July 28, 2014, 05:08:26 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 - mb66energy

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 22
1
I discovered something really cool today. I was shooting some Fracking platforms and noticed how bad the heat shimmer is here during the summer. Unfortunately, a Daytime shot was required and the simmer was making it difficult to use longer lenses to flatten the subject against the sky.

[...]

Thanks for sharing your observations!

Years ago I observed that 1/400 second gave me much more detail than 1/30 second exp time - o.k., I had some shimmer showing regions of much detail, some regions blurred but the impression was as sharper image overall. 1/30 second integrated sharp and blurred regions into a mushy overall experience. But I have NOT tried to exaggerate exp time beyond a second.
Focal length was 640mm equiv. - I set my 40D to ISO 1600 to reduce exp time despite ISO 1600 for a 40D is its outer limit quality wise.

Your example shows - IMO - the same detail in both shots but the 30 second shot is undistorted which makes it more attractive. One remark: The left shot seems to be in full sunlight, the right shot doesn't show the bright contrasty light - was that caused by the 30 second exposure or did you have changing light?

Thanks again - Michael

2
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 13, 2014, 07:48:57 AM »
Might be a nice replacement for my 70-200 4.0 and the 5.6 400 and should make a nice walk-around lens. (100mm equiv is a standard focal length for me :) Good contrast and strong flare resistance are very welcome. And add a built in lens hood (like 5.6 400 has) ... but that is just dreaming ...

Hopefully it is a 2 ring zoom which extends during zooming to keep it small for transportation at the 100mm setting. Usually I like fixed length lenses but in that focal length region it would be a 350mm thing and not fit into the bags I own.

Just dreaming about a 24-105 Mk II with great quality so you could live with
10-22 ... 24-105 ... 100-400 (+2x TC) and two 7D mk II for ultimate flexibility. Add a macro lens and everything is fine!

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 07, 2014, 02:18:53 PM »
 (1) IQ which is far beyond that of a 40D or 600D
    (good colors, soft transitions / good contrast to show textures correctly)
 (2) control button layout which is close to e.g. the 40D (mustn't be the same) which gives
    fast access to functions. A ring arount the lens mount to set the aperture would be great.
    and a "shoulder" display like 40D and 7D
 (2a) well implemented video with very good quality and operability (in terms of hardware
    controls)
 (3) a hybrid view finder which makes video in bright light a joy and helps to validate critical
    exposure settings in bright light
 (4) reliable, reliable, reliable and fast AF with a wider field of AF sensors compared to the
    ancient 9 point AF of my cameras


(1), (2) and (2a) are a MUST, (3) would be a great option and (4) would be very helpful.

At the moment I rely on the great operability of the 40D and the video quality / features(with Magic Lantern) of the 600D but my dream is to have ...

      2 identical bodies          which            are well designed for photography and video

Just my 2 ct. - Michael

4
EOS Bodies / Re: The Always Hidden Camera at the World Cup
« on: July 05, 2014, 04:17:42 AM »
The photos displayed were from the game Algeria - Germany with partially stronger rain. So this might be the (boring) explanation of these "hidden cameras" ...

5
EOS-M / Re: Next official EF-M Lens
« on: June 29, 2014, 09:16:21 AM »
We shouldn't forget that the EOS M was "an experiment", as their CEO said. There are no real rumors about the long-awaited M3. I do still believe that Canon will go mirrorless with their 'normal' SLR's (I expect the 7DII to be the first one -> hybrid VF, stunning video functions, many autofocus points etc.) and they will have an EF mount, otherwise they would kill themselves after building up a lens system for, I don't know, 40 years?! I wouldn't bet on the M system.

I hoped for an EF-X mount which exhibits compatibility to EF-X-lenses with eXtremely small back focus - a large part of the lens might be inside the camera including focusing motor, IS system ...
This EF-X mount I hoped for would have been compatible to EF and EF-S lenses. No need for an adaptor would be interesting. The mount flange had made the cameras thicker but if the hypothetical EF-X 2.0 22 had nearly everything behind the mount it had to protrude just 3 or 4 mm and resulted in a moderately flat camera-lens-combo. The larger camera thickness would have allowed for a camera grip hiding a much larger battery to go for 500 or 600 shots.

So I like your idea to use the EF mount for future mirrorless cameras - hopefully Canon will read/hear us.

But so long the EOS M will be a very good camera with APS-C (sensor) quality and compact outline ... I like mine very much for what it is ...

6
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Owners Post Your Pictures
« on: June 29, 2014, 09:05:29 AM »
I have great joy with my EOS M - I use it as replacement for my S95 (much much better texture rendering especially with higher ISO), as a "intelligent lens backcap" for wide to standard focal lengths and as a small camera for experimental photography. Another great thing is the contrasty and contra light proof (o.k. "resistant" would be a better term) standard zoom (1st picture).

My 55mm B&W ND 1000 filter came in use with the standard zoom - and the EOS M is a nice option for experiments with long exposure during daylight (2nd and 3rd picture with 30 sec exposure time). The EF-M 11-22 is just a little bit more expensive than a B&W ND 1000 filter with 77mm or 82mm filter thread - so this is a valuable option if I will do long exposures with an ultrawide ....

7
Lenses / Re: Canon 135L F2.0 - Am I expecting too much
« on: June 29, 2014, 08:43:21 AM »
I observed the same behaviour with the sister lens, the EF 2.0 100 - in some situations I have seen strangely coloured objects before and behind the focus plane. Just (newer) apochromatic designs do not show that behaviour:

The Voigtlaender 125mm 2.5 and the (Carl) Zeiss 135mm 2.0 APO - both apochromatic designs.

I thought about "sidegrading" to one of these lenses but (1) both do not have autofocus and (2) are expensive and (3) the raw situations where these LOCAs show colour fringing aren't worth (A) the extra money and (B) the extra complication with more gear to choose from ...

Enjoy your surely great lens - best - Michael

8
Lenses / Re: Why do fast primes not have IS?
« on: June 24, 2014, 03:11:26 PM »

I will try to make an approach, as far as I can handle your question:
IS (Canon) is a moving optical element inside the lens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_stabilization
To work properly it has to move fast and accurate. To be fast it has to be of low weight.

Fast apertures need a larger image circle over the whole optics compared to narrow apertures.
Therefore the optical elements of the IS should be larger as well. This leads to higher weight which causes loss of speed and higher energy consumption and also to higher prices because of the more expensive optics.
So with IS Canon always compromises between functionality of the IS and useful max. aperture.

This is my conclusion. Maybe someone else can do better.


Superteles with IS have large elements.

Weight and energy consumption should therefore be even greater, per your explanation.

Does the larger housing of the superteles provide more space for the mechanism that moves the elements?

Comments?


Superteles have large front elements but the IS group is mostly a thin lens element of much smaller diameter nearer to the bajonet than to the front element.

In standard lenses and wide angles you need smaller radii for the lens surfaces so the lenses become thicker and have higher mass - this implies higher forces to reposition them fast enough to counteract camera shake etc.

But your argument - in a tele you have more space - might be an additional reason.

A third one: A 2.8 300mm lens typically costs several thousands of dollars - 500 dollar more for a fast IS isn't prohibitive, it's a 10% increase of the cost or price. For a fictional EF 1.8 50 IS it means a 500% increase of cost or price!

9
"Tested" some FD lenses with the EOS M via FD->EF-M Adapter
FD 4.0 17 / FD 2.8 28 / FD 3.5 50 Macro / FD 1.4 50 S.S.C. (chrome ring) / FD 1.8 85 / FD 3.5 135 / FD 2.5 135 / FD 4.0 200

Only the FD 1.4 50 S.S.C. showed very good quality and is interesting for me because it has a higher aperture than all my other lenses. This one might be in the photo bag you mentioned.
In the tele range the EF 4.0 70-200 is far superior to the above mentioned lenses. The EF-S 60 Macro is crisper than the FD 3.5 50 Macro.
FD 4.0 17 never was a very sharp lens but is interesting for video because it has very low distortion.

The major drawback of the EOS M is the fact, that you cannot find the right focus setting via the display easily. A electronic viewfinder of a future EOS M would be very helpful for that.
But if you use more or less static objects/subjects using the FD lenses via EOS M might be a good way to experiment with these older lenses.

If you want use the lens on your 5D, this link might be helpful:
  http://www.thelensdoctor.co.uk/page5.html
There you can convert one or two of the most promising FD lenses into an EF mount version - for me I am thinking about the FD 1.4 50 S.S.C. ... but still waiting what Canon will do in the 50mm range ...

10
EOS Bodies / Re: New Sensor Tech in EOS 7D Mark II [CR2]
« on: June 22, 2014, 06:58:48 AM »
What about a 7D C(inema) as a parallel development with
  4k Video at reasonable frame rates
  a hybrid viewfinder

and a photo related 7D mark II which will be anounced later
with a totally new sensor tech.
Preferably a sensor which separates the whole incoming light
e.g. by interference filters to feed three photodiodes for R-, G- and
B-channel ... just dreaming about nearly lossless color separation
and a 1:1 mapping of imaging and image pixels!

11
EOS-M / Re: Canon EF-M 55-200 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Gets Official
« on: June 17, 2014, 01:16:00 PM »
[...]


I do expect the Canon EF-M 55-200 to be a better perfermer in terms of IQ than both the much more expensive Fuji [which is not great] and the Sony lens. But lets wait and see .. MTF charts anyone? ... and then test results and pictures. :-)

Of course this lens only was announced, because I recently purchased the EF-S 55-250 for use as light telezoom on both my 7D and via adapter on the M.  ;D
[/quote]


RED:
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/ef-m/ef-m55-200-f45-63-is-stm/spec.html

BLUE:
I know that feeling but it doesn't work always: After I bought my 5.6 400 I was shure an IS version or the 100-400 unicorn lens as mark II would be available instantanously - 3 years later both aren't available.
But that feeling is a good anti dote against GAS ...

12
EOS Bodies / Re: More EOS 7D Mark II Talk [CR1]
« on: June 16, 2014, 11:17:59 AM »
We’re told the top plate has a noticeably bigger bump around the viewfinder than the current EOS 7D.
A hybrid viewfinder perhaps?  Or maybe the return of eye controlled autofocus?

Hybrid viewfinder: First thing I thought myself. Would be a great thing and excellent with eye controlled focus + a very fast AF system without and with live view ... might replace my 40D + 600D combo for photo + video.

13
Lenses / Re: What was your first L lens?
« on: June 05, 2014, 05:04:28 PM »
The 4.0 70-200 L (non-IS) in 2005 for the 20D - still in use as an allround telephoto lens.
The 5.6 400 L followed some years later.

135 L was on my plan but I preferred the 2.0 100 due its smaller size and similar IQ.
100 L Macro was an option but 100 Macro had similar, sometimes better reviews in
terms of IQ and the L was twice the price - the non-L version won.

14
Haves in black - new ones in red:

TOOLS:
EF-S 10-22 | 60 ||
EF-M 11-22

EF 2.8/24     | 2.8/40                 | 2.8+2.0/100 | 4.0/70-200 | 5.6/400 ||
EF 2.8 24 IS | Sigma 1.4 50 Art | 2.8 100 IS Macro + 2.0 100 | 4.0 70-200 IS | 5.6 400

2 x 40D || 2x TC ||| 600D for video ||| EOS M + bunch of FD chrome rings
2 x 600D for video and photo + 2 x EOS M with EF adapter as intelligent back cap

Add a fast APS-C and/or a slow high MP 35mm camera

15
Lenses / Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM Image Samples
« on: May 16, 2014, 01:06:50 PM »
Am I being silly or are there bigger sample images available yet?

[...]

There are bigger samples if you click the link below the image in its caption - just right from the number of the picture which is in a readable "language". (I just hovered with the mouse over the caption to see if there is something more representative ... and found it.)

They are some 20 MPix large so they might be taken with EOS 6D and EOS 70D ...

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 22