November 29, 2014, 02:58:33 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 - tron

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 127
Lenses / Re: More EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Talk [CR2]
« on: October 29, 2014, 05:33:49 AM »
I believe we will see a 5DMkIV, a 6DMkII, a 1DxMkII before we see 100-400 II. Not to mention a 7DMkIII  ;D ;D ;D ;D

I would like to ask CR if this proves yet another BS to refrain from mentioning it again and to stick to more plausible rumors please.

100-400 II rumors are good only for laughing!

10K? No way. A 135 format DSLR should not cost 10K. For that price I'd expect at least medium format. If in fact any camera maker made a body so feature-rich that the 10K price tag is justified, it means the camera will have 150 advanced functions that will be useless to me. 200fps? Max ISO at 1,000,000? DR of 100 stops? Ultimate, but totally useless.
MMMM, if Max ISO 1,000,000 means a super clean 25,000 or even better 50,000 and if DR was 25 stops (not necessary 100) then that would be a camera to pay for  8)

P.S 10 fps would be enough too.  :)

I do not want to tempt you but now how about the new 400mm DO II ?  OK maybe I do want to tempt you...  ;D ;D ;D

Not particularly tempted.  Yes, the 400/4 DO II is slightly shorter and a bit lighter than the 300/2.8 II, but the differences are pretty small.  The 300/2.8 gives an excellent 420/4 and a very good 600/5.6, and importantly f/2.8 for indoor gymnasium shooting (currently with my 70-200 @ 2.8, I'm often at ISO 12800 already).

If the DO II is as sharp as the 300/2.8 then by the same argument it should give a excellent 560/5.6 and a very good 800/8 i.e. in a small package replacing two or even three expensive heavyweights further up the lens chain.

But it's still f/4 at best....
If you are at 12800 already then indeed the 300 2.8 is the best choice. Unfortunately as you increase focal length (from 200 to 300) you will possibly need to increase speed too. As a result ISO will have to go up even by a little. In that case granted, a 400 4 would be much much worse. I guess it all comes down to the shooting circumstances.

I found that the maximum sharpness on a 60D was at F9... and F8 was very close to that. Above and below, it fell of. I still say it is a bit soft if you don't step it down.... but honestly, don't we all try to use whatever lenses we have in their sweet spot?

Generally, yes.  But f/9 is getting pretty narrow when you also need a fast shutter speed.

It is definitely a great lens, and superior to the existing 100-400 in the overlapping range..... but I do expect a new version of the 100-400 would reverse that, although at several times the price....

The 70-300L is also better than the current 100-400 in the overlapping range; between that and the 600 II, I had pretty much stopped using my 100-400, so I sold it.  I'm not even certain I'd want the new 100-400, I might just get the 300/2.8 II as a 'portable' option.
I do not want to tempt you but now how about the new 400mm DO II ?  OK maybe I do want to tempt you...  ;D ;D ;D

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-200 f2.8L IS II pricing and feedback
« on: October 27, 2014, 07:43:40 AM »
Just the same as last year. Canon would like to increase sales but they are a little greedy on price...

Just my opinion.

Apparently the new 100-400 looks likely to be a scaled up version of the Canon 70-300. What a shame - a scaled up IF version of the 70-200 would have been better.
That would imply that it would be constantly at its max size. For a 100-400mm lens that would be ... big. Bigger that 400mm 5.6L (compare 200 2.8 with 70-200 2.8L IS II to see what I mean)

It is coming in November ouaou. Is it November 2017 or November 2021 though?  ;D ;D ;D ;D

Well, of course it is coming in November....I ordered the Sigma 150-600S.  It will be announced just after my 30 day return window expires.
You can still cancel Canon's arrival. Return your Sigma...  ;D ;D ;D

Lenses / Re: More chatter on an EF 11-24 F/4L coming soon
« on: October 24, 2014, 09:30:16 AM »
I would still miss a coma free 16-35 2.8L III for astrophotography...  :(

The reason being is that anything wider has a bulbous element which cannot be protected much from light (in contrast to a flat front elememt lens with a hood...

That and the need for a 2.8 aperture...

Lenses / Re: The 50 prime problem
« on: October 24, 2014, 09:28:38 AM »
From what I've been able to gather from a couple of years of net research and renting and borrowing lenses.  Nobody makes an EF mount 50mm prime that works very well, at least for my needs. 

I eliminate the Zeiss due to lack of autofocus.

The 50 L has focus issues at different distances

The EF 50 1.4 has poor optics and is fragile

The EF 50 1.8 is good for the price (hmmm maybe I should test that one again)

The Sigma classic 50 has autofocus problems

The Sigma 50 Art has autofocus problems

A fast 50 prime needs a very accurate and consistent autofocus system to take advantage of the shallow DOF.  It is frustrating that none of the manufacturers have risen to the challenge.  I don't know why it has to be so difficult.  I have money to spend, but nothing to buy.  :(
Out of all options the 50 1.8 seems the best !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lenses / Re: why there are no new L primes
« on: October 24, 2014, 08:36:31 AM »
Well there are no new L primes this year BUT there will be a new DO prime. Which looks very tempting even though I already have the 500II ...  ::)

EOS-M / Re: EOS M with Magic Lantern, shutter cannot release
« on: October 23, 2014, 04:35:12 AM »
You should ask this question to the ML forum too...

Lenses / Re: Night Sky
« on: October 23, 2014, 04:30:27 AM »
Hi Alexander / xxelis,

Rokinon 24 f/1.4
Rokinon 14 f/2.8

These 2 are the best lenses you can buy for wide angle astrophoto. Forget the canon 1.4.

what is so bad about the Canon 24mm f/1.4? The price tag, or more?

This is wrong about the Canon 24 1/4


Lenses / Re: Travel gear thoughts...
« on: October 22, 2014, 12:56:17 PM »
Getting just 16-35 and 70-300 will only result of changing lenses frustratingly often.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon 750D real world review
« on: October 20, 2014, 08:27:24 AM »
The D750 isn't any better then the 5D3 at high ISO.
Actually, it is at least 2/3 of a stop better. I sold my 6D and several L lens, about 2 weeks ago, and purchased the D750. The D750 is cleaner at high ISO's than my former 6D was, by at least 1/3 or so of a stop. I can push high ISO images much better with the D750 than I could with the 6D.

Still trying to figure out which Nikon lens are worth a crap, most of the Nikon primes are slower to focus than the Canon counterparts.
You sold your 6D and L lenses for 1/3 or so of a stop? :o

And now you are trying to fgure out which of the slower focusing Nikon lenses are at least worth a crap?  :o :o


now now chaps he actually sold it for 2/3rds of a stop
The comparison was with 6D not 5D3. But even if we take "at least" into consideration we may be talking of a 1/2 stop difference... Questions remain...

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 127