March 04, 2015, 10:52:59 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 ... 1030
Lenses / Re: 400mm f5.6 - Why ?
« on: July 14, 2013, 06:24:38 PM »
The IQ difference in real world shots would likely be noticeable, but barely, in terms of sharpness and contrast.  The 100-400L has a very nervous bokeh with a complex background.  But overall, I've been very happy with my 100-400, and have no real interest in the 400/5.6.

Lenses / Re: 400mm f5.6 - Why ?
« on: July 14, 2013, 06:13:58 PM »
The 100-400 does great with a clean background, but with a bird in a thicket, for example, the lens will hunt or more commonly jump back and forth between two branches or a branch and the subject, repeatedly...sometimes, I just manually focus in that situation.  The 600 II just locks onto the bird in similar situations (although with the 2xIII, it behaves sort of like the 100-400, if not as bad.

Lenses / Re: Lee Filters for Wideangel
« on: July 14, 2013, 05:20:35 PM »
Do you guys know if we can put a circular polarizer
before putting the Lee filter holder?

It's physically possible, assuming your CPL has front threads (my Slim mounts don't) - screw CPL on lens, then Lee adapter ring, then holder.  Fine if you're using a solid ND, but with a grad ND you'll be rotating the horizon line on the filter as you change polarization and it's unlikely you'll get both where you want them at the same time.

Lenses / Re: 400mm f5.6 - Why ?
« on: July 14, 2013, 04:55:51 PM »
The IQ is a bit better than the 100-400L at 400/5.6, and more importantly, the AF is faster and less prone to hunting.  So it's a great choice for birds in flight, where shutter speeds are fast enough to negate the benefits of IS.

That difference is best represented as 1/2-stop, whether or not the settings of the camera result in that complete 1/2-stop being used.

Still not correct.

With a 1/2 stop setting f1.2 is actually f1.1892.

With a 1/3 stop setting f1.2 is actually f1.2599.

With both a 1/2 & 1/3 stop setting f1.4 is actually f1.4142.

This difference is why the 1/2 stop setting between f1.4 & f2.0 is f1.7 not f1.6 or f1.8 as it is less confusing due to larger numbers allowing better numeric distinction between settings.

On a side note,

Is a f1.2 lens actually 1/6 stop wider when set to 1/2 stop increments when shot wide open???

Who are you, DxOMark, unable to consider a lens independent of a camera?  ;)  Forget about the camera for a moment.  Compare an f/1.4 lens vs. an f/1.2 lens, just the lens - how much faster is the f/1.2 lens?  Well, neither exactly 1/2 nor exactly 1/3 stop, but 1/2 stop is a better approximation. 

To answer your question, 1D X with 85mm f/1.2L II, illumination constant, camera locked down, VF shutter closed, AV mode, ISO 100:

1/3 stop increments: f/1.2, f/1.4, f/1.6, f/1.8, f/2, metered shutter speed 1/50, 1/40, 1/30, 1/25, 1/20 s

1/2 stop increments: f/1.2, f/1.4, f/1.8, f/2, metered shutter speeds 1/45, 1/45 (no change from wide open), 1/30, 1/20 s

1 stop increments: f/1.2, f/1.4, f/2, metered shutter speeds 1/60 s, 1/30 s, 1/15 s

Lenses / Re: Indoor Lens recommendations?
« on: July 14, 2013, 03:46:17 PM »
You will like the 40mm....I would add that with the STM focus motor, it will serve you well for indoor video too...

How will the STM focus motor help with video, given that the OP has a 60D?

by magic? mistake, i thought he wrote 6d

Not even by magic lantern.  ;)

The 6D doesn't AF during video, either. Just the T4i/650D, T5i/700D, and the EOS M. The 70D will have it, too.

Have you tried with a 2x TC on a MkII lens?
No I have not, is there a problem balancing these? I don't have any Mk2 lenses but had an opportunity to have a play with one - very nice too! I am now lusting after a 600 Mk2, but even if I sell a lot of kit it is still out of my reach for now! If there is a problem balancing them then perhaps a suitable foot would be a solution.

The MkII lenses are much lighter than their predecessors, and one reason is the elimination of the protective meniscus lens in front.  That shifts the lens' center of backwards, but the tripod collar/foot is in the same relative position.  It's fine with the bare lens and a 1-series, but problematic with a 2x TC and/or extra weight on the body (I sometimes use an ST-E3-RT to trigger a 600EX-RT with a Better Beamer on a bracket with a long, forward-angled extension).  If you used a long lens plate (Wimberley P-50) attached so it extended quite a ways back, that would likely be fine.  The RRS replacement foot dovetail extends a bit behind the mounting screws on the collar, and with the 1D X plus 2xIII on the 600 II, the back of that foot is even with the back of the 80mm clamp when correctly balanced - any more and it wouldn't be using the full clamping surface.

Lenses / Re: Lee Filters for Wideangel
« on: July 14, 2013, 11:15:38 AM »
Neuro ... which 105mm CPL are you using? I've been thinking of getting the B+W CPL, how would you rate it ... Heliopan is beyond my budget for a CPL.

I don't have a 105mm CPL (yet), but I have the B+W Käsemann CPL in 77mm and 82mm, and I'd almost certainly get it in 105mm, too.

Lenses / Re: Lee Filters for Wideangel
« on: July 14, 2013, 10:34:10 AM »
The two holders with tandem adapter is usually used with a grad ND and a CPL. An alternative with a single holder is to put the Lee screw-in filter adapter in the outer slot, and attach a 105mm (round) CPL.

Lenses / Re: Lee Filters for Wideangel
« on: July 14, 2013, 09:58:54 AM »
The Foundation Kit (not the slip-on), the 82mm wide angle adapter ring, and 4" square (ND, big stopper) or 4x6" grad NDs. 

Lenses / Re: Indoor Lens recommendations?
« on: July 14, 2013, 08:56:51 AM »
You will like the 40mm....I would add that with the STM focus motor, it will serve you well for indoor video too...

How will the STM focus motor help with video, given that the OP has a 60D?

Technical Support / Re: Help needes: EOS 7D - noisy pictures
« on: July 14, 2013, 08:33:47 AM »
Really? OK...let's nitpick  ::)

Sub-par would mean performance below the average SLR body at the time of the test. This is clearly incorrect so the 7D is not sub-par. (If you disagree, take it up with Merriam Webster.)

I'm not opposed to picking nits.  ;)

So because the 7D's AF is 'better than the average dSLR' it's not sub-par?  If you think that, you should refer yourself to Merriam Webster.  In fact, 'par' isn't the average of every golfer out there, both great and crappy. It's an estimate of how well a first class golfer should do on a given hole.  Saying the 7D is not sub-par because it's got better AF than a Rebel is like saying every duffer out there could be playing on the PGA Tour.  That's why golf has a handicapping system, and while I'm not saying the 7D is a 'bogey golfer' it does need a handicap to compete with the recent 1-series bodies and the 5DIII.

As for getting a shot, heck, you don't even need AF or a burst for that. Manually prefocusing, waiting for the action to be in focus, and a well-timed shutter press work today, just as they did with early film cameras. But the horse-and-buggy was once the state of the art mode of transportation - today's standards are higher.

The bottom line is that there are many people who believe the 7D's AF to be nearly perfect.  It's not.  Yes, it's better than a Rebel or a 5DII - much better.  No, it's nowhere near as good as a 1DIV, 1D X, or 5DIII.  From an objective standpoint, missing >25% of shots is adequate, certainly not excellent or even very good. 

After shooting for a couple of years with a 7D and 5DII, one of the first things I noticed after getting my 1D X was that when culling images, I could no longer just delete a whole bunch of shots as OOF, a habit I developed with the other bodies.  Since getting a new camera wouldn't have magically improved my technique, it's down to having better AF.  Just sayin'.

Lenses / Re: EF-M 11-22 f/4-5.6 IS STM Not Coming to the USA
« on: July 13, 2013, 08:18:55 PM »
I ordered from Visatek
Where do you find visatek? Is it on eBay?

Typo. It's Vistek -

I've borrowed a Wimberley II, and I have the RRS PG-02 LLR - both are excellent in terms of support, but I prefer the RRS.  I like that the RRS gimbal breaks down easily for transport.  I also like the side mount design - it allows easy access to the MF ring, prefocus ring and lens buttons from underneath with the left hand.  Wimberley also has a side mount, but it limits you to specific replacement feet.

I'd also recommend getting a leveling base for your tripod, with whichever gimbal you get.

I use the Wimberley 2 and am perfectly happy with it compared to the other gimbals I have tried, though I have not had the opportunity to try the RRS so I cannot comment on it.
I noticed in your post that you mention replacement feet, other than a marginal weight saving, why would you want to replace the lens foot? I currently use 300 F2.8 IS and 800 F5.6 IS, used to use a 600 F4 IS, used to use a 400 F2.8 non IS and have tried both Mk1 & 2 500 F4 IS lenses on it all balanced perfectly both vertically and horizontally with a 1 series body - so I don't understand the replacement foot concern.
Am I missing something? This is not meant to be facetious I am actually interested.

Have you tried with a 2x TC on a MkII lens?

Camera Body Gallery / Re: This sensor is holy
« on: July 13, 2013, 07:11:14 PM »
I wasn't kidding about the bird. Calibrated monitor? Oh, please. I see it in my iPhone.  It looks like the silhouette of an accipiter, an American kestrel to be specific.

Oooh, could it be? I get a chance to correct Neuro on something not at all related to cameras? ;-)

Kestrels (Falco sparverius) are falcons- the only 3 accipiters in N.A. are the Northern Goshawk, Cooper's Hawk, and Sharp-shinned hawk.

My bad - thanks!  Been a long day, starting too early.  In fact, it probably looks most like a sharp-shinned anyway. The 'wings' are a little too big for a kestrel.  ;)

Pages: 1 ... 412 413 [414] 415 416 ... 1030