Messages

76

Lenses / Re: *HELP* Alternatives to Canon EF-S 10-22mm

« on: January 29, 2012, 01:18:11 AM »

I found the following link in this forum (CR):

http://www.akphotodenver.com/2011/06/14/tokina-acknowledges-pairing-issue-with-11-16mm-f2-8-lens-and-canon-7d/

(Credit to the original uploader) that mentions autofocus problems of the Tokina with the 7D (especially the non center point)

In that article you can find also a reference to:

http://www.highdefedition.com/2009/10/canon-7d-autofocus-issue/comment-page-1/

This backs my distrust in 3rd party lens makers.
Of course they may solve it but again what happens with the future EOS bodies?

http://www.highdefedition.com/2009/10/canon-7d-autofocus-issue/comment-page-1/

Thanks for the links! I can happily rule out the Tokina since so many people are having issues with that lens and the 7D, I don't use autofocus very often (especially with wide angle landscape work) but obviously it's worthwhile to have a lens that works 100% with your camera, especially when you're spending decent amounts of money on them!

77

Lenses / Re: *HELP* Alternatives to Canon EF-S 10-22mm

« on: January 28, 2012, 10:12:04 AM »

why are you all missing the sigma 10-20 f3.5 ?

I think it´s the best in that range...

I did take a look at this lens, but as with the Tokina 11-16mm, paying extra money for the constant aperture doesn't really seem worth it as I'll be stopping down a great deal for my landscape work.

78

Lenses / Re: *HELP* Alternatives to Canon EF-S 10-22mm

« on: January 28, 2012, 10:08:08 AM »

Sounds like you might have made your choice-- but just to chime in:

I've tested the 10-22 and own the 11-16. I needed the constant, fast aperture, so the 11-16 wasn't a hard choice. It is definitely prone to flare, though I haven't had a huge CA problem (seems trivial compared, to say, my 85 f1.8 ). The short focal range is the biggest drawback; unless you're planning to shoot wide shots for an extended period, it can be tedious switching lenses or carrying two bodies.

The extra reach of the 10-22 not only gives you one more degree on the wide end (which is bigger than it seems at wide angles-- a 9% gain over the Tokina) and  the reach at 22 gets you all the way to a classic 35mm perspective. In other words, it can shift between UW and the more intimate but still moderately wide framing that many traditional journalists and street photographers used. The Tokina is always a bit too short when you need to make such a transition-- which is somewhat frequently, for me.

For you, it sounds like tripod-mounted landscape work is the name of the game, so you might be less hassled by lens changes. But if you'll be using the lens for other applications, the focal range is a consideration.

Otherwise, the lenses are about equal in sharpness, at least in my eyes. Canon saturation might be a bit better. Tokina has much better build quality-- but the Canon isn't a slouch. Solid but definitely not L-grade.

Thanks for your input, the 10-22 is mainly to replace the kit lens (18-135mm). I have a 50 and 17-40mm L lens I rarely use the 18-135 higher than 30mm (telephoto work isn't something I do often but I have a Minolta MD 300mm lens which I use with an MD-EF converter) so that's why I've been looking for a more specialised UWA lens

79

Lenses / Re: *HELP* Alternatives to Canon EF-S 10-22mm

« on: January 27, 2012, 07:29:45 PM »

Just want to say a big thanks to everyone for their input and advice, I am still leaning towards the Canon model, but I think what I might do is rent out the Canon 10-22mm and the Sigma 10-20mm for a week before I head out to Iceland and see which I prefer, work out the pros and cons of both and just see how it goes

thanks again! really appreciate the effort you guys go to help people out, was my first time starting a topic so I wasn't sure if I would even get a response, so thanks (again)

80

Lenses / Re: *HELP* Alternatives to Canon EF-S 10-22mm

« on: January 27, 2012, 07:16:36 PM »

Hi Adam,

IMO, the Canon 10-22mm is the best option.  It's the middle of the road option of the three (IMO) best APS-C UWA zooms. Those break down as follows:

• Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 - narrowest range, fastest aperture
• Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 - widest angle, slowest aperture
• Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 - broadest range, intermediate aperture

From an IQ standpoint, it's basically a wash between the three. Those three are better than the other two lenses you mention.  But, I think the Canon is an excellent compromise - unless you'll need to shoot in low light, the Canon is the way to go.  I used to have the 10-22mm, only sold it after getting the 5DII and the 16-35/2.8L II to replicate the focal length.

I truly like my sigma 8-16. There's npthing larger on an aps-c. Yes it does start at 4.5(8mm) and 5.6(16mm) but for me it's not an issue at all. Also  IQ IMO. is very good and the price is great

I had previously looked at the 8-16 but given the nature of the front element I won't be able to use any of my current filters so that puts me off that one

81

Lenses / *HELP* Alternatives to Canon EF-S 10-22mm

« on: January 27, 2012, 05:48:45 PM »

I'm currently planning a trip to Iceland and I'm looking to upgrade my current gear to take advantage of the amazing scenery there. I'm almost sure that I'm going to end up purchasing the EF-S 10-22mm lens (current UK price £600) but I'm aware of the other lenses available in this particular range and just wondered about other peoples thoughts on the:

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 (£380)

and

Tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 (£365)

Are these lenses worth the lower end budget price? how do they feel? are they nice and heavy, or light and "plasticy"?

The two Tokina models that interest me are the 11-16mm f/2.8 (£535) and the 12-24mm f/4 (£460)
They are a little more expensive, given that they offer a constant aperture across the zoom range, but still less money than the Canon model. I'm not 100% sold on actually needing the constant f/2.8 as much of what I'll be shooting will be shot between f/8 and f/16 and I'll be doing some 9-Stop ND work too so again the f/2.8 isn't exactly needed, but is this lens as good as people say it is? The 12-24mm has good reviews too but it's not as wide as the Tamron, Sigma or Canon models.

All of the results I've seen online from all of these lenses are really great, It's generally hard to choose based on IQ alone, especially when most images online are usually low-res or the quality has decreased due to the uploading process

What I want to know is if anyone has used the Canon model and one or a few of the others, what are your opinions? is the Canon worth spending the extra money? or are the lower budget lenses as good as reviewers say they are?

many, many thanks.
Adam Cross

82

Canon General / Re: Patent: Canon RAW Video

« on: January 27, 2012, 08:41:44 AM »

Surely it would have made sense to hold off on the C300 so they could build in this new RAW video capabilities so you can output 4k video. oh well, C300 II will be around the corner I guess, Canon are turning into Apple!

83

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Sighting?

« on: January 23, 2012, 02:40:54 PM »

Only just noticed the Canon 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x .... jeez I would not mind that lens at all, gimme!!!

84

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Sighting?

« on: January 23, 2012, 02:35:13 PM »

not a 7D that's for sure (even if mine wasn't sitting right here the differences are obvious) but that widescreen LCD looks pretty sexy (16:9 ? if so that would be amazing, but it could just be the odd perspective of this photograph). nice new battery grip design too! but... if he has the grip why is he using the normal shutter release if he's shooting portrait, does this mean the grip is a prototype just for show?

 this can't be anything else but the new 5D III with new battery grip, of course it could be the 3D or 7D II but I highly doubt that.

85

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Why canon?

« on: January 20, 2012, 11:34:14 AM »

Ergonomics and ease of use! mainly on the higher end models as I can't say I'm a fan of the small plasticy models below the 7D which seem to be made for tiny elves but I have big hands so there's that to consider

also, a friend of mine is a big Nikon user and I just didn't like the experience of shooting with his D700 but that's more down to the fact that I hadn't ever used a Nikon DSLR before and it was all new and scary =D

I won't talk about IQ because that's a tough thing to talk about, every manufacturer makes really great cameras these days that you're going to get good results if you know what you're doing.

And as a personally opinion, Canon are much better looking than any other camera

86

Canon General / Re: Patents: Canon 55-110 f/2 Optical Formula

« on: January 19, 2012, 11:07:04 PM »

Such a strange focal length... well, strange to me anyway, why not 50-100 ? why the 55-110 ? I don't know, I don't work for Canon. But still, not a particularly useful focal length for me;  16-35, 50 and 70-200 do me just fine ^_^

87

EOS Bodies / Re: There's something wrong with my 7D's liveview

« on: January 13, 2012, 09:36:48 PM »

I was going to suggest that it might be the "Auto Power Off" option but the minimum time is 1min so it can't be that.
Are you using genuine Canon batteries or 3rd party/after market batteries?
Depleting batteries to 0% is never a good idea. you should charge frequently, I tend to charge mine every other day, or every day depending on how much I'm shooting

88

EOS Bodies / Re: 1D X Limitations Fixable?

« on: January 08, 2012, 10:00:07 AM »

Ok, I'm not really understanding this.(treat me like a n00b if you will) My knowledge of minor details and tech specs is pretty good but this completely escapes me. why would the 1D X not autofocus at f/8? Am I missing something here? It sounds extremely odd to me.

[edit]

Okay, I've just been informed that it won't AF if the lenses widest aperture is f/8.  This makes alot more sense to me, gosh, I don't feel like such a n00b now. haha

89

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II for Photokina? [CR1]

« on: December 28, 2011, 06:50:25 PM »

As far as a Mark II 7D goes:

the only thing I would look to improve on my current 7D is the low light / high ISO performance, other than that I have no issues at all. very hard to fault the 7D and very hard to decide what to upgrade.. lower MP might be an idea? the 15mp on the 50D is really rather good...

90

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D2, 5D3 and Megapixel Insights

« on: December 14, 2011, 12:02:33 PM »

a 7D 2 is an unrealistic advance right now with everything surrounding the 1Dx, the cinema cameras and all the hype surrounding the 5D III

The only reason I would look to upgrade from my current 7D to a 7D2 would be if it offered considerable improvements in low-light performance or if they radically decided to make the upgraded body full frame (which will never happen) but with the 5D II becoming cheaper by the month ($1700 here in europe) the chances are I'm more likely to buy myself a 5D II body while the price is down and while production still continues

I'm personally not hyped on the 5D III as I'm pretty sure on release it'll be out of my price range

as for the high MP sensors.... they're not really of that much interest to me. Anything around the 20mp mark on a full frame sensor is surely enough? the 1DX has proved favour of a lower MP/full frame combo.

If I were to bother with anything with a high MP count it would be one of Hasselblad's H4D systems (the 200MS is pretty incredible) but that would be if money were no object and I just wanted a new toy