November 24, 2014, 07:33:59 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 - Harv

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17
1
Lenses / Re: 400mm thoughts
« on: November 17, 2014, 02:18:06 PM »

The MTF's on the new 100-400 @ 400 are substantially better than the 400 5.6 prime which is a pretty sharp lens.  In fact, the charts say it's substantially sharper even with the 1.4x and 2x tele's attached. Didn't expect to see that. If it focuses quickly and tracks well I may have to retire the prime.

I put one of these on pre-order the morning it was announced.  Based on the published MTF charts, I fully expect it to be sharper.  Like you, I'm looking forward to evaluating the AF speed and accuracy and if it turns out to be fast, my 400 f/5.6 will become redundant.

2
Lenses / Re: 400mm thoughts
« on: November 16, 2014, 11:29:14 AM »
I owned and used the 400 f/4 DO Mark I for a couple of years, having purchased it new.  For me the advantage was obviously the IS and 1 stop faster, plus being able to use a 1.4TC on it.  I no longer own the lens.

I have owned a number of copies of the 400 f/5.6L and still own one today.  In my opinion, the 400 f/5.6L is noticeably sharper at any aperture, and the lens is lighter.  The downside is the need for faster shutter speed.

Having said all that, the MTF charts on the 400 f/4 DO Mark II look to be outstanding and I suspect this new version will be much sharper than either of the above two lenses.  If it wasn't so dang expensive, I'd consider buying it.

Another lens worth looking at, in my opinion, is the new 100-400 that will be available in late December.  The MTF charts on that look great also, plus the latest IS.

3
Lenses / Re: Field review of the new Canon 100-400
« on: November 15, 2014, 08:45:00 PM »
The picture in his article with him holding it is the first time I've caught the fact that it still has a barrel that moves in and out thus still making this lens a potential for sucking in dust and moisture like the old version that I have. That's a disappointment. I thought I read somewhere here that it didn't do that and it was a more "balanced: lens since it wouldn't change it's centre of gravity when zoomed in.

I have one of the new versions on pre-order.  Having said that, I've had 4 copies of the original and never had one that "sucked in dust and moisture".  I was just never able to find a sharp copy which is why I don't own one now.

4
Post Processing / Re: POLL: What picture styles do you use?
« on: November 13, 2014, 11:06:15 AM »
Neutral, and as I shoot only RAW, I change it in post if needed.

5
Lenses / Re: Field review of the new Canon 100-400
« on: November 11, 2014, 07:54:39 PM »
Hi,
    He mention it focus as fast as the big white prime and looking at the MTF chart, I think this will replace both the old EF 100-400mm L and the EF 400mm F5.6L.

   Have a nice day.

That's what I'm hoping.  I have mine on order.

6
Lenses / Re: Field review of the new Canon 100-400
« on: November 11, 2014, 06:42:25 PM »
I don't know that I would call that a "review", but thanks for the link all the same.

I agree that it`s not a full fledged review, but he touched on the elements of the lens that are important to me.  Possibly to others as well.

7
Lenses / Field review of the new Canon 100-400
« on: November 11, 2014, 05:54:33 PM »
I found this on the Canon Europe Professional website this morning.....

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/technical/danny_green_on_ef100_400mm_f45_56l_is_ii_usm_zoom.do

8
Lenses / Re: Preorder: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 11, 2014, 04:19:46 PM »
Any canadian sites? :(

Aden Camera seems to be the first Canadian site with a listing - $2400

I pre-ordered mine from Aden first thing this morning.  At that time they didn't even have a price yet.  I firmly believe this lens is going to rock.

9
Lenses / Re: Preorder: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 11, 2014, 07:43:27 AM »
Mine will be ordered today.    :D :D :D :D :D

10
Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 10, 2014, 08:44:20 PM »
So. Same filter size, same F range, same focal length, except heavier, longer, wider and also 50% more expensive than the previous version.  Am I missing something?  Unless the AF performance or sharpness or something blows the prior version away (hard to imagine at the same F stop) we just waited 10 years and are paying 50% more for turn-style zoom? Please someone tell me I am missing something major here.

The old one had lousy handling, terrible optical performance from 300mm to 400mm wide open with the IS activated, and the IS was just this side of useless.


I owned 4 copies over the span of 7 years and had exactly the same experience.  I will gladly pay the asking price if it's sharp at the long end, has the current IS and focuses faster than the original.  If the optical performance is on par with the 70-300L, I will be ecstatic.


11
Lenses / Re: Is the new 100-400L II going to be a push/pull after all?
« on: November 10, 2014, 07:17:31 PM »
Yes.....  first you PUSH it around to the left to increase the focal length and then PULL it around to the right to shorten it.   ;D

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Interesting Article on DXO Mark Ratings
« on: November 10, 2014, 12:41:18 PM »
Thanks for the link.  An excellent read.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D Mark II - Finally using Canon's newer fab?
« on: November 10, 2014, 06:00:27 AM »
You lost me at.... A larger format Canon sensor with 59% Q.E.!!    :o

14
Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 08, 2014, 03:07:20 PM »
Will likely be $2,400 - $2,500 here in Canada.  I still want one.  I will definitely be on the pre-order list.   ;D

15
Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 06, 2014, 03:51:28 PM »
Second  look (who am I kidding), after several looks I noticed there are no focal length markings, which by reference to 70-200 and 70-300 layout should be visible wrapping over the top.  Excitement fading  :'(

It is probably racked all the way around to the short focal length setting and the last mark is top/center in that position and not visible from this particular viewing side.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17