Messages

7651

Canon General / Re: Lets Play Chess

« on: July 21, 2011, 12:54:46 PM »

Am I the only one who's noticed the King/Queen are the wrong way around?

(queen on her own colour, king on the different colour)

There is no rule in chess that I know of that requires you to move the queen only to a space with her color.  This is taking during the game when pieces are obviously not in their original positions.

Dr Croubie is correct, the board setup is wrong.  Yes, it's during play, but given that pawns move only forward, there's no way for the white king and queen to have switched positions at this point in the game.  Clearly, though they are experts when it comes to camera gear, when it comes to chess, the folks at lensrentals are ROOKies (sorry, it just slipped out).

7652

EOS Bodies / Re: What is the best pocket camera?

« on: July 21, 2011, 06:47:44 AM »

The best Canon is the G12 the S95 cannot produce images of a commercial quality (it's on the banned list of certain stock libraries), but the G12 is capable of images that at fit to screen size are difficult to differentiate from a Medium format system, let alone 35mm.  Of course given optimal conditions, it won't allow background blur or proper macro shots, but it will allow you to use the EX flash system which many others won't. (and it has an optical viewfinder too).

That's interesting.  So, the G12 delivers image quality that's hard to differentiate from a MF system, whereas the S95 does not.  Can you explain how that's the case, given that they use the same sensor?  Do the articulating screen and optical viewfinder have a big impact on IQ?  Maybe it's the lens - after all, the G12 zooms to 140mm FF-equivalent, while the S95 only goes to 105mm.  Maybe it's the wider aperture of the G12?  Oh, wait, the S95 is f/2 at the wide end, vs. f/2.8 for the G12.  I could continue to speculate, but hopefully Flake will provide the true reason, then go on to tell us how the 7D has better IQ than the T3i.

7653

Lenses / Re: Canon 400mm L 5.6 .. So what's changed in 19 years?

« on: July 20, 2011, 10:56:19 PM »

On the weather sealing issue, seems all pre-1999 lenses have some basic form of weather sealing:

Chuck Westfall (Canon USA) has provided information about the weather sealing found in some pre-officially-sealed lenses.
 
According to Mr Westfall...

(Thanks John!)

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=996&Title=Partially-Weather-Sealed-Canon-Lenses

Yep.  In fact, it was this very thread that resulted in the news post on Bryan's TDP site.  From p.2 of this thread:

I'll do a little more digging...

Apparently, the 400mm f/5.6L is partially sealed.  According to Chuck Westfall (Canon's tech support guru)...

My 'digging' consisted of contacting Mr. Westfall, and I forwarded his responses to initial and follow-up questions to Bryan at TDP (John = me, neuroanatomy is part of my day job  ), thinking the fact that these 'unsealed' lenses do have partial sealing was pretty interesting and worth disseminating.  In particular, the fact that a push-pull zoom like the 100-400mm actually has dust-resistant seals around the zoom ring is worth noting, since that lens is sometimes aka the "dust pump."

Other ones that also need weather sealing are the 35mm f1.4L...

I agree...but remember that for sealing on a lens to be effective, the body must also be sealed, and although some non-1-series bodies have partial sealing, only the 1-series are truly weather-sealed (the rank ordering for sealing is 1-series >> 7D > 5DII = 50D/60D).

7654

Lenses / Re: Canon 400mm L 5.6 .. So what's changed in 19 years?

« on: July 20, 2011, 05:52:35 PM »

most people agree that a native f/5.6 lens will AF better than an f/2.8 lens + 2x extender, so if the 70-200 is already pretty good, a 500 f/5.6 would be better.

The accuracy should be equivalent with and without extender.  But using the 2x extender will result in ~50% slower AF, by design, than the bare lens; a 1.4x extender slows AF speed by ~25%, also by design.

7655

Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM

« on: July 20, 2011, 02:19:36 PM »

The 200mm L is on my short list as well.   

At $800 and it being a black lens, it's a lot more low-key than the 'big white lens' -- it's supposed to be REALLY sharp.

To be specific, you mean the 200mm f/2.8L II.  "200 L" could also refer to the 200mm f/2L IS - which is not black, not low-key, definitely no where near $800, but is really REALLY sharp. 

The 200/2.8L II is a very nice lens - I had one for a while, which I sold after getting the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II.  One thing to note is that you need a fair bit of light to handhold a non-IS lens at 200mm, especially on a crop body.

Weird; for L cash I'd have expected they were all sealed :/

It depends on the design and intended use of a lens.  Its not practical, for example, to seal a push-pull design, but it was popular a several years ago.  Same for a TS_E lens.  Any lens that extends while zooming or focusing is impractical to seal, but the design keeps weight and cost down.  Some of the older designs were around before sealing became popular, so there are lots of choices.

If you need weather sealing, be sure to select a lens with that feature.  Having a choice can be a good thing.

It also depends on the design date, I think.  A push-pull design isn't a problem - the 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L has a push-pull design similar to the 100-400mm, but the 28-300mm is weather-sealed.  Extending zooms like the 24-105mm and 24-70mm are weather-sealed, too.

Canon started offering 'dust- and weather-resistant' lenses in late 1999.  Before that, the white primes and zooms did have weather sealing under the switches and focus/zoom rings (so the 100-400mm, 400/5.6L, 300/4L IS, etc. all have some degree of sealing) - what's lacking is seal at the mount gasket.

L primes after 2006 are also weather-sealed - so, the 85mm f/1.2L II from 2006 is not, whereas the 50mm f/1.2L (released in 2007) is, as are the 14mm f/2.8L II, the 24mm f/2.8L II, and the 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS. 

7656

EOS Bodies / Re: What is the best pocket camera?

« on: July 19, 2011, 10:16:39 PM »

Love my S95.  Truly a pocket camera (unlike G-series), shoots RAW, easy to fully control, goes anywhere, delivers excellent IQ. 

7657

Lenses / Re: Canon 400mm L 5.6 .. So what's changed in 19 years?

« on: July 19, 2011, 10:14:26 PM »

Update:  It's not the lens, it's the camera...the 120-300 f/2.8 still hunts now and then in more or less the same situations that the 120-400mm did.  Now I'm interested to see what a better AF sensor would do.

Ok, so not a cheap-o lens.  But still, a Sigma lens, and Sigma has to reverse-engineer the AF algorithms, plus the fact that Sigma lenses are often reported as having less than stellar AF.  So, frankly, I'm still not convinced it's the camera.  Does a Canon lens of the same aperture hunt like the Sigmas do?

7658

Software & Accessories / Re: Graduated Neutral Density

« on: July 19, 2011, 11:49:48 AM »

A bit off the topic here, but in case anyone's interested...

Kenko-Tokina bought Cokin Filters:
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/kenko-tokina-acquires-cokin-filters-16915

They bought them, but apparently they still haven't paid the bill for Cokin's website hosting....

7659

Software & Accessories / Re: Need Backpack recommendations

« on: July 19, 2011, 11:48:02 AM »

I have a Lowepro S&F vest / belt setup.  It's pretty handy because I already had a couple little Lowepro bags and they slot right in.  The only downside, especially for heavier lenses, is that the bag can rock back and forth into you if you run along, but I didn't notice that happening when I carried it and all my lenses.  I haven't used it much (in fact I've only used it once so far), but when I did it seemed pretty comfortable.

The obvious negative is that you can't change lenses inside a bag, as you could in a backpack, if you only have small lens pouches.  Overall, I'm pretty happy with it, though. 

I have the S&F Deluxe Technical Belt (no harness), and really like it.  I occsaionally hang a Toploader Pro 65 AW from it, with a lens case on the other side, but more often hang the camera over my shoulder on a BlackRapid strap, with one or two lenses and/or a flash on the belt.  I've also got the little pouch for my iPhone, since the belt+cases block easy access to my front pants/shorts pockets. 

For easier changing of lenses, check out the S&F Lens Exchange Case 200 AW - it opens up with a second 'temporary' pocket so it can hold two lenses during a switch.  The main case is a great fit for a 70-200mm f/2.8 or 100-400mm with hood reversed.

7660

Software & Accessories / Re: Need recommendation for GND filter setup for 5DmkII

« on: July 19, 2011, 11:40:57 AM »

This issue came up recently on TDP as well, here's the relevant thread, which includes some shopping links.  The main issue for you, if your need is really desparate, is that the two primary holder systems (Lee and Cokin Z-Pro or X-Pro) are out of stock everywhere, and have been for some time.

There's a holder/filter option available from Schneider Optics (the parent company of B+W Filters), shopping links to B&H/Adorama are in the thread I linked above.

7661

Contests / Re: Holga Giveaway

« on: July 19, 2011, 09:21:39 AM »

Why not?  Sure...count me in.

7662

Software & Accessories / Re: extension tubes

« on: July 19, 2011, 09:10:03 AM »

i swear they have what i think is called (i'm a bit of a noob so could be completely wrong and talking about random crap) d-ring between the tube and the camera, whether the name is right or not i can see 1 of these things on my 100mm f2.8l

Yes, your 100L Macro has a mount gasket (maybe you were thinking O-ring?).  But the Canon extension tubes do not.  See:

...all bare metal there.

7663

Lenses / Re: 2x teleconverter mk2 vs mk3

« on: July 19, 2011, 09:05:09 AM »

Performance-wise, the optical differences when the MkII vs. MkIII are used on Canon zoom lenses is very minor (and in some cases undetectable).  The real difference (supposedly) comes with the MkII versions of the superteles - although since none have actually been released, that supposition is based on Canon's published MTF charts for the new lenses in combination with the new TCs.

7664

Lenses / Re: Canon 400mm L 5.6 .. So what's changed in 19 years?

« on: July 19, 2011, 09:00:12 AM »

@edwin: I don't know much about lens optics.  would a 500 f/5.6 be darker than a 400 f/5.6?  from what I've heard, the 400 f/5.6 is a pretty good lens as far as AF speed and accuracy go, so would keeping the same max aperture really hurt that?  I do understand we're dealing with shallower depth of field because of the focal length, how big of a deal is that?

A 500mm f/5.6 would project the same amount of light on the image and AF sensors as a 400mm f/5.6 - that's solely a function of iris diaphragm diameter (89.3mm for 500/5.6, 71.4mm for 400/5.6). 

Random guess about a possible reason Canon avoids a 500mm f/5.6:  Canon would want to avoid cheapskates (like me) from buying such a lens and then complaining about its "poor autofocus performance" when they use it on cheap Rebel (#00D) bodies.  The 500mm f/4 is expensive, but I bet that stop of light gained would be a big benefit.  I know that my cheap-o Sigma 120-400mm has a tough time focusing on stuff at 400mm (where it is f/5.6).

The stop of light is a benefit gained for shutter speed, no effect on AF performance.  For anything other than a 1-series body, the off-center AF point sensors are f/5.6-sensitive - an f/4 lens does not provide any additional sensitivity or accuracy - an f/4 lens is the same as f/5.6 for the AF system.  The center AF point on recent non-1-series bodies is f/2.8 sensitive, so f/4 doesn't help there, nor does faster than f/2.8.  For a 1-series body it would make a difference - the high-precision center AF point on those bodies is f/4-sensitive.

Sorry, Edwin - your Sigma 120-400mm has a tough time focusing on stuff at 400mm (where it is f/5.6) not because it's f/5.6, but because it's a cheap-o lens and the AF system in the lens is not that good.

7665

Software & Accessories / Re: extension tubes

« on: July 19, 2011, 08:50:53 AM »

Canon is weather proofed :S

The MkII and MkIII versions of the Canon 1.4x and 2x extenders (aka teleconverters) are weather-sealed.  Canon extension tubes are not weather-sealed.