Messages

46

Lenses / Re: what's the best UV filter for Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II lens?

« on: February 01, 2013, 05:37:24 PM »

B+W XS-Pro MRC would be my choice.  The F-mount  would also be a good choice as would the Slim - with the caveat that Slim do not work with standard lens caps (only the slip-on cap that comes with them).  The F-mount and XS-Pro style filters work with standard caps since they have standard filter threads on the front. 

47

Lenses / Re: Lens Help..EF 28mm f1.8 any good?

« on: January 30, 2013, 11:22:25 AM »

I've been searching around for a good used deal on one to replace my 35mm f/2.  The 35mm f/2 is kinda mediocre, and the 28mm f/1.8 USM seems like a good-sized step up (without a skyrocket in purchase price).  The CA issue is mitigated with the Canon lens profile in DPP, and the corners appear to be considerably sharper than the 35mm f/2, so the upgrade path is a no-brainer (you can always correct CA with PP, but you can't add detail or sharpness that just isn't there).

48

Canon General / Re: Curious Distraction: Explain your username, avatar picture, etc...

« on: January 28, 2013, 04:59:50 PM »

... and being the primary photographer, there are not too many photos of myself.

+1

My avatar is a self portrait - a sagittal MRI of me.

Certainly the only one that exists on our little forum.  Bonus points for originality and overall cool factor.

49

Canon General / Re: Curious Distraction: Explain your username, avatar picture, etc...

« on: January 25, 2013, 04:38:10 PM »

My name is Kyle, I (currently) live in St Louis, MO.  Easy 'nough.

50

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: I love big gear

« on: January 25, 2013, 12:11:44 PM »

^ Ironically, the nifty fifty is also in the picture for contrast.  Nice touch.

51

Pricewatch Deals / Re: What is the best place to sell your equipment?

« on: January 23, 2013, 08:16:59 PM »

I have used eBay and Craigslist exclusively (60/40, respectively). I've bought stuff from KEH, but never sold anything to them because the prices I've been quoted on their site have been WAY below market value. I'm always stalking CL and eBay for excellent deals an broken equipment (I fix broken lenses, bodies, etc in my spare time).  Most of my equipment has been repaired or purchased by money I make by repairing and selling.

52

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Speed Booster: full frame fov on an APS-C size sensor

« on: January 23, 2013, 12:53:40 PM »

it'll be interesting to see who produces the first FF mirrorless with interchangeable lenses

Leica M9 - 2009
Leica M9P - 2011
Lecia M-Monochrom, M Typ 240, M Typ 220 - 2012

FF mirrorless with autofocus or affordable FF mirrorless is a different story, waiting to be written.

53

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Speed Booster: full frame fov on an APS-C size sensor

« on: January 23, 2013, 11:31:40 AM »

A year and a half ago I posted the idea of a wide-converter for FF lenses to APS-C image circle.

Source:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=1564.msg22452#msg22452

EF 0.625x converter for APS-C cameras (keep the original angle of view of EF lenses on crop sensors and gain 1-1.33 stops of light)

I was pretty close, except for the fact the the flange distance needed to be reduced to make that a possibility (hense the need for Sony NEX or Fuji X series).

54

Canon General / Re: The tax monster is coming soon. What are you planning on doing with your refund?

« on: January 18, 2013, 08:17:34 PM »

... I think an EF 70-200 2.8 IS ll should be a great way to pump some more money into the economy through B&H.

It's our civic duty.  Yeah ... that's the angle I'll take in my request for discretionary spending.

55

Canon General / Re: The tax monster is coming soon. What are you planning on doing with your refund?

« on: January 17, 2013, 04:51:24 PM »

Does part of the down payment on a new vehicle count as 'fun'?     I suppose not, but then, I fund all my gear purchases from 'on the side' consulting work - the day job income (and taxes refunded from that) go toward the important stuff - house, cars, kids' college and retirement funds, etc.

What the hell type of moonlighting does a neuroscientist do???  LOL

I was thinking the exact same thing.

56

Canon General / Re: The tax monster is coming soon. What are you planning on doing with your refund?

« on: January 17, 2013, 03:05:32 PM »

I'm not sure the financial department will OK an AFE for camera gear.  Travel and kitchen reno will certainly come first.

57

Lenses / Re: 2013 - The Year for 400mm Lenses? [CR1]

« on: January 17, 2013, 12:56:36 PM »

Neuro's in rare form today, sarcastic and mistaken.  Somebody mark that on the CR calendar. 

If Canon were to release a new 400 f/5.6L with all the latest features (v. 4 IS, weathersealing, modern build quality and materials, better MFD, etc) what do you think the cost would be?  I think it would have to remain below the price of a 70-200 IS II, but I could definitely see it coming close to $1800 or so given Canon's recent price structure.

58

Canon General / Re: Why buy from a bricks and mortar store?

« on: January 16, 2013, 01:19:28 PM »

Sorry, but it's not a loophole.  In pretty much every state that charges Sales Tax, there's an equivalent Use Tax that applies to goods purchased out of state for use in the state where you reside.  The buyer is responsible for paying that tax to their state government.  A loophole is a technicality or ambiguity that allows you to avoid the spirit of a law while obeying the letter of that law.  Not paying Use Tax on internet purchases is flat out tax evasion.  Much like driving 10 mph over the posted speed limit, it's unlikely you'll ever be caught/penalized...but it's still against the law.

I totally agree with you neuro, but where is the line drawn for what must be declared on taxes?  Purchased on eBay (new or used)?  Craigslist?  Garage sale?  What is the letter of the law?

59

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 50 f/1.2L

« on: January 13, 2013, 12:18:26 PM »

Sorry for the pedantic comment, but the bokeh of the 1.8 is pentagonal (five-sided), not hexagonal (six-sided).

No, thanks! I can't make the edit myself though, so I'll just sound more like a tool. 

One of my long time curiosities with the lens was will I upgrade from my 1.4? After 2 weeks with the 1.2 the answer is no - but I did *like* using it more than I do my 1.4, and maybe that counts for something?

Sorry, I'm an engineer, that's kind of how we roll.  I didn't mean it as an insult or anything.  I did enjoy reading your review on the lens, and I think everyone's experience with it is valid, and personal to some level.  Keep the reviews coming, and I will continue to read and enjoy what is written.  Thanks again for sharing.

60

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 50 f/1.2L

« on: January 12, 2013, 04:23:00 PM »

Sorry for the pedantic comment, but the bokeh of the 1.8 is pentagonal (five-sided), not hexagonal (six-sided). 

I do agree with the assessment that if Canon made a 1.4 with the build quality and wide-open image quality of the new 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm IS primes, the sales of the 1.2L would be greatly affected.  I like my 1.8 v. I, but I'm always on the lookout for a deal on a used or broken 1.4 because of the wider aperture, better (not excellent, though) build quality, and USM (though not Ring-USM).  Personally, I wouldn't consider the 1.2 for myself because of price alone, but the advantages over the 1.4 (build, weather sealing and Ring-USM) are obvious.  The image quality and focus accuracy are debatable.