February 28, 2015, 09:09:00 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 - Lee Jay

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 115
241
Lenses / Re: canon 7D2 with 100-400 ii lens with 1.4 Extender for birds
« on: January 14, 2015, 10:26:58 AM »
Alan, you need to shoot your targets from far enough away that the resolution limit is somewhere in the range of your target.  In both of these shots, the resolution limit is beyond the high-end of your target so nothing can be determined.

242
Lenses / Re: Canon EF Lens Technology Video
« on: January 14, 2015, 10:24:25 AM »
Oh yeah!  I love geeking-out on this stuff!

243
Canon General / Re: Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path
« on: January 14, 2015, 09:31:30 AM »
Neuro, I really ask you to post to the topic of the respective threads rather than launching repeat personal attacks on me (and on other members of this forum).  Every time you run out of arguments you come with the same type of sh*t. I'm getting sick and tired of it.

You don't think everyone else is tired of your non-stop "antiquated, mechanical  mirrorslapper" BS?

244
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Around the Corner? [CR1]
« on: January 13, 2015, 07:56:37 AM »
<p>We’re told that Canon will replace the EF-S 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 IS with a new version soon, and it will come as an EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM. This lens has been rumoured for a while now.</p>
<p>There was no word if this was coming for CP+ next month.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

When Canon is going to produce a quality EF 28-200/300mm lens for FF cameras? Nikon counterpart delivers very good IQ despite the narrow aperture.
Tamron one is also a good option but I'd prefer something from Canon.

Canon already produces the best one available the 28-300L.

245
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Around the Corner? [CR1]
« on: January 12, 2015, 04:17:32 PM »
EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

Hm... I am always puzzled, if people who need/want such an "one for all" lens better should buy a good bridge camera.
But such lenses get sold.
Not many bridge cameras with APS-c sensors and for which you can quickly exchange the range for, say, a 10mm fisheye, a 600/4, or an 85/1.2.
Yeah, right!
But how many 18-300 owners might also own/lend/use a 10mm fisheye or a 600/4?
And how many 10mm fisheye and 600/4 owners need/want a 18-300?
Honestly?  ???

An 18-300 style lens can be very useful as a video lens or as an all-in-one travel lens when you can't take the big stuff with you, such as on a hike, rock climb, or in a canoe or kayak.

246
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Around the Corner? [CR1]
« on: January 12, 2015, 03:39:13 PM »
EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

Hm... I am always puzzled, if people who need/want such an "one for all" lens better should buy a good bridge camera.
But such lenses get sold.

Not many bridge cameras with APS-c sensors and for which you can quickly exchange the range for, say, a 10mm fisheye, a 600/4, or an 85/1.2.

247
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Around the Corner? [CR1]
« on: January 12, 2015, 02:10:48 PM »
All these lenses need to start at 15mm Canon!  Even most of your compacts start at 24mm-equivalent, why not your much more expensive SLRs?

248
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: January 11, 2015, 03:47:32 PM »
And in 6 months time, maybe that will be the debate here:

"Canon has more MP, better AF!"
"Sony has more DR, better IQ!"

... but the problem for lots of us will be that a FF sensor that performs the same as the 7D2 sensor won't represent anything new or better: there will be just more of it.

So more DR = better but more MP doesn't? That just betrays your personal preferences. Both can be better, both can be irrelevant, depending on needs.

Quantity (more MP) is not the same as quality (better MP)

You seem to have missed the point of what I said. Better isn't an objective term. For *some* people, having more pixels of even the same quality as today (however you measure it) is better.

So you're saying that if sensor A has measurably less noise and measurably more DR than sensor B then A isn't better than B from an objective point of view?

In what conditions?  Are all other things equal or are other things (such as pixel size/count) different?  What about color separation, quality and/or existence of the AA filter?

249
EOS Bodies / Re: 2015 wishlist
« on: January 10, 2015, 01:12:29 AM »

  • Please cure my horizontal deficiency syndrome when leveling the camera


EVF's can be great for that - it's nice to have horizon guides/spirit levels etc. in the viewfinder (Sony's variant is particularly good, but maddeningly absent from their a6000).  Let's hope Canon obliges some day.

They already have - for years now.

A spirit level in the view finder? Canon? Which one?

Trying to remember... I think the 7D was first, then 60D, 70D and 7D2.  I think some of the 1D series have it too...maybe 1D4 and 1DX?  Not sure.  Maybe you could look it up.

250
EOS Bodies / Re: 2015 wishlist
« on: January 09, 2015, 04:21:23 PM »

  • Please cure my horizontal deficiency syndrome when leveling the camera


EVF's can be great for that - it's nice to have horizon guides/spirit levels etc. in the viewfinder (Sony's variant is particularly good, but maddeningly absent from their a6000).  Let's hope Canon obliges some day.

They already have - for years now.

251
EOS Bodies / Re: NEW CAMERA - EOS 80D?
« on: January 09, 2015, 11:49:34 AM »
The 50D turned into the 60D, which was described as the "Super Rebel" as build quality and size decreased. The camera was a bit of a bust and the 70D corrected that by moving upmarket.

I suspect Canon is moving the Rebel back into that "Super Rebel" slot.

A part of me is wondering if the xxD line is nearing its end.

The 70D moved upmarket in terms of capabilities but not in terms of price.

I think you need to have something between a $600 Rebel (body only) and an $1,800 7D Mark II (body only).  Whether they call than a Rebel or an xxD makes little difference, but if you do call it a Rebel, then something has to fill in the low-end.  Maybe they think that's the SL1.

252
EOS Bodies / Re: NEW CAMERA - EOS 80D?
« on: January 08, 2015, 10:43:25 PM »
Maybe it's the large sensor hyperzoom (FZ1000 competitor).

253
Lenses / Re: Quick Comparison: Canon's new 400mm Options
« on: January 06, 2015, 03:20:16 PM »
Primes will always beat zooms in light transmission due to fewer optics.  There is an advantage to primes that most people don't realize.

I find primes have about a 1/2 stop advantage over zooms of similar apertures.

Yep and for most who require big teles for wildlife also require better low light capability and 1/2 stop can make a difference in the morning or late evening or when adding an extender to the mix.

The actual difference is more like 1/6th of a stop.
Example:  70-200/2.8L IS II T-stop=3.6, 200/2.8L II T-stop=3.3.

depends on the number of optics.  For that lens 1/6 may be correct.

What other pairs can be checked?  As far as I can think of, the only other one is the 100-400L and 400/5.6L where the f-stops and focal lengths are the same between prime and zoom.  The 400/5.6L hasn't been tested.

254
Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: January 06, 2015, 01:32:24 PM »
As I keep telling people, the old one was very good optically, but only under ideal conditions (IS off or stopped down a stop).  The new one seems to be massively better under regular high stress conditions (wide oopen with the IS in, and in resisting flare and CA.

I think those ideal conditions must also include using a full frame sensor with relatively large subsensors.  I was reading another thread here yesterday that discussed how high density sensors put more stringent requirements on lenses.  Something tells me that the first version's proponents were more likely using full frame bodies with it than crop bodies.*  If the new version also excels on crop bodies, then that in itself is a big improvement.

* I'm a newbie, so of course there could be another explanation.  But quality reports on the first version are unarguably widely varying.  It's likely that Canon had silently been improving the design and tolerances over the decade+ span of the first version.  It's possible that there was a lot of sample variation.  But it could also be that those factors were at times combined with sensors of varying pickiness.  So ultimately, the optical benefit of the new design might not be that it's improving the best samples, but rather that it's decreasing sample variation (so they're all the "best" ones) and thereby offering more consistently positive performance even on dense sensors.

I used it with teleconverters on crop bodies and it was fine, under ideal use conditions (a stop down and/or IS off).

255
Lenses / Re: Quick Comparison: Canon's new 400mm Options
« on: January 06, 2015, 01:28:22 PM »
Primes will always beat zooms in light transmission due to fewer optics.  There is an advantage to primes that most people don't realize.

I find primes have about a 1/2 stop advantage over zooms of similar apertures.

Yep and for most who require big teles for wildlife also require better low light capability and 1/2 stop can make a difference in the morning or late evening or when adding an extender to the mix.

The actual difference is more like 1/6th of a stop.
Example:  70-200/2.8L IS II T-stop=3.6, 200/2.8L II T-stop=3.3.

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 115