March 01, 2015, 08:04:19 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 - J.R.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 105
16
to all who say that Canon is not innovative:
Yeah, you're right!  ;)

+1

I'm sure the naysayers will come up with some pathetic bullS___ as to how the patents are worthless because none of them have improved DR.

17
Canon General / Re: Canon Date codes gone? Why?
« on: January 13, 2015, 06:48:50 AM »
I can see this hurting resale values down the road.

No it won't. Just keep the original receipt with the packaging material intact.

18
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III Replacement Talk [CR2]
« on: January 13, 2015, 05:08:40 AM »
I'm not interested in "the market" (attention, here comes the holy cow, the always so present "market"!), but results.

The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent

19
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III Replacement Talk [CR2]
« on: January 13, 2015, 03:22:56 AM »
Given that you have failed to articulate any other functionality losses, I'm going to therefore draw the conclusion that the "massively compromised with severe loss of functionality" is in fact limited to one feature and one feature only: autofocus and only when using a 3rd party adapter for 3rd party lenses.

Terrible battery life, Sony's weak UI, shutter-induced vibration, lossy RAW compression...but you go ahead and draw what ever conclusions you want – facts have never affected them before, no reason to let them start now.  ::)

Sony's UI is improving and far more customisable than Canon's and speaking of UI's how easy is to access MLU on a Canon DSLR? In short, whether a UI is good or bad is not objective as it depends on what you're used to.

On the one hand there is mirror vibration that Canon has made no effort to make easy to eliminate due to MLU being hard to access and on the other there is shutter vibration which I'm pretty sure Sony will seek to fix (as they have other issues.)

So if you want to compare _systems_, then using the issues you've raised, on the one hand you have a system that is constantly evolving and improving (Sony) and on the other hand you've got a system that has gone nowhere (Canon.) But really the "going nowhere" sort of fits Canon quite well. Oh, unless you count improvements to autofocus as that seems to be all that Canon cares about now but which I'm sure Sony will also improve.

Have you started to shoot using Sony systems yet?

20
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III Replacement Talk [CR2]
« on: January 12, 2015, 08:27:42 AM »
Given that you have failed to articulate any other functionality losses, I'm going to therefore draw the conclusion that the "massively compromised with severe loss of functionality" is in fact limited to one feature and one feature only: autofocus and only when using a 3rd party adapter for 3rd party lenses.

Terrible battery life, Sony's weak UI, shutter-induced vibration, lossy RAW compression...but you go ahead and draw what ever conclusions you want – facts have never affected them before, no reason to let them start now.  ::)

So if I use a Sony lens and not an adapted Canon lens, I won't have any of these problems? Sweet!

Just a question for you Dilbert, why haven't you switched to Sony already? Ever since I've been on these forums (early 2012 I believe) all I've seen from you is non-stop Canon bashing.

For someone facing so many difficulties in getting acceptable IQ from your Canon gear, moving to Nikon/Sony is the best thing you could do and get back to shooting images.

21
Lenses / Re: New Canon 100-400mm Mk2 lens with 2x extender mk3
« on: January 07, 2015, 10:11:47 PM »
What was the EXIF for the moon shots

Hi,
Thanks for the further comments. I'll try weights cos it is a metal tripod (Benro) with an Induro BHD 1 ball head.

I am getting strange results - attached two pics of a stone wall and both are pretty sharp, one using the extender and the other the basic lens. Cropped the 400mm pic to give the same field of view as the 800. Both shot at 1/25sec!!! and no camera shake and my previous moon pics were 1/800sec for the 800mm and 1/250sec for 400mm yet the fast shutter speed for the moon gives a blurred image. So not sure the source of my problem is vibration. Really confused why I can't get a decent focus at infinity (ie the moon) when these two pics indicate the combo is not bad.

22
Lenses / Re: New Canon 100-400mm Mk2 lens with 2x extender mk3
« on: January 07, 2015, 10:09:08 PM »
Just an observation: I'd have thought that in practice 2x extenders are best kept for fast lenses.

There is some truth in that. However, for someone chasing birds, any addition to the focal length is welcome. This usually results in experimentation with extenders.

Nevertheless, getting a supertelephoto is well outside of a normal budget, the 2x extenders provide a lot of additional focal length albeit at a price in IQ.

+1, i tend to always have a TC with me, just in case! :)

Chasing birds at f/11 without AF is not easy, to say the least, unless the bird is sitting immobile. In my opinion, the sheer inconvenience in using a 2xTC on an f/5.6 and the concomitant loss of IQ are not worth the the extra reach over 1.4x, which will be fairly marginal anyway because of the poorer IQ and the higher noise.

True. As I said, using 2x TC with f/5.6 lenses is usually in the nature of experimentation usually. The additional FL is at great cost - no AF, f/11 and less than excellent IQ.

23
Lenses / Re: New Canon 100-400mm Mk2 lens with 2x extender mk3
« on: January 07, 2015, 09:57:40 AM »
Just an observation: I'd have thought that in practice 2x extenders are best kept for fast lenses.

There is some truth in that. However, for someone chasing birds, any addition to the focal length is welcome. This usually results in experimentation with extenders.

Nevertheless, getting a supertelephoto is well outside of a normal budget, the 2x extenders provide a lot of additional focal length albeit at a price in IQ.

24
EOS Bodies / Re: Expect Higher End Products at CP+ in February
« on: January 07, 2015, 06:48:04 AM »

I sold my 1DX and all my L primes. Not looking back.

Not looking back?  :o :o

Seriously, what sort of lunatic comes with ranting posts at CR AFTER selling all his Canon gear?

I keep hearing of guys who break up with their girlfriends but still keep checking their FB profiles to see what is going on in the girl's life ... It's supposed to be a mental condition, get help!

25
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New firmware for 1DX ?
« on: January 07, 2015, 05:45:47 AM »
Mine certainly hasn't - I purchased one last month but as I got it from a bricks and mortar store, I'm not sure how long it had been sitting on the shelf.

26
Lenses / Re: New Canon 100-400mm Mk2 lens with 2x extender mk3
« on: January 07, 2015, 05:42:14 AM »
A couple of quick issues which I noticed using the 2x extender on the 100-400-II-

1) Trying to focus using the LV is going to be PITA. If you do need to use contrast detect AF, then you should start by turning the focus ring manually so that the lens is focused behind the subject and then start the contrast detect AF. This is usually much faster.

2) Unless you have one of the best tripods available, using a tripod with the 2x attached is a no go. Even the slightest of vibration using the tripod is going to muck up the image. I've tried it with my manfrotto (AU tripod) but it is a struggle with the slow shutter speed at f/11. The only way I've got reasonable shots using a tripod with slow shutter speed is with MLU or shooting LV.

3) In my opinion, the IQ using the 2x is better than it was with the 100-400 v1 with the 1.4 extender.

4) My shots with the 2x extender are not exactly razor sharp, but they are not as blurry as yours. I will post some images once I can access my home computer  ;)

Happy shooting!

27
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: January 04, 2015, 10:36:54 AM »
Grey Bushchat

28
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: January 03, 2015, 08:34:52 AM »
Another distant shot - I liked the pose.

Nice shot - I've got a shot of the same bird

29
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L Mark II
« on: January 03, 2015, 08:30:10 AM »
Ugly Duckling, NOT

30
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L Mark II
« on: January 03, 2015, 08:27:08 AM »
I just had a look at TDP crops of the new 100-400 and nearly fell off my chair ! The lens even stands up against the hallowed 70-200 2.8 II. 200 at f2.8 for a tight portrait or 300 at f5 ? Or 400 at f5.6 ? Looks like this is one expensive lens that I'll be forking out for.

This is one superb lens. The IQ between the 70-200 II and the 100-400 II is indistinguishable (except that the 70-200 can go f/2.8 of course)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 105