Messages

1

Lenses / Re: I have just lost confidence with Canon Rumors & B&H

« on: April 17, 2013, 03:00:47 AM »

I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.

It's "bigger rebates on select lenses". Are you sure that the 24-70II is on the list  ?

2

Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM

« on: April 16, 2013, 12:26:24 PM »

Not a macro/close-up photo  . This one was taken last sunday. The big buggy (hpi-racing, 1m long) was driven by my friend.

3

Site Information / Re: Minimum CR Forum IQ?

« on: April 11, 2013, 05:19:28 PM »

Rather than a straightforward minimum IQ score, I propose the following criterion for forum participation:

(IQ score / your camera's DR score) > 9

The smaller denominator gives more of a chance for us dumb Canon shooters to participate in this forum.   

Brillant 

4

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: ASP-C Canon body advancement - stuck/abandoned ?

« on: April 10, 2013, 06:29:20 AM »

Ahhh, good to know that you're one of those people who think the sensor is the sum total of a camera.  I bet that DxOMark T-shirt looks great on you! 

I understand there are many other important components to a body - but I still dont see any great "leap" from a say 550d to the 60d ?

Do you see any great leap in sensor from the Nikon D3200 to the D7100?  Oh wait ... I forgot the D5200 .

5

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dynamic range, high lights information D800 vs 5dmk2

« on: April 04, 2013, 03:08:17 PM »

The DR of my 7D is so terrible that I didn't even dare to lift the shadow 

try to do it and se whats happening. Your shadows are blocked.

Done!

No visible noise (to my eyes, resizing may help here), but that doesn't matter to me anyway. Now, Mikael, please tell me which version you prefer (out of two bad photos) 

6

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dynamic range, high lights information D800 vs 5dmk2

« on: April 04, 2013, 04:22:25 AM »

The DR of my 7D is so terrible that I didn't even dare to lift the shadow 

7

EOS Bodies / Re: 5DMIII+70-300L w/ kenko tc or 40d+70-300L or 5d miii image cropped ?

« on: April 03, 2013, 04:39:55 AM »

Hi - Anyone with Kenko TC experienc, would you be able to suggest
Which one of these provide better iq and overall better ?
5D mark III w/ 70-300mm L with Kenko 1.4 tc
Or
5d mark III w/ 70-300mm L cropped
Or
40d w/ 70-300mm L (considering the 1.6x crop factor or APSC)

I have all the three except the TC. Wondering if it is worth spending the money on kenko when I have the other two options. I heard mixed reviews abt kenko when mounted on the 70-300

Rhanjs

Hello, juste out of curiosity, did you compare the IQ of the 2nd and the 3rd solutions? Keep in mind that "reach" is about pixel density. A 5DIII image cropped to the PoV of a Canon APS-C sensor will have about 8.7MP, so a little bit more than a 30D image and a little bit less than a 40D's. I'd say that the 5DIII has slightly more reach than the 30D and a little bit less than the 40D, but a cropped 5DIII image should have better IQ than a 40D's, given the difference in technology  .

8

EOS Bodies / Re: Congratulations Canon to another great Camera release!!

« on: March 22, 2013, 10:53:33 AM »

So to me, it is just stupid to not match your primary competitions sales bullet when you can do so for zero investment.

Does the Nikon D3200 have AFMA? 

9

Lenses / Re: 17-40mm advice please!

« on: March 14, 2013, 04:41:44 PM »

Although the 17-55mm F2.8 IS is the full frame equivalent of 27-88mm F4 IS

The 17-40mm is 27-64mm F4 on crop

Just to avoid some confusion:
The 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is the full frame equivalent of 27-88mm f/4.5 IS.
The 17-40mm f/4 is equivalent to 27-64mm f/6.4 on crop. 

You don't lose a stop and a half by cropping. You must mean 'as it pertains to DOF'. Just to avoid confusion.

Furthermore, I think this example can't be quite right for even DOF. Note that the o.p. says:
The 17-55 is the full frame equivalent of 27-88 f/4.5 IS; AND
the 17-40 f/4 is equivalent to 27-64mm f/6.4 on crop

but how can the equivalent f/stop for DOF purposes increase both when you move to full frame and when you move to crop? Or am I missing something?

Oh sorry! I wanted to use the same words as tomscott. He certainly understands the conversion, I think he had juste typed too fast  . A longer statement would be:
The 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is the full frame equivalent of 27-88mm f/4.5 IS on crop (I ignored the "on crop" in the previous post because the 17-55mm is a lens for crop bodies).
The 17-40mm f/4 is the full frame equivalent to 27-64mm f/6.4 on crop. 

@3kramd5: thanks for the added detail, yes, I meant DoF equivalent.

10

Lenses / Re: 70-400/ f4.0-5.6 Zoom ... Canon, where are you?

« on: March 05, 2013, 05:40:18 PM »

So go ahead and switch to Nikon already. They're a reputable company that makes good products. You obviously prefer theirs to Canon's, so what on Earth is keeping you as a Canon customer?

hehehe .. the usual fanboy crap, wehn they up against the wall.
No I do not want to switch to Nikon. I want a new, improved EF 100-400/f 4.0 (!) - 5.6  L IS II with MTF like the new nikon and at a price not higher but preferably lower than the new Nikon. To go along with the other Canon stuff I got.

Where is my Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6 L IS Mk I??? 

11

Technical Support / Re: Teleconverter and DOF

« on: March 01, 2013, 10:35:25 AM »

Yes it is different, I think Neuro has made a small error.

The subject magnification stayed the same (the framing) the apparent aperture is the same (the hole in the lens stayed the same physical size) so the dof is the same.

Sorry PBD, but Neuro made no mistake. If you want the DoF on the 140mm stay the same, it needs to be at f/2 (supposing that the 100mm is at f/2). However, the 140mm is at f/2.8, so the DoF is deeper.

Let's exaggerate a little bit: do you think that for the same framing, the 50mm @f/1.0 will have the same DoF as the 500mm @f/10? 

12

Lenses / Re: 17-40mm advice please!

« on: March 01, 2013, 10:08:36 AM »

Although the 17-55mm F2.8 IS is the full frame equivalent of 27-88mm F4 IS

The 17-40mm is 27-64mm F4 on crop

Just to avoid some confusion:
The 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is the full frame equivalent of 27-88mm f/4.5 IS.
The 17-40mm f/4 is equivalent to 27-64mm f/6.4 on crop. 

13

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Black AF points...NOTHING + Spot-meter?

« on: February 18, 2013, 09:05:36 AM »

Just a print screen of Top 100 in Switzerland

Who's list?

I had a look at toppreise.ch. The list does look similar. However, I did not fine the ranking of sales. The list that have the D800 and the D600 on top is ranked by popularity. Popularity in such a site does not necessarily mean sale figure. It can be, for example, the number of searches  .

14

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Black AF points...NOTHING + Spot-meter?

« on: February 18, 2013, 08:53:46 AM »

Just a print screen of Top 100 in Switzerland

Top 100 based on what?  Sales or customer feedback?

The D800 was all the time to top 1 to 5
And the 5DIII was all the way down the list, about 25th or 30th place
On sales of course

Top 100 of what? (devices which can take photo?) Provided by whom?
It's hard, for me, to imagine that the D800 outsells the D3200 

15

EOS Bodies / Re: What if the rumored 5Dx is actually a 4D?

« on: February 15, 2013, 12:07:14 PM »

And as you said elsewhere on this site, without high fps, you can't take good photos

Obviously the mods removing your previous remark and susequent rebuttals to the same effect wasn't sufficient to prevent you from having another go at the expired horse....

Thank you for your insightful comment. Now would you like to comment on the topic of the 5Dx/4D?

...and thank you for flagrantly misrepresenting what I said.  Now would you like to provide a link to where I stated, "Without high fps, you can't take good photos," or, perhaps you'd like to suggest that the 5Dx/4D will actually be a lens, and not a camera?

but, but, ... Neuro, you promised stop beating that horse