January 28, 2015, 01:49:59 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 - mb66energy

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 30
16
Lenses / Re: New Canon 100-400mm Mk2 lens with 2x extender mk3
« on: January 07, 2015, 04:09:05 AM »
@Bennymiata: Good remark about CF tripod. I bought mine for two reasons: (1) smaller weight savings and (2) much higher vibration damping compared to aluminium. This is valid just for the cheaper SIRUI tripods.

Another idea: atmospheric turbulence is a factor with longer focal lengths. With 300mm equiv I havent seen it to often. with 640mm equiv (EF 5.6 / 400) it is a factor, more so with 1280mm equiv.

Using live view in 10x mode you might see strong variations of sharpness and there is no way to be fast enough to correct these variations and hit the shutter.

A solution which comes into my mind is: Use live view without magnification (or viewfinder) and focus manually - this might average the sharpness variations and might lead to a good compromise. I will try to find a photo and make it available here later.

Another check procedure that comes into my mind: Try focus methods in a room where you have constant temperatures (= no/low turbulence) and look how your methods perform. One of the first photos with my EF 5.6 / 400 was a close up and it was tack sharp, contrasty, with well defined textures of a wooden table and a computer mouse. My first outdoor shots were landscapes in a sunny landscape after a cold night (-5 degree celsius) including dark brown crops (? areas which were prepared to grow corn) - a good condition for heavy turbulence!

Good luck - Michael

17
I believe it was DeWitt Jones who called landscape photography "visual extraction" or something like that. Choose a quality telephoto zoom and you'll be happy.

Good finding: I just wanted to propose
(1) f/4 / 70-200 if flexibility is needed     OR
(2) f/2.8 100 Macro if macro is a concern
because I like to extract nice setting in landscapes.

But this might differ from landscape to landscape. Germany is one of the more dense crowded regions and therefor it is full of artifacts. So ultra wide will add to many artifacts and disturb the image ... or I am not good enough to integrate lots of artifacts in a landscape photo ;)

18
Yes, really well done because it is an interesting lens because it is really small and lightweight. With it's 2000 Euro/$ it is in the sweet spot between 1000 Euro  zooms and a 6500 Euro lens. If it's optically great and takes TCs well.

Do you mean optically great before or after flare artifacts are 'minimized' in post using CaptureNX?     ::)

Oh, and does Nikon make optically great TCs?   ::) ::)

flare artifacts: It depends on the strength of these artifacts. If the correction is only relevant for passionate pixel peepers ... I would accept it.

TCs from Nikon: Don't know because I have no experience with Nikon. But what I have heard in the last 25 Years about Canon's TCs: They are designed into the resulting lens+TC combo and show extremely good quality. But if I use a lens 99% without TC it wouldn't matter too much for me.

Let's wait for the reviews and what will Canon's answer be in 2016 or 2017 ...

19
Software & Accessories / Re: Two monitors vs ultra-wide one?
« on: January 07, 2015, 03:07:59 AM »
Tough question - personally I never liked the idea of two or more monitors. My idea of a good screen is a Desk of 800 x 1500 mm with a built in monitor of nearly the same size including at least a WACOM area of let's say 200 x 300 mm and at least 150 ppi. OLED would be welcome - if you need just to read a document power consumption will be 10 Watts, if you view a complex technical drawing, it is more. A good idea are some scenes in the movie Oblivion, where they use similar devices.

But back to reality: I am searching a smaller Ultra HD TV set. 3840x2060 pixels seems to be good enough to replace a lot of two monitor solutions and has enough height to show portrait mode pictures at ~3MPix. And it offers the chance to view my EOS 20D images at full resolution!

40 inch is what I search for - the resolution is 110 pixels per inch.

And I think I will buy one as soon as possible before they vanish from the market. Just now I hear very often "40 inch is to small" - valid for a TV set but not for a computer screen. At the moment Ultra HD TVs are low price - heard about an inititative to push them into the market. 40 inch (without 3D, but including 4 x HDMI 2, Miracast, etc. are about 400-500 Euro.

How good will a 40" monitor be for retouching? From my limited experience, monitors larger than 30" aren't that good for retouching... Correct me if I'm wrong, please.

I have retouching done only in homeopathic doses - no experience in that field. And I do not own that display yet but after 25 years of computer use I tend to the opinion "larger is better".
One thing is very important if you do color-critical retouching: You need good color stability from different viewing angles.

The Samsung UE40HU6900 has visible brightness variation with the viewing angle but colors seem stable. Reviews show that this display gives good color reproduction, contrast and brightness. The week point seems to be motion reproduction for movies, but this might be solved by using a high quality external tuner.

My usage scenario is at the moment
  * replace the defect DLP beamer (50 white pixels within 2 weeks after just 1750 hrs of operation)
  * have a device to display photos near their native resolution
  * plan to use it as computer screen in my living room with a PC in the room above (need a new graphics card for that purpose)
  * view contents of my tablet via Miracast wirelessly.

At 500 Euro it seems a bargain ....

If I buy that display/TV I will give feedback!

20
Looks like a cool lens.

And what a great example of Nikon "innovation": a "DO" lens a mere E-L-E-V-E-N years after Canon's first, the 70-300mm DO IS, hit the streets.

Well done, Nikon...

Yes, really well done because it is an interesting lens because it is really small and lightweight. With it's 2000 Euro/$ it is in the sweet spot between 1000 Euro  zooms and a 6500 Euro lens. If it's optically great and takes TCs well.

21
I don't know how good the technical quality is you need.

IMO the combo

 * EOS 6D + 70-200 (OVF better for tele shots/better stabilization)
 * EOS M + EF-M 22 (display o.k for wide shots, f/2.0 for low light environments, unobtrusive)
 * 16-35 or 11-22 for "ultra wide cases"
 * Manfrotto 709B desk tripod
 * EDIT: Forgotten the EF2EF-M adapter as backup if 6D fails (after Murphy's law this will prevent the 6D from failing. And have a small umbrella with you ... to avoid rain)

would be a good small gear set which doesn't need to many lens changes. The mini tripod from Manfrotto is very light, shows good stability and is cheap - the ball head is not great but it's getting better while I use that little thingy.

EOS M and EF-M 22 will make a good "always with you" package - even after the "shooting"!


Have a nice holdiday - Michael




22
Like just about everyone, I've been burgled on more than one occasion. Like HDD crashes, for most people it's not a matter of if, but when. Face it...that's reality.

[...]

-pw

So I understand your "massive" approach. Perhaps I will try out mimikry by putting my living room located kitchen drawer element into the kitchen. There is some hope that burglars aren't trying to find camera equipment in a kitchen cabinet!

23
Software & Accessories / Re: Two monitors vs ultra-wide one?
« on: January 06, 2015, 04:13:03 AM »
Tough question - personally I never liked the idea of two or more monitors. My idea of a good screen is a Desk of 800 x 1500 mm with a built in monitor of nearly the same size including at least a WACOM area of let's say 200 x 300 mm and at least 150 ppi. OLED would be welcome - if you need just to read a document power consumption will be 10 Watts, if you view a complex technical drawing, it is more. A good idea are some scenes in the movie Oblivion, where they use similar devices.

But back to reality: I am searching a smaller Ultra HD TV set. 3840x2060 pixels seems to be good enough to replace a lot of two monitor solutions and has enough height to show portrait mode pictures at ~3MPix. And it offers the chance to view my EOS 20D images at full resolution!

40 inch is what I search for - the resolution is 110 pixels per inch.

And I think I will buy one as soon as possible before they vanish from the market. Just now I hear very often "40 inch is to small" - valid for a TV set but not for a computer screen. At the moment Ultra HD TVs are low price - heard about an inititative to push them into the market. 40 inch (without 3D, but including 4 x HDMI 2, Miracast, etc. are about 400-500 Euro.

24
Since three years I use a kitchen drawer module from a swedish company which has sometimes usable furnitures.

Upper drawer: A flat drawer for all smaller accessory (cables, lens caps, tripod screws, memory cards, adapters, etc.)
Middle drawer: A higher drawer (~15cm) for bodies and lenses + flash.
Lower drawer: A high drawer (~25cm) for chargers, cases, bellows, undefinable stuff. It is planned to use this drawer to keep 1 or 2 pre-packed bags in the near future - the LowePro Pro Runner 200 will fit easily + a small classical bag.
Width: 60cm, Height: ~70cm, Depth: ~60cm (outer dimensions)

Air circulation is possible because I have "installed" some spacers that leave a 5mm gap between corpus and the drawer front plates. The cabinet is located in my living room which has constant temperatures.

I am VERY satisfied using drawers because you mulitply the visible area by the number of drawers. Since using that cabinet it is much easier for me to find something very quickly.

Another smaller cabinet (WxHxD = 40x180x35 cm³) is used to store tripods and some laboratory stuff (bases, rods, clamps) for "studio close-up/macro". My living room has enough sun and space to do that type of photography and therefore I decided to store the cameras and accessories in that room!

Hope this helps at least as ONE option ... Best, Michael

25
EOS Bodies / Re: Wait for it ... Revolutionary or Evolutionary in 2015
« on: January 05, 2015, 09:25:14 AM »
Yeah, I knew it was a joke link, hence the smilies. I remembered the talk from years ago about the digital film sensor cartridge and did a quick google and that's what came up. Here's a link about a more recent variation on the theme, but it looks pretty much a waste of time. I think the only reason to hang on to old film cameras is because you want to shoot film. Or for nostalgia. Or both. :)
http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2013/08/20/history-doomed-to-repeat-project-promises-digital-cartridge-for-film-slrs

Thanks again!
Shooting film isn't attractive for me - I am no longer patient enough to wait 1 or 2 weeks for the resulting images.
The spirit of these older cameras is their simplicity - especially the F-1n. Haptically delicious controls for each relevant parameter.
Using the EOS M with old FD lenses is a joy when it comes to focusing and setting the aperture. Setting exp time and ISO values is a hassle because the EOS M behaves more like a computer equipped with an imaging chip and a bayonet. But the IQ of this little camera is excellent ...

26
Lenses / Re: 24mm - Digital Photography's magical focal length?
« on: January 05, 2015, 09:18:44 AM »
I really liked the 24mm (38mm equiv) on my APS-C body but I tend to use the 10-22 more now. The special of this focal length is that it's perspective tends to be that of the human eye-brain-system in standard mode.
If I am focussed on a detail, my personal feeling is that of sth. between 100 and 200 mm equivalent. But in the "dreaming mode" I have more of a 180° panorama feeling.

Usually I am much more focussed on details so 100-300mm represent my "frame of interest" - therfore I have a good idea of photographing my personal "view". A 70-200 zoom on APS-C (100-300 equiv) is MY standard lens.

By the way: I am waiting for my EF-M 22 which will serve as a "ultrawide" (for my taste) with an imaging back cap ... errr .. the EOS M - so I will reengage that focal length if necessary ...

Historically I think it was the idea that focal length and active area should be the same and technical restrictions have nailed the focal length of the "standard wide lens" to 35 mm: small lens diameter for getting f/3.5 (10mm) and no need for retrofocus constructions in the pre SLR era. With SLRs entering the market the standard focal length was increased to 50mm to keep the mirror path clear without too much effort.

27
EOS Bodies / Re: Wait for it ... Revolutionary or Evolutionary in 2015
« on: January 05, 2015, 07:06:29 AM »
Evolutionary ... at least in the Canon ecosystem

I share the opinion that in terms of sensor IQ we are on a very high level. Mostly features can be developed and integrated - e.g. DPAF is more on the revolutionary side for me, but only a "local revolution".

Revolutions for me were:
(1) I hate changing lenses so I have more than 1 body. But I would prefer a camera which has two EF mounts and a simple mechanics which allows to change between both mounts/the mounted lenses. Perhaps for a FF mirrorless body.
Ain't going to happen!
Quote
(2) I hate to buy a new camera to get another sensor: An exchangable sensor-CPU-buffer unit would be great. Same camera feel/operation but improved IQ/special applications. A monochrome 20 MPix sensor unit for the 7D ii with 1.5 stops increased sensitivity would be great for that fast camera!
You're missing film photography!
http://re35.net/
:D :D :D

Thanks for the link but it's a fake website. First I was lucky to see a reason to keep my Canon F-1n but after reading the disclaimer I have to wait for another reason to keep it.
It was a design study for corporate design based on a 15 year old idea to put a sensor in a cardridge. The 15 year old attempt had a tiny sensor according to the available tech at the time ...

28
EOS Bodies / Re: Wait for it ... Revolutionary or Evolutionary in 2015
« on: January 05, 2015, 05:00:05 AM »
Evolutionary ... at least in the Canon ecosystem

I share the opinion that in terms of sensor IQ we are on a very high level. Mostly features can be developed and integrated - e.g. DPAF is more on the revolutionary side for me, but only a "local revolution".

Revolutions for me were:
(1) I hate changing lenses so I have more than 1 body. But I would prefer a camera which has two EF mounts and a simple mechanics which allows to change between both mounts/the mounted lenses. Perhaps for a FF mirrorless body.
(2) I hate to buy a new camera to get another sensor: An exchangable sensor-CPU-buffer unit would be great. Same camera feel/operation but improved IQ/special applications. A monochrome 20 MPix sensor unit for the 7D ii with 1.5 stops increased sensitivity would be great for that fast camera!

29
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Yongnuo 35mm f/2 Canon Clone on the Way
« on: January 05, 2015, 04:46:52 AM »
as long as its cheap and sharp.

I doubt these ancient designs can deliver "sharp" on 20mp+ digital corner-to-corner w/o major CA wide open. They only consist of two pieces of glass sandwiched together in a cheap plastic shell and an even cheaper stepper motor.

Yn's modifications won't change that basic premise, it's really only about "gimme a fast lens as cheap as possible". Yn might have a bit better bokeh tough, which isn't hard to archive given the original's performance.

[...]


A two lens-one element 35 mm is not possible for EF cameras because you need the retrofocus construction to keep the mirror box clear. The negative front element of the photos gives a clear hint for retrofocus design too.

What I see from the Yongnuo images is at least 4 groups (counting reflections/lens borders) - the original lens had a 5/7 construction.

@privatebydesign
I asked myself why is Canon perhaps interested in clones - and came to a similar conclusion: Cheap lenses with good quality might drive the the decision for EF mount compatible cameras. If people have an EF mount camera they will perhaps upgrade.

Your remarks about the chinese market are very good: Include e.g. India and you have 2.5 Billion people that might buy Yongnuo lenses and ... Canon bodies.

Personal opinion: I ordered just yesterday an EF-M 22 to make my EOS M pocketable - and on the other hand I have the brilliant EF 40 with exceptional contra light contrast/flare resistance. So my interest in this lens isn't too large ...

30
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New Firmware Coming for EOS 5D Mark III
« on: January 03, 2015, 12:58:41 PM »
That's what I like in our "modern world":

Hardware x Software x Firmware x Accessories = Confusion

But I have to admit, that Canon has a remarkable level of compatibility at least with lenses + bodies + accessories. Their more or less conservative handling of product cycles helps sometimes.

Hope you get a solution which allows you to use ML and the 5D iii as you prefer/need it!

Best - Michael

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 30