September 02, 2014, 11:17:00 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 - neuroanatomist

Pages: 1 ... 412 413 [414] 415 416 ... 926
6196
Lenses / Re: Just wondered, will this fit.....
« on: March 07, 2013, 10:30:54 AM »
2xII vs. 2xIII not very different, optically.  I picked up the 2xIII recently, mainly for the better AF performance with supertele lenses.

6197
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]
« on: March 07, 2013, 10:21:02 AM »
I think this would be a game changer IF it comes in under $2.5k.

It almost certainly will not be that cheap.  I'd expect a camera that's billed as a 'mini 1D X' to be priced in the $3500-$4000 range.

my bet 3299$

Could be.  There's logic to having it come in a bit cheaper than the 5DIII MSRP. 

We’re told that the larger battery seen in the EOS-1D X is part of the reason it will autofocus bigger lenses better than a camera with say an LP-E6.

Which means using 2xLP-E6 in the grip should allow the same autofocus performance, and, I would add, should also allow driving a burst speed of 12+ fps, a feature which would draw even more current than a big lens AF.

No, dual LP-E6 ≠ one LP-E4N.  With two batteries in a grip, the voltage output of them is not added, they are used in an alternating sequence. The 1-series bodies drive lens AF motors faster because the battery delivers a higher voltage.

It should have nothing to do with the fps, either - adding a grip to a dSLR isn't required for higher frame rate AFAIK (although it was with film bodies to drive the film winder faster).  Even with Nikon bodies where the grip provides a higher frame rate, there's a firmware hack that enables that higher frame rate without the grip, i.e. the higher frame rate with grip is a Nikon marketing ploy to sell an expensive accessory.

6198
Lenses / Re: Just wondered, will this fit.....
« on: March 07, 2013, 10:13:52 AM »
Well, the 70- vs. the 80- makes a little bit of a difference.   :P

The 70-200/2.8L IS II does very well with a 2x TC.  Here's an example with the 7D:


EOS 7D, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L II IS USM + EF 2x II Extender @ 400mm, 1/160 s, f/5.6, ISO 3200

6199
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 7D or ..
« on: March 07, 2013, 10:09:31 AM »
I suppose I'd wait two weeks, just to see what the feature set of a 70D (if that's what's announced) looks like. 

But as for, 'everyone is not really happy with 7D', sorry but that doesn't make sense.  Well, it does in the sense that not everyone is ever happy with any particular product.  People like to complain.  But for bird photography, the 7D is one of the best cameras available, and it's the best camera in it's price range.  AFAIK, the only better options for shooting birds are a 1D-series body or a 5DIII, and in both cases you'd ideally want to pair such a body with a lens longer than 400mm. 

I've got a set of bird shots on my Flickr stream, and while a few of the recent ones are shot with a 1D X and 600/4L IS II, most of the images are from a 7D + 100-400L.  For $2700, that's an excellent value and a kit that's ideal for bird photography. 

6200
Lenses / Re: EF or EF-S for 7D/70D
« on: March 07, 2013, 10:02:48 AM »
A few years?  I'm a big proponent of buying the lens you need now, for the body you have now.  If you'd said, 'in a few weeks' fine.  But I'd really recommend considering a high-end EF-S lens to replace your kit lens.  The EF-S 15-85mm f/3-5-5.6 IS is slightly cheaper than the 17-40L, has IS and a much more useful focal range, and will deliver better IQ than the 17-40L when used on the same crop body.  The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is, IMO, the best general purpose zoom for APS-C.  Both of those high-end EF-S lenses will hold their value well - in a few years when you get a FF body, sell the EF-S lens and buy the kit lens with the FF body. 

6201
Lenses / Re: DPReview: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Review
« on: March 07, 2013, 09:57:04 AM »
More high praise for the 24-70 II, with the usual caveat of price.

Question for people who've bought the 24-70 II and had/have the 24-105mm f/4L IS 'kit lens'.  Did you keep the 24-105L, and if so, now that you have the 24-70/2.8 II, do you use the 24-105L any more?

6202
Lenses / Re: Just wondered, will this fit.....
« on: March 07, 2013, 09:37:52 AM »
Sure you can, at least physically.  Assuming you mean the EF 80-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II, the 2xIII will make that into a 160-400mm f/9-11 lens, meaning no AF so you'll have to manually focus the lens.  I suspect the IQ will be nothing to write home about, either. 

6203
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]
« on: March 07, 2013, 09:35:11 AM »
I think this would be a game changer IF it comes in under $2.5k.

It almost certainly will not be that cheap.  I'd expect a camera that's billed as a 'mini 1D X' to be priced in the $3500-$4000 range. 

6204
Software & Accessories / Re: Which wireless radio control for the 5D3?
« on: March 07, 2013, 09:03:45 AM »
Does the RC-1 IR trigger work from the rear of the camera when you are in an outdoor environment.  I've never used this device because I always though that the front mounted IR receiver on the EOS bodies would only work reliably from the front, which would limit the RC-1 to a self portrait snapshot tool.  Second question: does the RC-1 have the ability to hold the shutter open in Bulb mode, without the need to keep your finger on the trigger?

No, not from the rear (unless there's something the IR signal bounces off, like pointing your TV remote at a white ceiling).  When the camera is set to Bulb, pressing the RC-1 shutter release once opens the shutter, a second press of the button closes the shutter.

6205
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]
« on: March 07, 2013, 09:01:22 AM »
Integrated grip and a high-density AF sensor?  Very, very interested.  Throw in noticeably better high ISO performance than the current 7D and I'm sold...

6206
Lenses / Re: Photozone spanks the 24-70 F4 USM L IS
« on: March 07, 2013, 08:34:03 AM »
Your logic clashes with the reality of facts being that this lens is going to replace the 24-105 as FF kit lens. And I can see why people react with a loud WTF.

Can I ask...what is the basis for your statement of 'fact' that the 24-105/4L IS will be replaced by the 24-70/4L IS as the FF kit lens, i.e. the 24-105L will be discontinued?  Did I miss an announcement from Canon?

6207
Software & Accessories / Re: Which wireless radio control for the 5D3?
« on: March 07, 2013, 08:30:57 AM »
I assume you mean something to trigger the camera, right?  I was in the same boat - I really liked the little Canon RC-1 IR trigger, but while that works with the 5DIII, the 1-series bodies don't have an IR receiver so a radio trigger was the only option.  Canon has an LC-5, it's expensive but for me the real downside was the remote unit is really big.

I picked up a hähnel Giga T Pro II RF remote.  Interval timer, the remote unit is small enough to fit in the palm (for getting in the picture if needed).  I like that the remote unit can actually be plugged directly into the camera if desired (i.e. used as a wired release) for interval timing, etc.

If you do have the Canon -RT system, you can acutally use that to remotely trigger the camera - but using a speedlite or ST-E3 as a handheld remote isn't the most convenient option, IMO.

6208
Lenses / Re: Camera & Lens Focus Calibration
« on: March 07, 2013, 08:23:33 AM »
Do I understand you correctly...zooms...short end tested at 25x and 50x, long end tested at 25x and 50x, and intermediates tested at 25x and 50x...

So a 70-200 would involve 6-10 tests with distances ranging from 1.75m to 10m?

And the results (5diii) would be an average (mean or median?) for the low end and an average for the high end?

And if you'll indulge me one more question...you run a complete, separate series of tests when using a TC?

Correct.  The number of intermediate focal lengths I test depends on the zoom range, e.g. for a 2-3x zoom like the 16-35mm or 70-200mm, I test just one intermediate focal length; for a ~4x zoom like the 24-105mm or 100-400mm, I test two, etc.  So for the 70-200, that's a total of 6 tests - 70mm, 135mm, and 200mm each at 25x and 50x the focal length.

The newer AFMA bodies (including the 5DIII) can store separate values for the wide and tele ends of zoom lenses.  I use the two distances and the intermediate focal lengths to help guide the choice - the values I enter are a compromise between the distance(s) at which I usually shoot with that lens, the effect of focal length on DoF, etc.  For example, with my 100-400L at 50x focal length, the FoCal-reported AFMAs at 100,200,300,400mm were 0,0,0,1 and at 25x focal length they were -3,0,-1,2.  The values I selected were W=-1 and T=1. 

The camera does a simple linear regression between the W and T values to apply AFMA at intermediate focal lengths.

Yes, with a teleconverter I do a complete separate set of measurements (6 for the 70-200/2.8 with the 1.4x and 6 more with the 2x).

6209
Lenses / Re: Full Frame Lens Choice to Match 7D and 17-55 2.8 IS.
« on: March 06, 2013, 07:15:23 PM »
True -- assuming, of course, the camera itself has an f/2.8 high precision center AF point. If I remember right, the Rebels at least don't, even if Jon's 7D does....

Rebel bodies starting with the XTi/400D have a high-precision f/2.8 center AF point, although the 'high precision f/2.8' part if the cross-type point is a single-orientation line sensor. The T4i/650D got the 40D/50D/60D AF sensor with the dual-cross center point similar to the 7D's center point.

6210
Lenses / Re: Full Frame Lens Choice to Match 7D and 17-55 2.8 IS.
« on: March 06, 2013, 06:47:53 PM »
One of the regulars here -- sorry, I don't remember which one -- often makes the point that the 24-105 on full frame is superior in every way to the 17-55 on a crop. It's wider and longer, you can get a shallower depth of field, and you get less noise.

Every way but one...you lose the f/2.8 high precision center AF point.  A very worthwhile trade, IMO.

Pages: 1 ... 412 413 [414] 415 416 ... 926