October 24, 2014, 10:48:58 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 - infared

Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 ... 65
346
EOS Bodies / Re: Sensor Dust - DSLR vs Mirrorless
« on: October 23, 2013, 12:17:56 PM »
When you open and close Petri dishes for bacteriology you learn to minimise any chance cross-contamination by spores and airborne bacteria by having the lid plate always pointing its inside surface down and turning over the bottom plate so that the agar is pointing down. That way, particles do not settle on the inside.  I do the same when changing lens...

Ever considered carrying around a portable HEPA laminar flow hood?   ;)

This is my favorite response, above...too funny!

I have 2 MFT cameras and a Canon 5DIII.  I don't have dust issues with either type of camera.  I know that it makes sense that the exposed sensor on the mirrorless would welcome debris but I am not coming across anything that is monumental... i.e. that I am seeing in my images.  I use common sense when changing lenses and occasionally give the blow out treatment with a dust blower....but I do not see scads of dust that I need to PhotoShop out etc. in my images.  Do anyone really have a consistent problem with this?????

347
Lenses / Re: Which TS lens is better
« on: October 23, 2013, 08:34:42 AM »
That is my quote "as good or better"...  I read a review BEFORE I bought my lens (I just looked for 20min and cannot find the review...but I did read it) and there were sample photos showing less color fringing with the 17mm TSE II with 1.4X compared to the 24mm TSE.  I was in shock.  In any event ...I have shot images with the 17mm TSE II alone and with the 1.4X on the lens.  I am very critical about image quality...I have to say...unless you are a professional Architectural Photographer and use the lens daily...or desperately need the f/3.5 for some reason or the slight extra swing/tilt..I cannot see buying both lenses.  The results are really SURPRISINGLY fantastic with the converter on.  It is something I would never even considered doing until I read the article. 
So, raise your eyebrows if you want ...but it is a great setup.
I'm happy for you for you enthusiasm over your 17mm setup, you have good reason to. But the review you refer to must be against the old 24mm TS-E. The version II is optically nearly perfect. Extremely sharp and sharper than the 17mm, CA, flare, distortion and vignetting is very well controlled and color and contrast are absolute top notch. And so is the 17mm. The pixle peepers will probably give the 24mm the highest grades, but to me, the quality differences between the two are academic.

I had not tried the 17mm+1.4xIII combo before, but did yesterday. It works surprisingly well, but the results are not as good as those you get from the 24mm TS-E 3.5L II (the differences are more than academic here). I did not do a very thorough test of how much tilt & shift I got from one compared to the other, but it seemed the 24mm gave me more of both. I'm sure someone else in here has done the comparison.
OK...this is getting interesting....I think that I stand corrected that The review I read MUST have been comparing the  17mm II+1.4X III combo to the OLD 24mmTSE
So Eldar, thanks for checking that out and giving a personal report (I would but have no 24mm!). Question...did you compare with the lenses stopped down to 6.3 or 8?
The reason I ask is because if you take a look at the DigitalPicture Lens Comparison Tool (only web comparison that I can find),  the results look VERY close. (Like say in a 20" x24" print are we going to see a difference?)

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=487&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=3&LensComp=486&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

Any pics you can post?
I also apologize for my "perhaps" over enthusiasm.
I just left on a business travel (currently sitting in an airport lounge), so it will be some time before I can post anything more than text.

In the TDP ISO chart comparison I think it´s clear that sharpness and contrast has taken a fair hit on the 17mm/1.4xIII combo. But the interesting question is of course what you would say looking at an actual image.

To compare with something else; Reuter published the statistics for the 100 best images of the year (2012). Which cameras, lenses, shutter speeds, ISO etc. was used. The most widely used lens was the 16-35mm f2.8L II. And it is beyond question that they have plenty of good images to choose from. If you compare the 17mm/1.4xIII combo to the 16-35 at 24mm f8, you´ll see that your combo is at least as good as the 16-35. So equipment wise you are positioned to produce image of the year quality with what you have.

That was my point..hit the sharpness and contrast a little with PS and who will know the difference. When I soot something with that rig it is always on a tripod and always stopped down..and when I see the real world results there is just no complaint from me! Thanks for the feedback...I am going to check out that comparison to the 16-35 II zoom on TDP!

348
Lenses / Re: Which TS lens is better
« on: October 23, 2013, 06:24:17 AM »
That is my quote "as good or better"...  I read a review BEFORE I bought my lens (I just looked for 20min and cannot find the review...but I did read it) and there were sample photos showing less color fringing with the 17mm TSE II with 1.4X compared to the 24mm TSE.  I was in shock.  In any event ...I have shot images with the 17mm TSE II alone and with the 1.4X on the lens.  I am very critical about image quality...I have to say...unless you are a professional Architectural Photographer and use the lens daily...or desperately need the f/3.5 for some reason or the slight extra swing/tilt..I cannot see buying both lenses.  The results are really SURPRISINGLY fantastic with the converter on.  It is something I would never even considered doing until I read the article. 
So, raise your eyebrows if you want ...but it is a great setup.
I'm happy for you for you enthusiasm over your 17mm setup, you have good reason to. But the review you refer to must be against the old 24mm TS-E. The version II is optically nearly perfect. Extremely sharp and sharper than the 17mm, CA, flare, distortion and vignetting is very well controlled and color and contrast are absolute top notch. And so is the 17mm. The pixle peepers will probably give the 24mm the highest grades, but to me, the quality differences between the two are academic.

I had not tried the 17mm+1.4xIII combo before, but did yesterday. It works surprisingly well, but the results are not as good as those you get from the 24mm TS-E 3.5L II (the differences are more than academic here). I did not do a very thorough test of how much tilt & shift I got from one compared to the other, but it seemed the 24mm gave me more of both. I'm sure someone else in here has done the comparison.
OK...this is getting interesting....I think that I stand corrected that The review I read MUST have been comparing the  17mm II+1.4X III combo to the OLD 24mmTSE
So Eldar, thanks for checking that out and giving a personal report (I would but have no 24mm!). Question...did you compare with the lenses stopped down to 6.3 or 8?
The reason I ask is because if you take a look at the DigitalPicture Lens Comparison Tool (only web comparison that I can find),  the results look VERY close. (Like say in a 20" x24" print are we going to see a difference?)

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=487&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=3&LensComp=486&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

Any pics you can post?
I also apologize for my "perhaps" over enthusiasm.

349
Lenses / Re: Which TS lens is better
« on: October 22, 2013, 10:41:10 PM »
I read a review BEFORE I bought my lens (I just looked for 20min and cannot find the review...but I did read it) and there were sample photos showing less color fringing with the 17mm TSE II with 1.4X compared to the 24mm TSE.

I suspect the review was comparing the TS-E 17mm to the original (MkI) version of the TS-E 24mm, which didn't have the stellar IQ for which the MkII version is known. 

But I'll reiterate what I stated initially in this thread - the only meaningful differentiator between the TS-E 17/4L and the TS-E 24/3.5L II is that one is 17mm and the other is 24mm.  In practical use, the IQ differences are insignificant.  Regarding using a 1.4x TC, the greater tilt capability of the 24 vs the 17+1.4x might be of significance in some applications.  Also, tilt has a pretty deleterious effect on IQ - I wonder how the tilted 24 II compares to the tilted 17+1.4x.

You may be correct...It might have been comparing the 17mm II combo TO THE OLD 24mm and I was unaware of it.
Again...I have to say...the results that I achieve with the 17mm TS-E + 1.4X are very, very good..especially if I stop down to f/8 or f/11. 
This stuff is complicated and tedious!!!

350
Lenses / Re: Which TS lens is better
« on: October 22, 2013, 06:00:35 PM »
Better?  If you're referring to the original TS-E 24L, maybe - but the TS-E 24L II is sharper than the bare TS-E 17mm, and decidedly sharper than the 17 + 1.4x (very obvious in the TDP crop comparison).
In a head to head ISO chart comparison, the TS-E 24mm f3.5L II is the sharper lens. It beats almost anything you can compare it to. And it combines incredible sharpness with all the other qualities that one could wish for.

But the 17mm is also an incredible lens and with our current sensors, I believe the differences between the two are a bit academic. I am a bit worried though, walking around with the unprotected bulging front lens.  The image below is a shot, unedited raw to jpeg in LR, except for size reduction to fit the 4M size limit, with the 17mm on 5DIII (1/50s, f5.0 and ISO100).
In the Digital Picture comparisons...yes if you are pixel peeping and both the 17mm II with 1.4x vs 24mm II TSE's there is a slight difference (according to this comparison)...but even here..if you stop both lenses down a stop or two...you can really see no difference....it is negligible.
For me ...working on a tripod...I can just stop the lens down...I never shoot with it wide open..never. (I guess maybe astro photographers would a lot, though).  Someone else may have different needs...but putting on a converter and stopping down a stop or two and that save me $2500 while still giving incredible results and lightening the load in my bag....Can't beat it!
Conversely ...if you are going to mainly shoot with the 24mm...then I would say to buy that and be done with it...
but I reach for the 17mm first...so this really works for my needs...   Again... in the real world, the results are so good that if you have a good shot..no one will ever notice the difference unless you are making a huge print and peeping very heavily. I dare say the results will blow away anything that my 16-35mm II would have set on 24mm.

351
Lenses / Re: Which TS lens is better
« on: October 22, 2013, 05:53:54 PM »
As others stated, you should decide based on focal length only.  Personally, I picked the TS-E 24L II as my preferred focal length, after spending some time shooting my intended TS-E subjects with at both 17mm and 24mm (testing was actually done with the 7D + 10-22mm; I bought the 16-35L II and sold the 10-22mm about a month after getting the TS-E 24L II). 

I bought the 17mm TSE II (incredible) Lens first...based on the fact that (much to my surprise), I could use my Canon 1.4X III to increase the focal length of the 17mm to 24mm and get as-good (OR BETTER !), IQ as the 24mm TSE.
Better?  If you're referring to the original TS-E 24L, maybe - but the TS-E 24L II is sharper than the bare TS-E 17mm, and decidedly sharper than the 17 + 1.4x (very obvious in the TDP crop comparison).
I was talking mostly about functionality. You can crop a little but cannot always go backwards.

Sorry - your statement about image quality suggested otherwise…

That is my quote "as good or better"...  I read a review BEFORE I bought my lens (I just looked for 20min and cannot find the review...but I did read it) and there were sample photos showing less color fringing with the 17mm TSE II with 1.4X compared to the 24mm TSE.  I was in shock.  In any event ...I have shot images with the 17mm TSE II alone and with the 1.4X on the lens.  I am very critical about image quality...I have to say...unless you are a professional Architectural Photographer and use the lens daily...or desperately need the f/3.5 for some reason or the slight extra swing/tilt..I cannot see buying both lenses.  The results are really SURPRISINGLY fantastic with the converter on.  It is something I would never even considered doing until I read the article. 
So, raise your eyebrows if you want ...but it is a great setup.

352
Lenses / Re: Which TS lens is better
« on: October 22, 2013, 07:19:07 AM »
I got first the TS-E 24 and then the TS-E 17. If I were to start all over I would start with the 17.
I bought the 17mm TSE II (incredible) Lens first...based on the fact that (much to my surprise), I could use my Canon 1.4X III to increase the focal length of the 17mm to 24mm and get as-good (OR BETTER !), IQ as the 24mm TSE.

I already owned the 1.4X III to use with my 70-200mm...and NEVER would have considered using it on a super wide-angle lens...BUT ....I find that the combo is INDEED impressive!  Of course you lose an f/stop from the 17mm making the the combo quite a bit slower slower than the 24mm TSE (f/5.6 vs f/3.5 on the 24mm)...but considering all of my work with the lens is done on a tripod and low DOF isn't something that I am usually looking for with a super WA....for me it was like buying two TSE's for the price of one! I am AMAZED at the results with the 1.4X III. It goes against all I have learned over the years...but there it is.
Something to consider when looking at these lenses.
You still have the drawbacks of filter placement, protruding element of the 17mm...it is a little more cumbersome ...but I find it to be worth the money savings for me. If I was a pro, who shot Architecture all of the time, perhaps not.

353
Canon General / Re: What's Next for Canon?
« on: October 19, 2013, 10:07:59 AM »
I'm a photo guy, not a video guy.  But in a few years, my kids will be saying, "These silly pictures don't even move, s'up with that?!?"

I really have a hard time picturing a future where photographs are also completely replaced with video. Both have their place. Would I really want looping videos on my walls at home rather than static pictures? That would be maddening. I don't want everything everywhere to be in constant movement. Imagine replacing 100 wedding photos with 100 videos -- it would take forever to go through them.

Yeah. Not gonna happen. Two different mediums. Very different purposes. One is about the narrative. The other is about the moment.

Clearly, you guys haven't seen the photos and newspapers in the Harry Potter movies...   ;)

Harry who?

354
Canon General / Re: What's Next for Canon?
« on: October 17, 2013, 08:19:34 PM »
I'd love to see an EOS M2 with dual pixel AF and an EFV.  I've stared at the EOS-M deals on Amazon and B&H over the last few months, and was a mouse-click away from pushing that "order" button a half dozen times or so.  But I just can't bear the thought of using one without an EFV, and without the AF shown off in the 70D.  The Fuji X-E1 kind of owns the mirrorless scene for now, but I wish Canon had a competitor to it.

Tarzan want EOS M2, now!   :P

I don't think the M2 (as mentioned in the DPP help file) is anything more than a M refresh.

How do you refresh a DEAD MACKEREL?
If the camera was $10 I would not purchase it! ...I have no use for it?
I maintain an extensive 5 DIII system.
All of my  mirrorless money went to Olympus and Panasonic for two MFT bodies and eleven lenses.
Why..because MFT Is light, small, produces incredible results for a very small system and it complements my FF system PERFECTLY! I have lenses from fisheye to tele with SUPER fast AF on great wide aperture primes!
Canon...I have been buying MFT for years...that is YEARS...and your only response AFTER I had assembled an entire kit was the M?  The M???????  Does management live with its head buried in the DIRT????
Did ANYONE notice what Fuji, Olympus, Sony, Samsung, & Panasonic have been doing for years???
Canon...doing nothing is doing nothing.   How could you have completely missed this boat!!!
Also your recent pricing on products brings nothing but resentment from a lot of loyal customers.
Sony is INNOVATING.  that's I-N-N-O-V-A-T-I-N-G...Please look it up...it is a word you are not familiar with any more.
Imagine what a better job you could have done with the A7r with your ability to make lenses. Imagine.

WHATS NEXT for me..The OlyMpus M1.  That is as close as I am getting to the letter "M". Who cares what Canon is doing with mirrorless?  NOTHING=NOTHING.

355
EOS Bodies / Re: Holidays 2013: Where the Heck is Canon?
« on: October 17, 2013, 08:10:02 AM »
Canon is out shooting with the Sony A7r!!!

356


No need to get rid of all your Canon glass, with an adaptor for the Sony you could keep using them and save yourself A LOT of money. That Sony/Zeiss glass is even more overpriced than Canon glass :P!

I think you are missing the point....the reason to get into a mirrorless system is to HA a smaller lighter kit AND have high resolution capture....I should be able to shave pounds off my kit and have a much smaller backpack....
Lenses can be made a lot smaller.

357
Funny how many people want to jump ship in a few years because Sony is supposedly to be the next big thing. Everyone has expectations that Sony will have great glass to go with the mirrorless in the near future. Canon will simply stand still ... eh?

With such great expectations from a company that is not even making a profit on the electronics division, people around here tend to think that Canon, the largest Camera selling company for the past decade, won't come up with something comparable, if not better.

Or...they could end up like Blackberry...asleep at the wheel. Time will tell.

358
i'll be honest..
I too am going to get the A7R. Simply because it is what i have been waiting for in a long time.
I'm a Canon fan and i have tons of Canon glass and accessories etc..
But i always thought the weight of the 5D3 was a little too much for me and since i'm not a professional, i don't "need" a professional camera do i.
I have since also made the decision to switch to Sony. I love my 5D3 and all my L glass but somehow the A7R with good zeiss glass…i couldn't see a reason why i needed to keep my canon gear.
I am in fact going to sell away everything and move to Sony by next year once the zeiss 24-70 is launched
Noting against Canon, but i think they are indeed lacking behind in the mirrorless market. I have the M, it's a joke..and with nothing new anytime soon, i can't wait…
You go Boy! LOL!
I am going to be a little patient..but I am definitely headed toward the same boat. How can you not, unless you are a pro who specifically needs certain parts of a pro system.  I think when the next Sony body is released and there are many more lenses available is when I will jump.  I am skipping eBay too, with their ridiculous percentages...do you know of any forums to sell gear on and just use paypal??????

359
all these new cameras are great. However, the breaking point will only arrive if and when Sony can come up with lenses as good as the 24-70 II, 70-200 II, etc. 

For me there is no point buying a Ferrari chassis and pairing it with a Mazda engine.

As a second / travel kit probably it is great but the lens collection is too small to be a primary kit. I might consider it once the option for the lenses grow in time.

Cheers ... J.R.

I agree... I have an extensive FF kit ( 5DIII ten lenses from fisheye to 300mm) L glass, Zeiss, best Sigmas...
I also have an extensive MFT kit (E-M5 E-P5..11 lenses from fisheye to 350mm equiv.) all the good AF primes etc.
Sony, classically release great tech in a body and mediocre glass...but they are making more of an effort this time and stocking up on the Zeiss lenses now and upcoming in the next couple of years.  As it stands right now..with my advancing age...I can see me in 2-years time, when the next Sony A 36MP body is released with Phase Detection AF, faster frame rate,better VF,  3rd party manufacturers are providing great lenses, the body is improved:  just selling off both of my kits and buying into one high-rez kit from Sony....   I am not into slapping MF lenses onto a camera (for the most part...)...but I can see a lot of people abandoning CAnon/Nikon right now who are into the MF thing and never looking back.
It is amazing..the stupidity and arrogance of Canon/Nikon regarding the mirrorless format....mind boggling.
The M is CRAP. Pathetic effort. The V cameras..not much better for serious photographers.
I have an E-P5 with the VF-4 and the photo experience is amazing to say the least...it trumps optical in many ways for me. It is more fun and exciting to use and soooooooo much lighter and smaller!!!!  Sony is coupling 36MP capture with all that I just mentioned...Who could not want that!!!?????
I can see in 3 years the Sony A7r system being everything MFT is today...with great glass that is WAY smaller than the current FF CAnon/Nikon glass.    MFT is currently an impressive, small,  fun  system....with very decent capture and a plethora of lenses and more every day...  Looks like Sony is the only one embarking on marrying the best of both worlds. 
Canon and Nikon look VERY foolish today. It's also completely inexcusable.
I saw this coming, did you see this coming??????   How could Canon not have an offering by NOW??????????
Just my 2 cents.

360
PowerShot / Re: Limited Edition PowerShot Cameras Coming
« on: October 15, 2013, 11:21:23 AM »
YES, this is really what we all expect from Canon! As long as we get overpriced, engraved dwarf-sensored Pointnshoots we don't even notice that Sony is bringing FF-sensored mirrorless system cameras to market.

Canon is seriously off-track. They are in for hard times. Another Nokia going to happen.

+10,000!.....

..and..... dey is butt ugly.

...but...hey...look on the bright side....fall is here...they could make nice kindling to start the fireplace!  :-)

Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 ... 65