.  An f/2.8 point has a physically wider baseline (separation between the two sensor lines) on the AF sensor than an f/5.6 point. 

39

Lenses / Re: When is the New 100-400 Coming?

« on: May 18, 2013, 10:14:02 AM »

<p>The new 100-400 does indeed exist and is being actively tested, however Canon is in no rush to announce the lens. We’re told that the current 100-400 still sells at an amazing clip and outpaces the 70-300L by a 4 to 1 margin.</p>

This is an astounding number if true.

Good Lord, people. If you want lower prices and/or better lenses, quit buying these lenses to simply keep up with the Joneses. And, quit listening to fanbois.

By all means...don't buy a great zoom lens which offers 400mm with IS, delivers excellent IQ, and costs only $1500.  That will force Canon to release a better version costing at least $1000 more (and incidentally driving up the cost of the current version by a few hundred dollars). 

40

Lenses / Re: Infra red filter - question

« on: May 17, 2013, 08:22:04 PM »

Something like the B+W IR Black (093) filter, or some other brand on IR Pass filter.

41

Lenses / Re: Infra red filter - question

« on: May 17, 2013, 07:24:43 PM »

If using a dSLR, it needs to be modified for IR imaging.  There's an IR cut filter on top of the sensor, there are outfits that remove them for you.  Then you need a filter on your lens to block the visible wavelengths.

42

Software & Accessories / Re: question for RRS/Acratech (high-end) ballhead users

« on: May 17, 2013, 01:21:21 PM »

FWIW, their 'travel tripod' the TQC-14 is rated for 25lbs.  The RRS owner has a video of him hanging from it and swinging under the legs - when I got mine, I just had to try it, and it supported my ~180lbs.

43

Software & Accessories / Re: question for RRS/Acratech (high-end) ballhead users

« on: May 17, 2013, 09:54:58 AM »

My RRS BH-55 doesn't move when tilted down in the drop notch with a 600 II, even if I push on it.

44

Lenses / Re: Can someone explain the Canon 50mmL f/1.2 "backfocus problem" ?

« on: May 17, 2013, 08:13:10 AM »

The focus shift can only be a problem if you focus too close. I have used two copies of he 50L, and I have never noticed any focus shift problems.

Yes, the problem is more evident at or close to the MFD.  But just because that's "too close" for you, doesn't mean that's true for everyone who uses the lens.   One could also say, it's only a problem if you shoot too stopped down - Someone who always shoots wide open would also "never notice a problem."

45

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: F/8 Autofocusing impressions

« on: May 17, 2013, 08:05:15 AM »

I've used my 1D X with a 600/4 II and 2xIII to track birds in flight, sometimes handheld. It does fine.  However, when shooting small birds in thickets (branches in front of and behind subject), where the bare 600 II locks onto the bird easily, with the 2x it hunts a bit - in that situation, it behaves a lot like the bare 100-400L.

Did you use spot single point or regular single point focus for this test?

I've tried both, spot AF does not offer a significant improvement. It certainly does help for birds in thickets without the TC in place, though.

okay... is the same for the 7D?

The 7D cannot autofocus with an f/8 combo.