July 31, 2014, 08:33:44 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 - pwp

Pages: 1 ... 69 70 [71] 72 73 ... 98
Lenses / Re: Most requested lenses for replacement?
« on: May 28, 2012, 12:06:22 AM »
Folks, they're not going to update the 135mm f/2 SF just so that it can compete with the current 135mm f/2 L.

I assume you're talking about the 135 f/2.8SF, an old design with film era relevance which will probably quietly disappear from Canon's inventory sometime soon. I wonder how many they sell per year? It's the venerable 135 f/2L which also hales from last century, April 1996 to be exact which I'm hoping to see upgraded.


Lenses / Re: Recommendation for a sidekick wildlife lens
« on: May 27, 2012, 11:29:49 PM »
Check out the current thread on the intriguing Sigma AF 120-300mm f/2.8 APO EX HSM DG OS. Talk about value!


Lenses / Re: sigma 120-300 f2.8 OS (The new one)
« on: May 27, 2012, 11:19:53 PM »
both shot handheld with the 120-300 os, minimal processing.
the heron (shot this morning):  300mm f3.5 iso400 1/1600s 50% crop (os wasn't switched to pan, but it didn't appear to affect the outcome significantly).
the squirrel (the first 'real world' test shot when I got the lens):  200mm f2.8 iso200 1/640s

Sheesh you must be Mr Muscles! The Sigma AF 120-300mm f/2.8 APO EX HSM DG OS (isn't that a nice long name for a lens?) weighs in at a beefy 2950g vs 2400g for the Canon 300 f/2.8 vs 1490g for the 70-200 f/2.8isII. Hand-holding the Sigma would deliver the dual advantage of being a great lens and a gym weights workout rolled into one. As an 80Kg weakling, I'd be packing the monopod. The 70-300L is a svelte 1050g.

I was very interested in this lens about a year ago when the new OS model started shipping, but there was so little information about it that I let the whole thing slide. But if it works as advertised, it's a very compelling lens. I have read that the older model Sigma 120-300 actually does not make it all the way to 300mm, it's more like 280 at the long end. Is this also true of the 120-300mm f/2.8 APO EX HSM DG OS?

At just a bit over $2k it's very very tempting. http://www.shopbot.com.au/m/?m=Sigma%20AF%20120-300mm%20f/2.8%20APO%20EX%20HSM%20DG%20OS


Lenses / Re: 17-40mm and DPP
« on: May 27, 2012, 10:44:41 PM »
Just ordered my 5D mk3 plus 24-105mm and wanting either a 17-40mm or maybe the 16-35mm if my piggybank can stand it. I know the 17-40mm has more CA and distortion but wondered how well images can be cleaned up using the Lens Optimiser part of DPP - any comments?

If you need to shoot wide open the 16-35 will be a far better option. I have a 17-40 and it's mushy at f/4. But a couple of clicks down it's a match for the 16-35II. I import my RAW files into Lightroom and check the LensCorrection option as a custom default to correct all images on Import into LR. This works fine. Others may comment on DPP's Lens Optimiser.

If you tend to shoot in the mid apertures, save $$ and weight with the highly regarded 17-40. BTW it takes 77mm filters which are the same size as your 24-105. 16-35 is 82mm.


Lenses / Re: 70-300L on 5D Mark III
« on: May 27, 2012, 10:31:03 PM »
The 5D3 and the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L will be a killer combination for you. The 5D3 gives this slightly slow lens a lot more scope than the 5D2 with increased options for bumping up the iso when the need arises, plus the very powerful AF system which will do a far better job working with those smaller f/4-5.6 apertures than the 5D2.

Just be aware that the 5D3 has the same black AF points in the VF as the 7D. Most people don't care but it can be a disruptive disappointment for some photographers. There is a recent thread on CR which discusses this, and may be worth a browse before dropping your Visa card on a 5D3.


Lenses / Re: 24-70 f/2.8L mk 1 or 24-105 f/4L
« on: May 27, 2012, 10:18:38 PM »
Later builds of the 24-70 f/2.8L have a reasonable chance of being OK. I know there are fabulous copies out there but my own experience with three very disappointing copies, and surprisingly negative experiences from just about every photographer I know would make me urge caution. If you choose the 24-70 be sure to buy where you can test & return if it's not up to your expectations.

Most photographers who use the 24-105 f/4is, myself included find it a useful and adept piece of glass. Most are very sharp wide open. Get a new one. Heavily used copies can experience jammed apertures and/or self-destructing IS. This is confirmed by CPS. But don't let that put you off. It's a great lens for the money and justifies it's L ranking. Mine needed a $250 repair at the 3 year mark but I'm tough on my somewhat abused gear. Don't buy mine!


Lenses / Re: A Brief Hands On: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II
« on: May 27, 2012, 09:59:26 PM »
That certainly isn't the prettiest hood on the block but who cares? Will your clients even notice? If the IQ is there as expected, I might finally get a 24-70 that is worth keeping. I've been Mr Unlucky with the 24-70 f/2.8 classic, three copies and all huge disappointments. Right now I use an unexpectedly good 24-105 f/4is as a stop-gap until the 24-70II ships. And I'll be keeping the 24-105 when I get the 24-70II, for some jobs I value it's reach and of course the IS.


Lenses / Re: Recommendation for a sidekick wildlife lens
« on: May 27, 2012, 09:50:50 PM »
  • 70-300IS (relatively light, relatively cheap, flexible (zoom), enough reach?)
  • 400 (relatively light, relatively cheap, inflexible prime, no IS, more reach)

The 70-300L IS f/4-5.6 has a great rep for being sharp wide open, though this is f/5.6 at the long end. It will perform better on newer bodies. For wildlife I'd be looking at staying with APS-C bodies because of the extra reach, +1.6 over FF. There are plenty of great wildlife images taken with 70-300L IS f/4-5.6 teamed with a 7D.

The f/5.6 400 is a dear old thing, inexpensive but a little slow and of course no IS. People do have great success with it but there may be better options. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for the 7DII. If we had all held our breaths waiting for the 5D3 half the photographers on the planet would have expired long before that camera's announcement. The 7D has plenty of admirers. It's not perfect, but what is? Go pre-owned if $$ is an issue. There may be good deals around as the upgrade obsessed among us sell up in anticipation of the 7DII.


EOS Bodies / Re: This should be more than a rumour
« on: May 27, 2012, 09:00:10 PM »
Touch wood I've never left anything at a job or had any gear lost/stolen. But given that 99% of people are pretty honest, I put my phone number on every bit of gear from bodies to light stands. If you picked up a Pocket Wizard with a phone number on it, what would you do? Some mongrels would pocket the item but by far the greatest majority would make the call.

Put your number on everything. I use a label maker. At least you're in with a good chance!


Lenses / Re: Most requested lenses for replacement?
« on: May 27, 2012, 07:45:54 PM »
I don't own a 135 f/2 at the moment but it's a brilliant piece of glass which feels very last century now that I've been spoiled by IS in the brilliant 70-200 f/2.8ISII. My 135 f/2 wasn't getting any use so was traded. I don't hold as steady as some photographers who can hand-hold at insanely low shutter speeds. I do value IS! The 135 f/2 lens would be a popular candidate for upgrade. I'd like to see it presented at the design level of the L100 f/2.8is macro. Even with the inevitable price boost, this would be a great seller.

EF50 f/1.4 would be another welcome upgrade, as would an optically improved 16-35 f/2.8III. Lessons learned in the redesign of the 24-70 f/2.8II may flow through to the 16-35.

There will always be time lapses in the development cycles, but that's life. But overall I see Canon's lens set as offering brilliant choices for just about any shooting style or special project.


Peace brothers. It's all getting a bit dogmatic. Myself included.
It's a useful discussion which I think I'd better exit from.

See you on another thread.


... a comprehensively inferior, deeply unpopular, black AF point system.

Comprehensively inferior, i.e. in every way?  Bit harsh, don't you think?  As stated, there was no hue and cry over the same system in the 7D.  Does everyone really want that dense array of AF points etched into the viewfinder?  Think it's deeply unpopular with people who switched back and forth between the standard and -D grid focus screen?  Nobody likes the ability to display an electronic level in the VF?
Comprehensively? In every way? Well yes, but I'm referring exactly to the black AF points, nothing else. You can run my post through the Oxford dictionary if you like, but look past my lack of language mastery and concider what I'm trying to communicate.

I stand by my statement and it's backed by direct experience. I've worked a busy daily schedule with 1D4 & 5D3 side by side for a three weeks now in all sorts of shooting environments. The 5D3 AF system is powerful and pleasingly accurate, all the way out to the outer AF points. It outperforms the 1D4 in most situations. But it's galling that full access to its power is denied because of the black AF points. I shoot in dynamic, not static situations and have either lost shots or missed peak moments because I've lost sight of my selected AF point.

Not really sure what you are saying about the standard and D grid focus screen and the level in the VF. These functions can be chosen if required/desired. Of course nobody wants that dense array lit up full time, nobody is saying otherwise. We just need to keep track of our selected AF point. Red has always worked, and works "comprehensively" better than black. 

Yes, the black can be tolerated, but as my Uncle Bob once told me, "Why not travel first class?" Ahem....it's a metaphor.


Technical Support / Re: Lightroom RAW to JPEG Export
« on: May 27, 2012, 07:11:51 AM »
Can you post samples of the RAW (or DNG) and the processed JPEG? Can you do a screenshot of your LR Export prefs? Are your colour prefs in PS as they should be? You may be viewing the JPEGs in a weird colour space. This has happened here a couple of times. Just a buggy PS.

If the file processes fine in ACR (Photoshop) then you're likely overbaking it somehow in LR as both programs use an identical RAW processing engine, just a different GUI.

Personally I always output to 16 bit TIFF, run any further postpro on the files in PS and then convert to JPEG. I use a very handy freeware script from Russell Brown, the Image Processor Pro http://russellbrown.com/scripts.html to convert the TIFFS into 3 or 4 different flavours of JPEG. Have a look, watch the tutorial and use it every day.


I had my red dot AF invisible yesterday in the strong sunlight. No system is perfect unfortunately.
No system is perfect, from manufactured goods to political systems. But in the context of this discussion, it's clear that Canon inexplicably let go the highly workable red AF point system for a comprehensively inferior, deeply unpopular, black AF point system. Sigh...And just as the Canon PR machine thought they had put the 1D Mk3 AF debacle behind them they've got yet another AF related bomb to defuse.

And what a shame. My 5D3 AF is the best I have ever experienced in either OneShot or AI servo mode in bright light or dimly function rooms, except when I lose sight of the selected AF point. And that's far too often.

Canon have re-written the paradox manual; a brilliant new AF system throttled by a simple, wrong GUI decision.


but I don't understand what the bag is for?

Just right for your sunglasses...


Pages: 1 ... 69 70 [71] 72 73 ... 98