November 22, 2014, 05:51:51 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 ... 58 59 [60] 61 62 ... 127
Site Information / Re: CR wobbly
« on: June 15, 2013, 08:26:00 AM »
Problems continue...

Reviews / Re: Can we have a 16-35 2.8L II review next please?
« on: June 15, 2013, 08:21:05 AM »
In my opinion we need a fast replacement for the 17-40L and 16-35 II L with an image quality like the 24-70 II L.

And that would be 12(14)-24 f/2.8?
Replacement of 16-35 II L = 16-35 III L
12(14)-24 f/2.8 = new lens (welcome of course but still new lens, not a replacement)

Lenses / Re: 24-70 f/4L IS vs 24-105L
« on: June 15, 2013, 08:14:27 AM »
And  finally, the 24-70mmf4L is a much smaller lens than the 24-105mm f4L.

Earlier in this thread Jack noted:
"What drives me since getting back into photography after many years of absence is all the commentary based on personal attachment or brand bias".

I too value unbiased advice.

From Digital Picture:

Canon EF 24-70mm f/4 L IS USM Lens   21.2 oz   (600g)   3.3 x 3.7"   (83.4 x 93mm)   77mm   2012
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens   23.7 oz   (670g)   3.3 x 4.2"   (83.5 x 107mm)   77mm   2005

Frankly, 1 1/2 ounces and half an inch does not make it "much smaller".  Its about 1/10th lighter and 1/8th shorter.

Yeah I've handled both lenses and "much" is a bit of an over statement! "Little bit" would be accurate. However that little bit makes some difference when carrying your backpack of gear around as well as around your neck. Always nicer to carry less weight. Length wise it's not that big of a difference, not really going to matter in real life shooting.

The main pros for the 24-70 right now for me are -
Sharper corners at 24mm.
Fluorite coating on front element.
4 stops of IS (biggie - I rely on IS as I travel without tripod).
It's newer (ok that one makes no sense really).
Macro (meh not bothered but sure, I'll take it).

The only con is range and price. Range is not that big a deal as I have the 70-200 and traveling with 2 lenses isn't so bad. And price is well within what I can afford.

Yet I still think the 24-105 might be more useful overall.

Seems I want a 24-105 f/4 v2!!

Difference in size and weight: indifferent, so little to be of any value. Others may disagree.

Sharper corners at 24mm: Yes but the advantage is only at 24mm. Nowhere else according to the-digital-picture

Fluorite coating on front element: No big deal at all. I use good quality UV filters (mostly Hoya HD UV).

4 stops of IS (biggie - I rely on IS as I travel without tripod): 24-105 has 3-stop I believe. No big deal either

It's newer (ok that one makes no sense really): Useless (I agree).

Macro (meh not bothered but sure, I'll take it): Indifferent. It's not real macro anyway.

The only con is range and price. Range is not that big a deal as I have the 70-200 and traveling with 2 lenses isn't so bad. And price is well within what I can afford:

Overlapping is nice unless you have to cameras with 24-70 and 70-200 all the time.
Price is serious. Why someone should pay more for something that is not worth it?  It's not a 24-70 2.8 after all.

Yet I still think the 24-105 might be more useful overall.

YES! I do agree with you

P.S I want a 24-105 II too  :)

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L Non-IS Discontinued?
« on: June 14, 2013, 10:16:17 PM »
I consider it a legendary lens. It was the first zoom I got with fixed lens quality. Plus, its price is reasonable.
I had one until it was stolen :(

Now I have a 70-200 f/2.8 IS II but I will feel sorry if this lens is discontinued.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS
« on: June 14, 2013, 10:02:52 PM »
You know I am thinking of a 400mm f/5.6L that I will combine with a 1.4X II (or even 2XII) for sunsets, sunrises, ducks, etc.

But my sunrise/sunset lens is a 300mm f/4L (non-IS) with the above mentioned teleconverters.

Also my "duck" lens (yes I have given it this nickname!) is a 100-400L.

So it would be too much. (The reason for fixed 400 is IQ wise  I do not wish to use the 2X).

A new 400 (either as a fixed lens or as a 100-400 zoom) would be the best for me (and I guess thousands more...)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« on: June 14, 2013, 09:56:07 PM »
Hey, how about the most simple thing (sort of):

Since we (are supposed to ) discuss 1DX and 5D3 raw files does anyone have both cameras?

I would like to see the same picture taken with the same lens, same ISO (and hoping the ISO ratings are the same and not say 10% apart...) , Av and Tv by both cameras.
Also the picture could be taken during the day and/or the night.

Site Information / Re: banning people for nothing at canon rumors
« on: June 14, 2013, 09:51:02 PM »
There are a lot of borderline cases, and its very disappointing to see a long time member making subtle comments that goad another member into posting something offensive.

I think I'm Guilty of this, nothing else mind, but "subtlety" is a fine art, not many are good at it.

In any case I think CR Admin does a reasonable job in difficult conditions.

Unless you Ban me for my Aussie Jokes and flagrant "poor taste" Images of Squirrels.

We are all imperfect.  we admins also do not "WANT" to ban or warn members, and only do so reluctantly, often after discussing it among ourselves. 

The situation I was referring to about goading members refers to those who continually push another member who has perhaps a short fuse into posting something improper that he might not have posted otherwise. Sometimes more than one jump in to pile on the snide comments.
I believe the first type of members are much worse and they should be banned first and the second group to be given a second chance.

Site Information / Re: Minimum CR Forum IQ?
« on: June 14, 2013, 09:41:15 PM »
Using the same letter to number formula 32 spells LIFE  ;D
Oh no! Don't tell me to find the numbers for the UNIVERSE and EVERYTHING  :o

Lenses / Re: 24-70 f/4L IS vs 24-105L
« on: June 14, 2013, 02:49:22 PM »
Here is sample pic from:


I didn't apply any lens correction
It looks good enough to me.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS
« on: June 14, 2013, 01:00:17 PM »
Maybe.  There have been rumors that it's being evaluated in the field.  I
Hmm CR0, CR1, CR2 or CR3 rumors?  ::)

Seriously, I would be interested too. I am just not too optimistic...

Site Information / Re: Minimum CR Forum IQ?
« on: June 14, 2013, 11:59:11 AM »
42....I immediately knew the meaning, but didn't post. For those who don't know, here is a quote from Wikipedia...

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
The number 42 is, in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams, "The Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything", calculated by an enormous supercomputer over a period of 7.5 million years. Unfortunately no one knows what the question is. Thus, to calculate the Ultimate Question, a special computer the size of a small planet and using organic components was created and named "Earth". This appeared first in the radio play and later in the novelization of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. The fourth book in the series, the novel So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish, contains 42 chapters. According to the novel Mostly Harmless, 42 is the street address of Stavromula Beta. In 1994 Adams created the 42 Puzzle, a game based on the number 42.

And the number 42 equates to the word "MATH" when adding up their lethers in the alfabet ..a=1,b=2,...etc..

Then should not the a answer be 32 ?
M=13 A=1 T=20 H=8.  13+1+20+8 = 42
(Unless you were referring to something else...)

But I admit I hadn't come across that ... explanation  :)

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS
« on: June 14, 2013, 11:49:17 AM »
So this could possibly turn into an actual product within a year?
There are rumors for the update of this lens every year...

Site Information / Re: Classified for Sell Section on CR
« on: June 14, 2013, 10:49:44 AM »
A minefield.  Ebay take a hefty slice but at least there is some semblance of a comeback and protection, same with buying from a shop.. buying sight unseen from a user who could be anybody without buyer protection (or seller protection) not a great idea, let craigslist and the others have thea headaches. 
+1 Unless the members know each other and/or can meet in person. In that case a PM is enough though...

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 2nd Body - your thoughts?
« on: June 14, 2013, 10:20:05 AM »

Unless you have a critical need for a second body now, I'd hold off and wait for this winter.  Hopefully, prices will drop to that level again, or at least close to it.  You could always get the 400 or 200-400 first.  With those big lenses, no one will realize a second body dangling off the end of it!   ;D

For everydays shooting, I'm good with one body. For my daughter school events + others activities, I feel I missing alot of close-up shots for not having 2nd body.

For exp. my 4yrs daughter will graduate from pre-school next fri ;D. All students will be singing and dancing etc....having 2nd body for these moments is very handy.

I don't want to pay another $3200 for a camera that don't use much - hate that >:(

It's nice to have another 5D III though - this camera is just PERFECT for my needs. Will see :-\ :-\ :-\
Having kids to photograph and wishing to not miss anything makes this wholly different.
I would definitely get a second 5D3.

Site Information / Re: CR wobbly
« on: June 14, 2013, 10:11:52 AM »
Speaking of problems...

OK nothing that a refresh will not solve but it is happening only the last few days.

Plus, I clear Browser's (latest Firefox: 21.0) cache very night.

Pages: 1 ... 58 59 [60] 61 62 ... 127