Messages

16

Lenses / Re: Sharpest Ultra-wide Lens for Full Frame

« on: September 30, 2012, 03:37:34 PM »

I currently have the Canon 60D and will upgrade to either 5D Mk III or 6D. I currently own the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 DX Pro and absolutely love it. However, once I make the jump to full frame I am contemplating buying one of the following UWA lens. I currently have the Canon 24-70L as well.

1) Canon 16-35 f2.8L
2) Canon 17-40 f4L
3) Canon 14 f2.8L II [not too eager as it's way too expensive ]

Though I hoped there was a 14-24 version from Canon.

Of the 3 mentioned, which one delivers greater contrast and sharpness. If there are any other lens from Canon or other brands that will delivers stellar sharpness in the center of the frame as well as in the corners then I am open to suggestions. Thanks in advance!

I love the 16-35, but the sharpness question, I have no idea, these are all shot with it, I find it a decent performing lens that is also built amazingly. They don't build them like that anymore. I guess it's pretty close to the 17-40 4.0 though.

Lovely shots. I love the train tunnel shot the most. What were the settings for that particular shot?

Hey killswitch, thank you, it was shot at 35mm wide open -  2.8 @ 1/5. I love how it has pretty awesome depth, despite the aperture.
This is the old one though (which I though you wanted), the 16-35 2.8 with the 77mm filter thread. I never bothered to get the new one, but I bet it's probably sharper.

17

Lenses / Re: Sharpest Ultra-wide Lens for Full Frame

« on: September 30, 2012, 02:29:17 PM »

I currently have the Canon 60D and will upgrade to either 5D Mk III or 6D. I currently own the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 DX Pro and absolutely love it. However, once I make the jump to full frame I am contemplating buying one of the following UWA lens. I currently have the Canon 24-70L as well.

1) Canon 16-35 f2.8L
2) Canon 17-40 f4L
3) Canon 14 f2.8L II [not too eager as it's way too expensive ]

Though I hoped there was a 14-24 version from Canon.

Of the 3 mentioned, which one delivers greater contrast and sharpness. If there are any other lens from Canon or other brands that will delivers stellar sharpness in the center of the frame as well as in the corners then I am open to suggestions. Thanks in advance!

I love the 16-35, but the sharpness question, I have no idea, these are all shot with it, I find it a decent performing lens that is also built amazingly. They don't build them like that anymore. I guess it's pretty close to the 17-40 4.0 though.

18

Lenses / Re: 24-70 MK II or 70-200 MK II?

« on: September 30, 2012, 02:19:55 PM »

I really love the 24-70 because of the focal length being more or less perfect for everything but sports (but for sports I actually find the 70-200 to be on the short end, you need a 400 too, IMO). I'd definitely get the 24-70, without knowing what you intend to shoot. My basic setup would be: 16-35, 24-70, 70-200, then you are pretty much covered. And that is what I have, plus the 50 1.2-

19

EOS Bodies / Re: Who said Canon cameras suck?!?

« on: September 27, 2012, 06:13:53 PM »

whatever did we do back when we had to properly expose.

20

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 1DX (Jpeg)

« on: September 26, 2012, 05:09:53 AM »

Just wondering and out of curiosity,if a person mostly shoots in jpeg,would it be worth getting the Canon 1DX?If not,why?
Thanks.

If you need to ask this question you probably don't need a 1D X.

21

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Why Hasselblad?

« on: September 25, 2012, 08:12:09 PM »

Speaking MF in general now, not Hasselblad (Hasselblad are, IMO, more or less dying, they closed down their main office and lost one of their very high ups to the competition. The force to be reckoned with right now is Phase One)
1/1600 sync speed is a gift from the gods.
The level of detail and the colour that comes off those 80 megapixel backs is amazing, try one out, you setup your lighting properly it's more or less possible to do an out of camera image that doesn't need processing. The people who use the MF cams are, most likely: Commercial shooters, fashion, products, landscapes, where speed and high ISOs aren't needed, but plenty of detail and resolution are (billboard etc etc). An MF camera starts to stutter around ISO 400, most will probably be shooting around 35, 50 or 100.


Of course, you enter a different world of hurt when it comes to stuff like diffraction, speed, DOF, post processing equipment needs, storage, price and so forth.

22

EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk [CR1]

« on: September 25, 2012, 08:04:50 PM »

If the sensor is a 16-bit sensor with some kind of active cooling (no, not necessarily a fan), and Canon doesn't completely botch the ISO 100 and 200 electronic noise, then it could stomp all over the D800. With an extra two bits of information they could push 15 stops of DR, maybe even a little more (but no more than 16.0.)

My guess is that its still probably their same old sensor tech, but with some kind of efficient cooling to keep the sensor below room temperature (thereby reducing electronic noise), and extra bit depth. Canon needs the active cooling because they are either incapable of innovating and patenting technology similar but different enough to Sony Exmor, or there simply ISN'T another way to reduce noise electronically like Exmor, and Canon either has to pay Sony royalties, or do something entirely different.

Am I wrong in thinking that the amount electronic noise stems from the placement of the image processing unit? Too close to the sensor, too much heat for say video,  far enough away to eliminate heat more electronic noise as it passe through the camera?
Maybe they should redesign the chip and do a pure imaging camera meant for the absolute best stills possible.

23

EOS Bodies / Re: mhm... open letter to canon?

« on: September 25, 2012, 07:59:31 PM »

Demanding a statement about what, exactly? That Sony right now produces some bloody good sensors and have some patents that Canon are having a hard time working around? That Nikon right now are better in some areas?
That Canon cameras are so bad right now that you can't make any money compared to Nikon shooters? That Canons pricing is wrong compared to Nikons?

We are all free to choose any manufacturer we want.

I'm not a Canon fan or anything, but this is just insane. People are doing awesome things with old consumer cameras.

If you are saying people should cram their complaining, yeah, then I agree completely.

24

EOS Bodies / Re: mhm... open letter to canon?

« on: September 25, 2012, 07:37:38 PM »

To put it bluntly.

Who really gives a S___. There are more pressing issues in this world you should be penning angry and frustrated letters about. So I can't really do anything than shrug and laugh this off as utter bloody madness.

25

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Blown-out Highligts in Stage Lighting

« on: September 25, 2012, 04:08:43 PM »

Time it, so you only get light where you want it, bring a long lens, so you can isolate your subjects from the blow out areas, it's possible and in my experience makes for more interesting photos.

26

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Any update on 1DX / 5D3 AF point display?

« on: September 25, 2012, 04:07:02 PM »

Canon's been pretty quiet on this one ever since CR reported that a fix that "might not be ideal for everyone" was in the works.

This has been annoying me more and more shooting with a 1D3 as a backup - with those wonderful autodimming bright red AF points...

Trevor

What I've heard from the shooters using 1D X is that there should be an update coming fixing it, but I hardly think a software fix can change it back to the red square goodness we know from the 1D's of old. That was the first thing I noticed too, when I tried out the 1D X, the AF squares, didn't like them at all.

27

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Adobe RGB or sRGB please?

« on: September 25, 2012, 04:04:54 PM »

I am just starting to get my head around my 5D III after a 60D. I have been to a few photography courses and have LR4.1 and PSE10. I shoot raw & L JPEG. My confusion is that some recommend sRGB however other people recommend Adobe RGB. The 5D III manual recommends sRGB but the LR books are divided. I only shoot for my own enjoyment at this stage but may join a club later when I get a little better. Any thoughts very much appreciated.

Srgb for 99% of everything. A-RGB for special prints.

This. Unless otherwise requested.

28

Canon General / Re: Loving Canon right now.

« on: September 19, 2012, 10:08:25 PM »

Does anyone know if the folks at nikon rumors hate nikon so much as people hate canon here?
For what i've seen and heard they dont. We should grow up.

Who here has thought about talking to their mothers about all the hate you have about canon? I'm sure she could help somehow. (ps. I'm not trying to troll anyone, just saying)

Yes, lots of hand wringing and cussing on Nikonrumors, same as here.

I don't know that.  However, I would think Nikon users should have a lot of complain for their high ISO and FPS on D800.
If you like the Canon/Nikon, you should expect they make better products for you.  If they cannot, you should be disappointed.  Actually that's weird for me if people take whatever Canon/Nikon provide to you without any complain.

+1:

About 30 years ago when I was doing my MBA, The Macro Economics professor asked us, Define "Development"... we gave a bunch of rubbish answers and then he said,

"Questioning the status Quo"..

If people don't question/ complain... things don't progress as well....

Yes, well, the only way to question/complain is with your wallet.

29

Lenses / Re: If you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they...???

« on: September 19, 2012, 10:01:00 PM »

16-35 2.8
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8

30

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon

« on: September 19, 2012, 07:27:57 PM »

That's why I finally decided to switch in next months. I just do want to pay Canon any more. Overpriced , old tech and trust me-very faulty gear, also what is more important seems that they do want to develop any more. I don't wantwaste another two years to get 6D2 with 5 crosstypes and 10EV DR. No more. that's my experience. There nothing much to say. You do not have to agree. Everyone has choice.

 Faulty is not my experience with canon cameras. I've never had a Canon camera fail. I've had ONE problem with the ETTL-circuit in my 1D IV, it was fixed at CPS in 2 hours by changing the top assembly, then only thing it meant was that it couldn't send ETTL info to the flash or shoot HSS, which isn't really a problem for me. I've had them act weird after 4 hours in heavy rain, but they still shot and worked after. My 1D II still works, it has cracks in it where I've dropped it and it's so worn you won't believe it, the batteries are more or less dead, but it still works, not that it ever sees use. I have 16 and 10 year old L lenses that still work fine and are used every week. My 10D and D30 were still alive when I gave them away a few years ago. (I regret getting rid of the D30 though).
The only lens I've ever broken was the 50 1.8 when it was about 4 years old. I treat my gear like S___, I'm not proud of it nor do I do it on purpose, but I'm not good at taking care of stuff I use so much (my cell phones die in 4-6 months) and in such a hurry sometimes. I never use lens caps, I never take care when changing lenses, the mount cap on the lenses may or may not be used, mostly never, because it hinders me as much as a lens cap does, I put my lenses on the ground etc etc etc. And I've never had it fail. I've broken 2 EX 580II's because they've fallen of stands so many times that they finally gave in, but not a manufacturing fault, to my knowledge.

You can be unlucky and get a bad copy, but in my experience they work. Besides my amplifier and speakers, Canon cams and lenses are the bits of electronic gear with the most longevity in my life.