December 21, 2014, 12:00:52 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 - K-amps

Pages: 1 ... 88 89 [90] 91 92 ... 103
1336
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8LisII with x1.4TC VS 70-300 f/4-5.6L
« on: December 02, 2011, 04:35:10 PM »
Not bad...pretty usable. I'd rather have this then miss a shot.

1337
Landscape / Re: Some new works.
« on: December 02, 2011, 03:24:37 PM »
Love the effect ! #1 and 3 are very well done.

I like the aspect ratio as well.... take it fomr a guy who has been printing 8x10 for the last 2 weeks and having to crop his hard work...  :P

What filters / PP have you used to get this effect?

1338
United States / Re: Prime lenses you currently own or on your wishlist.
« on: December 02, 2011, 02:33:39 PM »
I currently have (FF):
35mm f2 (indors)
50mm f1.4 (outdors and portrait)

Wish I had 80mm f1.2  and a macro prime (no matter the focal distance)

If funds are an issue... get the non-L 100f2.8 Macro. It is as sharp as the L, I still miss mine. A good MINT copy can be had on ebay for about $460, which is a bargain, when you consider, it takes nice portraits too.

1339
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8LisII with x1.4TC VS 70-300 f/4-5.6L
« on: December 02, 2011, 02:31:29 PM »
mostly the 70-300 goes on the 5DII and the 70-200II goes on the 7D/1D4 due to the use that I make of the different bodies.

In your case, they would have similar lengths and would be substitutes to each other; Interestingly, I was thinking the other way around  :):  70-200 on the FF for portraits and indoor shots and the 70-300 on the Crop for more reach, I don't need redundancy as much, I want range.

Agreed - that's why I use the 100-400mm on my 7D and the 70-200mm on my 5DII, for the most part.

I am sure you must have tried the 2x on the 100-400 on a 7D... Thats close to 1300mm equivalent !! Was the footage usable?

1340
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8LisII with x1.4TC VS 70-300 f/4-5.6L
« on: December 02, 2011, 01:16:53 PM »
I believe that the 70-300L is better at the 70-100 range than the 70-200II - however it may be better colour contrast . However this is personal preference based on A3 prints rather than some scientific test.

That said both lens are top draw - I am happy to have both  - mostly the 70-300 goes on the 5DII and the 70-200II goes on the 7D/1D4 due to the use that I make of the different bodies.

In your case, they would have similar lengths and would be substitutes to each other; Interestingly, I was thinking the other way around  :):  70-200 on the FF for portraits and indoor shots and the 70-300 on the Crop for more reach, I don't need redundancy as much, I want range.

1341
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8LisII with x1.4TC VS 70-300 f/4-5.6L
« on: December 02, 2011, 12:30:29 PM »

The usual testing procedure is to manually focus (10x live view) or better yet, focus bracket (and take the sharpest image) to compare sharpness across lenses.

Liveview? You are rubbing it in again  :P

1342
United States / Re: Prime lenses you currently own or on your wishlist.
« on: December 02, 2011, 11:37:57 AM »
50mm f1.8 mk.II
180mm f3.5L

Wish list: 135mmL f2

1343
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8LisII with x1.4TC VS 70-300 f/4-5.6L
« on: December 02, 2011, 11:26:07 AM »
The 70-200 is sharp and very nice overall, still... both copies not as sharp as my 70-300L.

Your experience differs from some of the reviews.  Are you basing the comparison on images where you used autofocus, and have you done an AF microadjustment for your lenses?

Not getting into a debate with you Neuro...  ;)  but to answer your question: Used AF but No micro adjustment since my 5Dc does not support it.  The refurbed one has some back focus issues on AF, at a distance of about 20ft from the subject, it will focus 6-7 inches deeper than the spot AF I choose. This is consistent (f2.8 ). When it does focus 6-7 inches back, the results are sharp. I posted a 100mm test in another thread, the newer one has less of this back focus bias, but when they do focus, the sharpness of both copies is similar. I posted a couple of quick shots here comparing the two 70-200's I have:  http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,2262.15.html  towards the bottom of the page.

With my 70-300L, It is easier to make out the weave of the fabric of the subject clearer at similar distances compared to the 70-200f2.8.  Assuming both shot at 200mm. Granted I have not done set up formal tests for this scenario (200mm) , just going of experience...

I will set up more elaborate tests if you care to purchase the 70-300L, otherwise personally I am convinced my the 70-300L copy is sharper than both 70-200f2.8's which are pretty sharp on their own.

1344
Software & Accessories / Re: To HDR or Not To HDR
« on: December 02, 2011, 09:45:54 AM »

Basically, my point is that it took a lot of work over a few hours just to get this far, and i'm still not happy. Whether it's the fault of Hugin that is introducing the noise from the darkest shots in the dark-areas or what, I don't know. But I doubt that any automated-program or in-camera settings can get anywhere near this with no user input, at least for now...

Don't know what your preferences are... but I did a quick PP using elements on your last image, using the following tools:

Reversed some darkening gradient effects to the right.
Shadow/ Highlights
Contrast & Brightness

You can do much better with PS/ or even Viveza. Your shot has lots of potential !

1345
Software & Accessories / Re: To HDR or Not To HDR
« on: December 02, 2011, 09:21:52 AM »
Did you do a graduated exposure filt to the right of the frame? Looks very dark and a bit distracting. I agree with you it needs some work, but it also has potential... good footage to work with. The lead in lines have potential... I wonder if it is the modern architecture clashing with traditional in the background that is contributing to some of your grief...

1346
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8LisII with x1.4TC VS 70-300 f/4-5.6L
« on: December 02, 2011, 07:38:04 AM »
I have both. Actually currently have 2 copies of 70-200f28mk.ii (long story):  I think my 70-300L is sharper. I was going to sell it after I got the 70-200, but so far I am not feeling the urge.  The 70-200 is sharp and very nice overall, still... both copies not as sharp as my 70-300L.

As others have said it is easier to handle and great for travel/ walkabout. No need to monopod. Great lens.

your con would be cost of TC vs. 1350 or so.

Given a choice I would not get rid of the 70-200 either. It's great indoors, has a great Bokeh and an "X" factor that makes some pictures almost magical... 

Good luck.

1347
I hope I am not off-topic here since 10 days ago I got a refurb for $1999 + Tax = 2140; then I saw this post and got a "new" one from Adorama for a price matched $1974 + 0 Tax = $1974. Thank you OP!!! 

Now I was hoping that the new one would focus as good or better than the refurb one since I did not think it was as sharp as my 70-300L. I did a test.... (I know lenses get sharper after they are "broken in") so advantage goes to the refurb; I did a small test. I shot a slanted carpenter's ruler with both lenses at 100mm (almost 100mm ;) ) both at f2.8. Spot AF at the 12" mark.

The 4478 is the older refurb unit and the 4481 image is the newer one. Both 100%crop of jpegs no sharpening done PP: Is the new one at least as good as the refurb?

I think they are similar but the older one had a hood on and looks to have better contrast...

1348
Canon General / Re: 15% Off at Canon Refurbished Store
« on: December 01, 2011, 09:29:30 AM »
Pardon my ignorance, but what is CLP?

I got a generic email from canon, with a coupon (HOLIDAY) that applies the 15% to the 5d2/7D that I tried it on.

Maybe it will work for you guys too?

Cheers!

1349
EOS Bodies / Re: 1D Mark IV Refurbs in Stock
« on: November 30, 2011, 09:36:02 PM »
15% code for reburbished DSLR and Lenses good till midnight Dec 2. I'm not going to use it and don't know if it's a single use so anyone's welcome to it

UVBWHR6N


and don't forget $5 shipping

SHIP11

Didnt work for me, hope it does for someone else...  :)

1350
Lenses / Re: I wish I'd never sold my.....?
« on: November 30, 2011, 05:05:20 PM »
I sold my very first L lens which was the 100mm f2.8L macro.. it was an awesome lens but i sold it to fund a 5d mk 2... and i know i wouldnt do as much macro photography as i would with street and landscape... Although the upside is i got a full frame i wish i would hold on to it  :(

+1 Me too... that copy I had of the 100 Macro f2.8 was razor sharp and great bokeh too. Sold it for the L version which did not dazzle me...

Pages: 1 ... 88 89 [90] 91 92 ... 103