September 17, 2014, 07:50:03 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 - bholliman

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 50
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M Vanishes from Canon USA Web Site
« on: May 27, 2014, 12:35:23 PM »
This may or may not be the end of the EOS-M line for Canon USA, time will tell.  Personally, I think its a great little complementary camera system, but Canon probably is losing money on every sale under $400.

I'm hoping Canon does continue to develop the M or another line of a really compact camera's with APS-C sensors.  Whether the future design is mirrorless or a small DSLR similar to the SL1, I don't really care.  I think there is a market for a small camera system that is compatible with Canon EF and EF-S lenses.

Canon General / Canon warranty transferable?
« on: May 23, 2014, 09:26:32 AM »
I recently purchased a speedlite bundle from Adorama and plan to sell one or two of the new 600EX-RT's.  This will be the first time I've sold any new Canon equipment or even less than a year old.

Is the Canon warranty still valid for whoever buys the 600EX-RT's?  If so, I assume I will need to send the buyer a copy of my invoice.


Lenses / Re: Lens choice for airshows
« on: May 21, 2014, 08:13:42 AM »
I think the Tamron 150-600 would be an excellent airshow lens.  Probably the best available option for less than $6K.  I ordered one from B&H several weeks ago am an still waiting.  I'm hoping it will arrive before our vacation to Alaska in mid June.

I had my eye on the Tamron but Tony Northrup reviewed it and the 500-600mm shots he posted were very poor -

I've read or watched most of the on-line reviews of the Tamron 150-600 and Tony Northrup's review is the only one that is mostly negative in regards to sharpness.  Maybe he received a poor copy of the lens?

Reviews / Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« on: May 19, 2014, 08:34:55 AM »
Just bought the original lens hood Canon EW-72
The attachement to lens is not so good at all. Both front and reversed attached to the lens.
A slight bump againt the hood and already it gets loose.
Anyone else with this experience?

No problems with my EW-72, feels solid.  You might have received a defective hood.

If your wife is getting more serious about wedding and portraiture photography then the 6D is the better choice.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but serious wedding and 6d/5d2 af system doesn't square. You can use it as a 2nd or backup body, but for anything mission-critical that moves this is not the camera you can rely upon. Think of the couple walking down the church alley, your af tracking fails and you have to say "Well, you know, I saved $1000, could you please repeat it?".

There are plenty of excellent wedding photographers using the 6D as their primary camera.  Dustin Abbott, who often posts here is one.  A local photographer, well regarded as the best in the town I live, uses a 6D as primary and 5D2 for his second shooter and doesn't have any AF issues with these bodies.

I'll be the first to admit the 6D's AF is not nearly as good as the 5D3 or 1Dx, but it's not bad either.  Unless you are shooting lots of sports or fast paced wildlife (BIF), the 6D's AF is probably good enough for most uses including weddings.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Advice on a upgrade from the Rebel XS
« on: May 13, 2014, 06:39:52 AM »

Try borrowing or renting a 6D and a 70D (Pass on the 7D, its not very good in low light).  Try them both a ISO 25600.
The bottom line is that you pay a lot of $$ for a incremental improvement in the APS-C line, which is why jumping to a 6D may be attractive for low light use, and almost everything else.

+1  As a 6D owner and father of an active 2-year-old, I strongly recommend it.  I purchased a 6D last year and almost never used my 7D after that, and eventually sold it.  The 6D produces very nice images at ISO 3200 and even 6400.  I prefer flash photography when it's an option, but there are places it's not allowed or would be disruptive.  For example if you want to get some candid shots of kids interacting, you really don't want to distract them with flash.

Regarding the 6D's AF and frame rate for moving kids or other things moving, I find it to be good enough.  We recently attended a birthday party with lots of under 5 kids and I was pleased with the number of good, in-focus shots I came home with.  I'm sure a 5D3 or 1Dx would have captured more good shots (higher FPS, better AF), but personally I can't justify the difference in price.  I feel like my current equipment exceeds my skill as a photographer anyway.

The MTF's do look very good!  I'm also pleasantly surprised by the initial pricing, after reading the introduction I was guessing $1,600 and $350.  For a landscape photographer they look like terrific options.  I'll be waiting for the hands-on reviews, but the 16-35 immediately goes on my list of most wanted lenses.

I agree with those recommending the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm 2.8 UMC.  Excellent lens for minimal investment.  Of course your 17mm TS/E is an incredible lens, hard to beat it for UWA landscape.

Which Utah park(s) are you going to?  Bryce is my favorite, but Arches, Zion and Canyonlands are awesome as well.

Lenses / Re: 135L v 85 1.8
« on: May 01, 2014, 05:11:53 AM »
I own both the 85 1.8 and 135 2.0 for use on my 6D.  The 135L is my most used portrait lens, but the 85 gets a fair amount of use as well.  The 135 is definitely a better lens: sharper, smoother bokeh and CA well controlled (also 3x more expensive).  But, the 85 1.8 is a nice lens as well.  I find the 135mm focal length often too long for indoor shooting while 85mm generally works well.  The 85 is relatively sharp, small and light.  The CA can generally be corrected in Lightroom.

If I had to choose between the two lenses, the 135 would win hands down, but I would not want to part with my 85 1.8 either.  If Canon does come out with an updated version of the 85 1.8 with IS (rumored for what that's worth), I would be one of the first people in line to buy one, as I love the 85mm focal length. 

Lenses / Re: EF 400L f/5.6 vs. Tamron 150-600
« on: April 30, 2014, 05:36:46 AM »
Thanks for the input and excellent sample pictures, I'm sold on the Tammy.  I plan to order one in the next few days so I have time to get familiar with it and perform AFMA before my trip north.

I placed an order for it on 4/1 from BH so I'd have plenty of time before a July trip - haven't heard anything yet.   Status is still "On Order".  I wonder what the current lead time is.

there is a quite a backlog for them as they are super popular

I ordered last night from B&H, but am nervous about delivery now.  We leave for AK in 6 weeks.

Lenses / Re: EF 400L f/5.6 vs. Tamron 150-600
« on: April 29, 2014, 04:20:26 PM »
Thanks for the input and excellent sample pictures, I'm sold on the Tammy.  I plan to order one in the next few days so I have time to get familiar with it and perform AFMA before my trip north.

Lenses / Re: EF 400L f/5.6 vs. Tamron 150-600
« on: April 27, 2014, 07:23:14 AM »
You see the differences in resolving power when you are looking at fine detail that is close to the limits of resolution of a lens. Here is a collage of shots of the centre of an iso 12233 chart (not a professional chart from a high quality printer but a standard laser print posted on the wall of my house in daylight). The results are pretty clear: at 400mm, the Tammy, which as as sharp as the 100-400 and close to the 400L, can't resolve fully the fine line circles; at 500mm it can; and 600mm it is definitely slightly better. For comparison, a 300mm f/2.8 II + 2xTC III wins at f/5.6.

Thanks for the real world examples, the bokeh is definitely smoother in the 600mm shot of the goose and some details look sharper.  The ISO 12233 charts provide an excellent comparison of fine detail resolution between 400 and 600mm.  The Tammy looks pretty decent at 600mm f/8.

The added reach of the Tammy along with its flexibility and image stabilization are making me lean in that direction over the 400L.  I'm thinking I should order the Tammy soon to make sure I have it prior to our Alaska trip.  I understand it's not readily available yet.  Thanks again!

Lenses / Re: A lightwight wildlife lens
« on: April 26, 2014, 08:58:30 AM »
My first recommendation would also be the 70-300L.  Great IQ for such a portable lens.  Also has the advantage of being usable on your 5D3.

My second choice would be the EF-S 55-250 STM.  Not quite as much reach, but very compact and light (also inexpensive, but that wasn't one of your selection criteria).  Canon really improved the sharpness when they upgraded this from the version II to the STM.  Build quality not even close to the 70-300L, but IQ is pretty sharp. The mid frame and corner sharpness actually looks better to me in these TDP crops than the 3x more expensive L.  The STM is 112mm long and 375 grams vs. 143mm and 1,050 grams for the 70-300L.

My sister in law has the 55-250 STM and uses it on her 650D.  I've borrowed it a few times to use on my EOS M and really liked its IQ for the package size.

Lenses / Re: EF 400L f/5.6 vs. Tamron 150-600
« on: April 25, 2014, 09:47:34 PM »
Never handled the Tammy but when I was in Denali last year, my 100-400 was often too short.  I did use it some with a 1.4x but now plan to return with the 300 and 2x someday.  If I were in your shoes, I'd really consider the Tammy and bring the 70-200 with TC as well.  My only reservation is that I was shooting the 100-400 at relatively high ISO's because of the lighting and the Tammy won't be any better.

Another alternative is to rent something long.  A member of our group had a 600 mm on a crop body (with a monopod) and got some spectacular shots.

Thanks for the tips.  I was wondering if 400mm would be enough reach, maybe with the 2x extender, but then I'm looking at f/11 and no AF.  I have an EOS M can give me more pixels on distant targets.  I'll look into rental options.

Lenses / Re: Wide angle lens
« on: April 25, 2014, 07:04:11 PM »
Rokinon/Samyang 14mm 2.8 UMC.  Excellent lens, very sharp with minimal coma.  Great value.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 50