March 04, 2015, 10:11:23 PM

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 ... 462 463 [464] 465 466 ... 1030
Lenses / Re: Tamron VC Frame Jumps
« on: May 19, 2013, 11:34:49 PM »
The recently posted TDP review of the lens stated, "There is no viewfinder framing shift during stabilization startup and the image is very obviously stabilized in the viewfinder."

I'd return the lens if still possible, else send it to Tamron.

Lenses / Re: Who do you recommend for Lens Rental?
« on: May 19, 2013, 08:09:58 PM »
Honestly, I've never rented a lens. I haven't ever been in a situation where I've had a defined, short term need for a lens. I don't believe in renting a lens to 'try it out' as I feel that's money better put toward the purchase of a new lens. If there's a lens that, after thorough research, I'm still not positive I want, I wait for one to come up on Craigslist and buy it used. Since it's not a need (else I'd buy it new), a can be patient.  I pay no more than 70% of the current/recent new price. That way, if I decide I don't want to keep it, I can re-sell it generally be no worse off.  I've done this with several lenses (200/2.8L II, 300/4L IS, 70-300 DO, 1.4xII, 2xII), and overall I've had a small net profit.  I also bought the MP-E 65mm and 28-300L which I still have, although I may sell the superzoom.  Basically, I get to try a lens for as long as I want, essentially free (or better!).

I have tried and and was happy with both.

Good to know about borrowlenses - they have a pickup location near me, so no shipping charges if I ever do need to rent something.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Kenko teleconverter questions
« on: May 19, 2013, 07:10:08 PM »
The question is whether the combos with the Kenko TC are giving accurate focus.  Because if they're not, and you can't apply AFMA, I don't think you can state that your Kenko TC actually 'works'.

Software & Accessories / Re: Screen protector question
« on: May 19, 2013, 05:30:54 PM »
Don't use one.  On recent/current bodies, the rear LCD glass is a user-replaceable part that can be ordered from Canon (and IIRC, costs less than you paid for the Giottos one.

I did order a Zagg shield for my 7D, but the piece for the top LCD didn't fit (0.5mm too wide), so I sent it back for a refund.

Lenses / Re: Who do you recommend for Lens Rental?
« on: May 19, 2013, 04:55:06 PM »

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Kenko teleconverter questions
« on: May 19, 2013, 04:53:10 PM »
IIRC, Mt. Spokane mentioned he had the same issue...and I believe he returned the Kenko TC.

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.

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

+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.

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.

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.

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. don't want to shoot macro or architecture?  Well then...what do you want to shoot?   ;)

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.

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. 

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). 

Pages: 1 ... 462 463 [464] 465 466 ... 1030