February 27, 2015, 01:25:39 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 - PeterJ

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 23
Lenses / Re: 70-200 is I vs ii:tc usage
« on: December 01, 2012, 10:50:39 PM »
1. Would the version ii 70-200 work with version ii converters
Yes - in fact the iii extender became available well after the lens was released.
2. Would the version ii converters work better with the 70-200 mark I
Not 100% sure on that, but I believe they did make some optical improvements so I'd expect so.
3. Is it important to purchase mark iii converters for the 70-200 ii
The mark iii has weather sealing and is a little better optically. It has some AF speed improvements with newer super-teles but I don't think those changes make a difference on the 70-200. Guess it's up to you if the extra $$$ are worth a small improvement, but either will work fine.

As for your main question I think the 70-200 II is considered to have better IQ than the 70-200 I in just about all regards, so the same will apply when using an extender even more so. The II version also has faster autofocus which will help when using an extender, which slows down AF.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Autofocus selection points...
« on: December 01, 2012, 07:33:27 PM »
A lot depends on your framing / distance to subject. For example according to a DOF calculator a 50mm on a crop at f/1.4 at 5 meters has a DOF of 0.43m which is ample for two people. At a wedding you often want full length shots that have a lot of background context. Plus for tighter shots you can often get the couple in pretty good alignment with each other.

But yeah for small groups (fairly well in line) and couples f/2.8 is probably a good range, but probably f/4 if you have a few people at the front/back etc. Neuro just posted back while I was typing but that is a good suggestion to have a play with a DOF calculator.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Autofocus selection points...
« on: December 01, 2012, 06:34:04 PM »
It sounds a bit like you want the A-DEP (automatic depth of field) feature that selects an aperture so that near and far objects on the focus points are all in focus. The 450D used to have it but it seems to have been removed from more recent cameras (or maybe XXXD still have it?) but either way it's not available on the 60D.

Lenses / Re: 650-1300 T-mount lens
« on: November 29, 2012, 12:14:37 AM »
I guess the CCD will probably only have 480 lines or so vertical resolution? If so sounds like you're on the right track using a relatively crappy lens with a longer focal length because you won't have much room for digital cropping.

I borrowed a similar lens from a friend a while back (can't remember brand, but similar class to those) to have a play with and at 650mm versus a 70-200L f/2.8 and cropping to 1920 x 1200 the 650mm had a fraction more detail but the Canon had better contrast and colour so was better for general photography. But if your CCD is reasonably low-res in comparison would expect you'd get much better results with the longer focal length.

I gather this will be some sort of automated target identification system and the still shots just for later confirmation / testing so you won't want the usual aspects of a 'nice' photo anyway?

Lenses / Re: 24-70 versus 24-105 AF performance
« on: November 28, 2012, 05:09:54 PM »
Thanks everyone,  based on the feedback I'll sell my 24-70 and get the 24-105. Looking at used prices locally it looks like I should be able to get a new 24-105 for about $0 - $100 more so think I'll go that way.

Lenses / 24-70 versus 24-105 AF performance
« on: November 28, 2012, 02:02:19 AM »
I've got a 24-70 f/2.8L (original version) and I've been thinking about a 'cross-grade' to a 24-105 f/4L. With a crop I used to use it a lot for portraits but since moving to FF (now own a 5D3) I normally use a 70-200 for that and 24-70 only gets used at f/4 or above most of the time anyway and often for things where IS would be a benefit. I use a 50mm if I want something faster.

Anyway I know a f/4 lens will technically focus slower in low light than a f/2.8 but just wondered from someone who's used both how low light AF between the two compares? I thought maybe despite f/4 the 24-105 may have a more modern / faster AF drive so maybe not too much of a difference in practice?

Lenses / Re: With my 5D MK III is an f/2.8 lens really needed???
« on: November 27, 2012, 08:06:46 PM »
Take a few outdoor portraits at 200 f/2.8 and see what you think of the look versus 105 f/4. Personally I use my 70-200 at 2.8 a lot and really like the isolation and OOF background.

Lenses / Re: Focal Distance: furthest possible maintaining blurred BG
« on: November 26, 2012, 06:25:33 AM »
biggest focal length as close as you can be to the subject
Probably an MP-E 65 then, or would the 180mm be better? :P

I don't own a 135L but have used one and it's a very nice lens. However I do own a 70-200 and I'd go with that for versatility especially at weddings where you'll be rushed and not necessarily be able to move yourself / subjects to get proper framing. Also the IS is worthwhile at those sorts of focal lengths when you don't have a tripod and maybe shooting quickly.

A few people mentioned it being smaller / more covert but really for wedding / portrait work most people will assume (often wrongly) bigger = better so that's really not an issue, and in their eyes probably makes you look more professional.

Software & Accessories / Re: iPad mini connectivity with 7d
« on: November 24, 2012, 09:58:49 PM »
I thought those cables could only connect to a USB host (like a PC) or is it something a bit different to the standard one?
I believe this is a specific cable by apple that is designed for this. This might eventually justify me getting an iPad as if this works well then I could use at weddings during the formals to ensure everyone's looking and in focus. It's very hard to gauge on a 3" screen. I'd be interested to hear how well this works in live shooting environment as I wouldn't want to be waiting forever for the picture to load up on the iPad.
Thanks Brian, having a further look I see it now. I hadn't heard of the iPad Mini and misread it as iPod Mini and wondered how they got USB host with just a cable.

ETA - Seeing you don't have an iPad the following might be worth checking out, it allows liveview shooting on some Android tablets. My Droid phone doesn't have USB host so I haven't tried it out myself:


Software & Accessories / Re: iPad mini connectivity with 7d
« on: November 24, 2012, 08:48:49 PM »
I thought those cables could only connect to a USB host (like a PC) or is it something a bit different to the standard one?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Got my (new) 7D back from repair
« on: November 24, 2012, 12:46:00 AM »
That sucks on the burst mode, it sounds like you still have a problem. I've owned both and can't think of any situations that should cause that especially when it sounds like you know what you're doing with settings etc.

The 5D2 does focus well on the center point, probably even better than the 7D in a lot of situations so that bit doesn't really suprise me. The main 7D advantages are the better spread, selection choices and servo also seemed better as well.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Got my (new) 7D back from repair
« on: November 23, 2012, 06:00:48 PM »
Paperwork says - tried to adjust AF unit, ended up replacing AF unit, shutter/focus button, main dial, and CF card slot assembly.

Jeeze thats a LOT to replace!!??
That just sounds like someone starting with the most obvious bits to replace and moving onto the less likely things. It's probably just not worth their time to go back and reinstall the bits that turned out to be OK. Interesting it was the CF card assembly, guess something must have been bent or out of tolerance and mechanically interfering with the AF. It reminds me of a joke:

A field service engineer turns up to a maintenance job almost two hours late and apologizes saying he got a flat tire. The angry customer replies, "how long does it to change a tire, 15 or 20 minutes tops???" to which he answers "I'm sorry but I had to remove and re-install 4 modules to isolate the problem".

EOS Bodies / Re: My 5d seems to have better video then stills
« on: November 23, 2012, 01:19:25 AM »
I guess if not too much of a pain you could always try "clear all camera settings" under the menu. Then if you had made some changes you want to keep just put them back gradually so at least you know which one is causing you a problem.

Animal Kingdom / Re: MY dog
« on: November 21, 2012, 03:56:17 AM »
This is one of my first shots after getting a 100L macro and having a play around with it:

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 23