October 21, 2014, 02:15:18 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 ... 418 419 [420] 421 422 ... 970
6286
Lighting / Re: 3rd party flashes not working with 6D
« on: May 02, 2013, 08:05:47 AM »
My flash isn't being fired at all. The red light indicating pilot isn't turning green letting me know its ready.

I thought green was charging and red was ready?  What happens when you press the pilot button - does the flash even fire?  Could be a bad hotshoe on a trigger, too. 

6287
Canon General / Re: Just Why
« on: May 01, 2013, 10:35:15 PM »
... the threads about to go to hell in a hand basket

UV filter on a supertele?!?  I think this thread started there, actually.   :P

6288
Lenses / Re: Canon 500 F4 IS vs Canon 300 f2.8 IS II
« on: May 01, 2013, 10:32:44 PM »
I think I'd opt for the 300/2.8 II with the pair of TCs.  Only thing I'd consider is if the loss in FL means you end up with too few MP for your output format if you crop (e.g. 420mm cropped to the FoV of 500mm).  AF tracking will be better, you have a lot of flexibility, too. 

Caveat on my advice is that I've no direct experience with either lens (except a few shots taken with a friend's 500/4 MkI).

6289
Canon General / Re: Just Why
« on: May 01, 2013, 08:09:26 PM »
Too much vignetting. I'd need to be able to lift those shadows by at least 5 stops - anyone know of a camera with enough DR for that??   ::)  ???  :-X

6290
Canon General / Re: Just Why
« on: May 01, 2013, 06:00:29 PM »
Not without filter threads on the front of the lens...   :P

6291
The 24-70 MkI has one of the highest maximum magnifications available in a non-macro lens - 0.29x. It's great for close-ups.

6292
Canon General / Re: Just Why
« on: May 01, 2013, 04:31:03 PM »
Just why do you think it needs one? 

dSLR sensors are insensitive to UV light. If you really want one (maybe you're shooting film?), there's a drop-in holder for gelatin filters that comes with the lens, and a different one sold separately for screw-in 52mm filters.

If you mean a front filter for protection, the old superteles had a protective meniscus lens (thin, non-refracting, relatively cheap to replace).  They removed it from the new MkII versions to save weight. The hoods for those lenses are very deep and offer substantial protection.

A screw-on filter of that size would be incredibly difficult to produce. Compare 82mm filter costs to 58mm filters - the difference in materials cost is minimal, you're paying for the precision to make the two surfaces perfectly flat (which is harder than making curves surfaces) and parallel - that need for precision goes up exponentially with diameter, and a 600/4 would need a >150mm front filter.

6293
Lenses / Re: New 100-400 to Launch with EOS 7D Mark II [CR2]
« on: May 01, 2013, 03:32:53 PM »
I wonder if there is a design benefit for longer lenses to switching the position of the zoom and focus rings.  The position of the rings on the 70-300L could become the new normal.

I'm not sure.  The zoom ring is also further out on the 200-400, but that might be so the hand on the lens is close to the zoom ring (that hand will be further out on such a heavy lens).

I had assumed it was the target market - Canon's 'lens positioning article' suggested the lens was aimed at APS-C shooters (and 'of course, it also works on FF cameras), and the 70-300L is similar to the high-end EF-S standard zooms. FWIW, the zoom ring is in back (opposite of the 70-300L) on the other 70-300 lenses (non-L and DO).

6294
Lenses / Re: Canon 85L II AF speed on 5D III???
« on: May 01, 2013, 03:16:58 PM »
I accomplish this by ensuring the camera is powered off, then throwing the lens into manual focus and focusing it to MFD, then back to auto focusing, turning the camera off, and detaching the lens (if i'm removing it).  Seems there could be a better way of accomplishing this.

HOWEVER, if that's my only (mechanical) complaint about the lens, then I'd say that's a +1 for purchasing it.

Why do you switch from AF to MF and back?  The 85L has full time manual focus, you just need to spin the focus ring to retract the front element before powering off the camera.

Love my 85L. It does focus faster on my 1D X than on my previous non-1-series bodies.

6295
Lenses / Re: A Walk Around Lens for a Trip
« on: May 01, 2013, 11:07:50 AM »
I keep thinking I'll move into a full frame but, truth be told, it gets more doubtful as I age.  For that reason I haven't spent a lot on EF-S glass but all the praise the 17-55 is getting sure impresses me. 

I may break my prejudice about buying EF-S lenses and pull the trigger on the 17-55 2.8 IS when my photo-fund gets rebuilt.

I've never been an adherent of the 'I'm getting a FF camera someday so I won't but EF-S' school of thought. But the lens(es) you need for the camera you have today.  Particularly if the EF-S lenses are the top ones (17-55, 15-85, 10-22), where resale value is strong.  When I eventually sold my 10-22 and 17-55, I think I lost a combined total of ~$120 from what I paid new for them - pretty cheap 2-3 year rentals.

IMO, the EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS is the best general purpose zoom for APS-C.  However, it is a little short for a travel lens whereas the 15-85 is better suited. If taking the 17-55, I'd be inclined to bring a longer lens, too.  I found the 100L Macro IS to be a great second lens for travel, since it does both tele and macro very well, and gives you f/2.8 across the board (with the 15-85, I'd consider a 430EX II or at minimum a 270EX II).


6296
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon are you listening?
« on: May 01, 2013, 08:42:05 AM »
Oh, they're listening.

Canon announces the 7D Mark II
  • 19 megapixels
  • 21 AF points (all cross type)
  • 8.5 fps
  • Dual Digic 6
  • ISO range 100-25600 (expandable to 51200)
  • Extremely low image noise*

* low noise mode is JPG only and output is a 5 MP image

See, they listen well!

6297
Lenses / Re: EF 800mm f/5.6L IS II [CR2]
« on: May 01, 2013, 08:24:04 AM »
I love IS, but aren't telephotos usually used with some other form of stabilization, e.g. a tripod?

I sometimes handhold my 600 II.  But IS helps even when it's on a rock solid tripod and gimbal head - a little breeze and that big hood acts like a sail!

6298
Lenses / Re: EF 100-400 Replacement in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 01, 2013, 08:21:31 AM »
However, if recent history is of any value, I think that Canon will do an incremental upgrade - i.e. solving the problems of the current version more than reinventing it. There's a 400/5.6 prime too, and they probably wouldn't cannibalize it.

So sharpness-wise I don't think the new model is going to be a lot better. I think they will keep the best selling points being new IS and smoother bokeh. Maybe weather sealing? The push-pull design is a specific feature of this lens and they might well want to keep it.

Hey, thanks for my morning laugh – it was a good one!! How could a brand-new lens with the latest image stabilization system and the same focal length and max aperture NOT cannibalize sales of a 20 year old lens??   The only possible answer is by the 20-year-old lens being substantially cheaper, and no matter what, the old prime is going to be substantially cheaper.  Besides, there are four 70-200 zooms and a 70-300 zoom in the L-series, along with the 100-400, and you think Canon is worried about cannibalization? For most people, a telezoom is the second Glenn's purchased after a standard zoom - Canon is very wisely offering a great selection for that choice.

As for sharpness, don't worry, the new lens will be significantly sharper than the one it replaces.  Think 70-200/2.8 IS differential. I suspect the only people who believe there won't be a substantial boost in sharpness are Nikon fanboys (in or out the closet) who want Nikon to finally have an xx-400mm zoom with IQ that rivals Canon, which they do...and will continue to for however long it takes Canon to get the new 100-400 to market.

6299
If you get tubes, Kenko is good, even the Opteka one linked is fine - they're all filled with the same air.  Personally, I went with the Canon tubes - for macro work I wouldn't have, but since my main use is between a heavy and expensive body (1D X) and a much heavier and more expensive lens (600 II), I wanted to be sure of the mount strength.

6300
you said your fault and fixing for free... and you still moan?

Did you miss the part where the free repair has taken a month so far, and will take 1-2 more months (at least)?  I'd moan.  Actually, I wouldn't moan...I'd yell.

did you miss the part that said it was his fault...  he has had a result getting it fixed... albeit slowly...

Ok, so you'd be happy being without a key piece of your kit for months.  Not many of us would be...

Pages: 1 ... 418 419 [420] 421 422 ... 970