March 03, 2015, 12:03:46 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 ... 435 436 [437] 438 439 ... 1030
The main question... Is there anything different between the ~1100 and ~800 lenses being sold on Amazon?

Might be a 'white box' version.  The 6D + 24-105L kit costs $500 more than the 6D body only.  Lots of retailers break apart those kits and sell the lens (which comes in a white box inside the kit) separately.

Lenses / Re: $1000 .. what to buy
« on: June 26, 2013, 10:41:43 AM »
Well, I am not neuro but this can not completely right. He does not have 500mm f/4L IS II, 800mm f/5.6L IS, 200mm f/2L IS, 200-400 f/4L 1.4X.

And - I think - he does not have 8-15, 17TS-E, 24 1.4II.

All true.  I notice you left off the 300/2.8L IS II from your list...perhaps you are aware that that lens is high on my list for a future purcahse?   :)

Canon General / Protecting yourself from gear theft
« on: June 26, 2013, 10:30:36 AM »
Some great tips from Roger Cicala (

Lenses / Re: 100L vs. 135L
« on: June 26, 2013, 08:42:41 AM »
If you want to compare lens sharpness, the only way is a solid tripod, a powerful steady light source (or flash) and manual focusing with x10 magnification on live view.

Actually, the proper way is not to rely on focusing lens at all.  Using live view with 10X magnification to focus initially is fine, But the actual test shots should be captured with focus bracketing using a slider or macro rail to adjust the distance in very small increments.  Then, the sharpest of the resulting bracketed shots should be used.

Lenses / Re: new lens advice
« on: June 25, 2013, 08:23:34 PM »
@OP - I'd get the 24-105L, used. Now that they only add $500 to the 6D price as a kit, they're selling for a good value on the used market.

@CarlTN - I'm in Boston, and I'm in the black on CL buy/sell.  I paid $450 for a 200/2.8 II, $750 for a 300/4 IS, $500 for an MP-E 65 (sold the first two for a decent profit, kept the third)  I bought and sold for the same amount both a 70-300 DO and a 24-105L.  I bought a 10-22 new from Amazon, sold it after about a year for a $50 loss - if I was selling it today, I'd make a profit.  It helps that I never have an urgent need to sell, and I have cash on hand if a deal pops up.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon 300 2.8 IS II with Gimbal Head
« on: June 25, 2013, 07:46:28 PM »
I'd be sure that foot will give you some room to slide the lens forward in the clamp; With an extender you'll end up tail-heavy otherwise.


Thanks...any suggestions as to how I could deal with this?

The RRS foot is designed for that, so get that and you're good.

Software & Accessories / Re: Extremely disappointed >:(
« on: June 25, 2013, 07:01:54 PM »
I have used the B&W step-up rings without any problems. I decided to buy them over another brand because I found that the threads of the B&W filters had better filter rings/threads as the no-name filter I had before, and I hoped the same would be true for their step-up rings. So far I haven't regretted my choice, the few dollars extra per ring seem very well worth it.


I have B+W step-up rings in 67→77mm, 72→77mm, and 77→82mm.  I've used them many times, recently in pairs (to get an 82mm filter on a 67mm or 72mm lens thread), and never had them bind up.

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
« on: June 25, 2013, 06:30:28 PM »
"For those who already own the older 600mm lens the decision becomes slightly more clouded. The new lens does not bring any real world sharpness advantages over the older version. The decreased weight and minimum focus distance however may just be worth the cost of the upgrade."

Really???  Pay another 6K just for some weight and closer focus?

He really missed the boat on the reasons to upgrade such as improved image stabilization and all but highly desired increase in AF accuracy with newer bodies like the 5D3 and 1DX due to closed loop AF system....and even with that is it still worth spending 6K to upgrade from the 600 F4L IS?  I could buy a couple more 5D3's or a 1DX with that 6K.

I don't think he missed the boat, at all.  Sure, on test charts the 600 II is better. But the original was very sharp. The AF might be slightly more accurate with a new body - but the AF on the old superteles was already excellent. 

There's no way I'd have considered buying a 600/4 MkI, even if it cost less than a 300 MkI. The original is too heavy to hike with, too heavy to handhold.  I'd have bought the 500 I, even though it's really not long enough for me on FF.  The reduced weight of the 600 II (as the reviewer aptly stated, it's a 600/4 lens in a 500/4 package) was the main reason I bought the 600 II. 

Software & Accessories / Re: FoCal Target Image
« on: June 25, 2013, 03:50:57 PM »
The standard target works fine at 50x focal length (I test at 25x and 50x).  I use a set of three 150 W-equivalent gooseneck lamps for a target taped to a wall in my basement, where I can test up to a 300mm lens. 

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
« on: June 25, 2013, 11:58:23 AM »
Much better. Now let's see a 600mm used for things that nobody would expect it to be used for.

Wait, expected a 600mm lens to be used for indoor portraits?   :o

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
« on: June 25, 2013, 11:40:55 AM »
But, does anyone use a super tele here and NOT take pictures of birds?

How about a squirrel?

EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM, 1/320 s, f/4, ISO 6400

Actually, it also makes a very nice indoor portrait lens.  For example, this one which was a handheld shot at 1/160 s:

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II Mentioned [CR1]
« on: June 24, 2013, 11:28:11 PM »
Canon is updating and, shocker.

At least, since we've all been paying attention to Canon's recent releases, the 35L II's price tag won't come as a sticker-shocker.

Lenses / Re: The ULTIMATE Canon lens
« on: June 24, 2013, 10:56:42 PM »
My copy front focused.

Did you try AFMA?

Lighting / Re: PocketWizard Noob
« on: June 24, 2013, 03:46:25 PM »
There isn't a 3rd party setup that works with the Canon RF technology.


Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II Mentioned [CR1]
« on: June 24, 2013, 12:43:49 PM »
With the Tamron and Sigma lineups, many of the core lenses everyone buys (18-35 APS-C, 24-70, 70-200, 35, etc.) are as good if not better from 3rd parties. 

Except for the Sigma 35/1.4, 'decent or nearly as good from 3rd parties' would be a lot more accurate than 'as good if not better'.  Of course, they're cheaper...and there's always a market for cheaper stuff.

Pages: 1 ... 435 436 [437] 438 439 ... 1030