August 23, 2014, 01:47:22 PM

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 - Michael_pfh

Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16
At least for the Mk2 of that lens the rear glass does not move at all - Send it back!

Lenses / Re: Help! 70/200mm f/4 IS OR 70/200mm f/2.8 IS II
« on: January 03, 2012, 03:58:08 AM »
I did upgrade from F4 to F2.8 about a year ago and have never regretted it. For indoor shots the F2.8 is definitely the lens you want to buy.

Canon General / Re: Canon 16-35 vs Tamron 17-50
« on: January 02, 2012, 04:28:10 AM »
It is a very unique lens I would say because of the shallow depth of field it creates which looks odd in a wide angle picture. If I would have to sell one I would sell the 24L and keep the 16-35 as it offers great flexibility.
As for the 24L my main use case is indoor shots at dinners and whenever flash is not an option. Sometimes I use it as walk around lens at night, however the 85L serves that purpose better, might be due to the half extra stop. For long exposure shots at night using a tripod the 16-35L does outperform the 24L by far.

Software & Accessories / Re: ANOTHER tripod topic!
« on: January 02, 2012, 04:16:30 AM »
I seem to be extremely lucky that my Manfrotto carbon fibre legs are from a rare good batch. Cam, battery grip, head and super tele weigh more than 8kg combined but the results are everything but shaky...

Canon General / Re: Canon 16-35 vs Tamron 17-50
« on: January 02, 2012, 04:04:59 AM »
I have never tried any lens other than Canon L so I can unfortunately not compare the two lenses.

However, I can highly recommend the 16-35L II, I did take a major share of my pictures with it as it is a great walk around lense on a crop body. I would definitely buy it again...

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Travel / carry bags
« on: January 02, 2012, 01:01:47 AM »
I am using LowePro Stealth Reporter D300AW and Lens Trekker 600AW bags as well as a Rimowa Tropicana 384.03 case and can highly recommend all of them.

Software & Accessories / Re: ANOTHER tripod topic!
« on: January 02, 2012, 12:45:38 AM »
I am using the Manfrotto 055CXPRO4 with a Manfrotto 498RC4 ballhead with almost all of my lenses (plus flash when needed) and a Manfrotto 393 for my 400F2.8L. I have been more than happy with the light weight and compact yet very sturdy tripod.

However, the 055CXPRO3 might be a better choice for you if you do not plan to use heavy super teles with it.

Lenses / Re: UW lens recommendation for 7d?
« on: January 01, 2012, 10:31:22 PM »
I am using the 16-35 F2.8L II on my 7D and have hardly faced a situation in which I would have wanted/needed more than the 25.6mm. In terms of IQ, build quality etc this lense is far better than the alternatives you listed however it is not UW on a 7D.

I recommend you to rent one for a weekend and to give it a try...

Software & Accessories / Re: Airtravel experts
« on: January 01, 2012, 09:49:13 PM »
I travel a lot for work and have fortunately never experienced any problems regarding the weight of either carry on or check in baggage (I am holding 2 gold statuses with 2 Star Alliance carriers, that raises the weight limit for me).

In order to protect my precious 400F2.8L while traveling I am checking it in using a Rimowa Tropicana 384.03 which is a very sturdy piece of luggage. It comes with some flexible set of dividers that allows you to customize the interior lay-out according to your specific needs.

Lenses / Re: Canon 16-35mm L II Usm
« on: November 14, 2011, 10:33:21 PM »
Guess you are right, I am not an expert. However, I do notice the difference, the 85 1.2L works better in low light, at least on my cam.

Lenses / Re: Canon 16-35mm L II Usm
« on: November 14, 2011, 08:36:24 PM »
As for the 24 1.4 I hardly use it during daytime (probably I just haven't gotten used to the shallow depth of field in a wide-angle pic (which is not that wide on a 7D). I use the 24 1.4L as a walk around lense that stays on my cam in the evening/at night and also when having dinners and get togethers with friends as it allows nice indoors pics without a flash. I must add that the 85 1.2L is even better for taking pics in dim light (as the additional f-stop allows it to let twice as much light in as the 24 1.4L), however, on an APS-C sensor the 85 1.2L is a 136mm lense which limits its use. On the 5DMk3 the 85 1.2L will probably become my night time walk around lense... ;-)

Lenses / Re: Canon 16-35mm L II Usm
« on: November 14, 2011, 07:59:36 PM »
Without having read any other the other replies I just want to mention that I am loving the 16-35mm L II USM. Despite having 6 other L's I still do take a large portion with the 16-35mm II which I find wide enough in 98% of the cases using it on a 7D.

Lenses / Re: 400mm 2.8 L (non- IS)
« on: November 07, 2011, 10:45:06 PM »
My canon dealer told me that even the 2.0x MkIII should work perfectly with the 400mm 2.8 L (non- IS).
I got the 1.4x MkII and it works fine.

EOS Bodies / Re: 1DX: obviating the need for more expensive lenses?
« on: November 07, 2011, 10:24:57 PM »
My local Canon dealer did let me try the new Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS II USM for a couple of hundred shots in challenging light conditions last weekend. I love it, most of all due to its light weight. I imagine I could carry it around all day for handheld shooting. For extended reach you could add a 1.4x teleconverter (not sure if the AF would still be fast enough to meet your needs though).

An future alternative could be the announced Canon EF 200-400mm f/4 L IS USM Extender 1.4x Lens in combination with a monopod...

Lenses / Re: 400mm 2.8 L (non- IS)
« on: November 07, 2011, 11:46:46 AM »
Thanks! I might get one then during my next trip to the US.

Found an interesting alternative to the Wimberley Gimbal head / Sidekick on B&H's website:

Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16