September 02, 2014, 01:28:50 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 - PixelReaper

Pages: 1 2 [3]
31
Lenses / Re: Recommendation 70-200/2.8+2x vs 100-400 f/4-5.6L ?
« on: February 13, 2012, 09:38:54 PM »
According to the review and the ISO charts on TDP, the 1.4III see very limited IQ loss when mated with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II vs. the 70-300L

http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=6&API=1&LensComp=738&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

I don't know Pix, the 70-300 looks pretty significantly sharper to me.

smirkypants- you are right
I agree, the 70-300 is at it's sharpest at 300 f/5.6.  For me, I plan to spend more time using to 70-200 at f/2.8 in its native focal range, using the 1.4xIII or the 2xIII on fewer occasions when shooting wildlife.  I guess if I was doing more wildlife and fewr portraits /  lowlight shots of the kid, I would pick the 70-300 IQ.  The 70-200 2.8 IS II + TC is a good comprimise for me since the wife will kill me if I were to buy both lenses!!! >:( >:( >:(

32
Lenses / Re: Recommendation 70-200/2.8+2x vs 100-400 f/4-5.6L ?
« on: February 13, 2012, 04:51:17 PM »
You know, I own too many lenses. Thought about buying the 70-300L because of the IQ/focal length. I already own the 70-200/2.8. Maybe I should just get a 1.4x. Any thoughts on IQ comparisons? Focus speed?

According to the review and the ISO charts on TDP, the 1.4III see very limited IQ loss when mated with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II vs. the 70-300L

http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=6&API=1&LensComp=738&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

33
Lenses / Re: Recommendation 70-200/2.8+2x vs 100-400 f/4-5.6L ?
« on: February 13, 2012, 04:24:44 PM »
I have been struggling to decide between the 70-200 2.8 IS II and the 70-300 L. I do mostly portrait and family shots in outdoor/indoors and low light. I use a 5dII so I too think the 70-200 is very versatile for this body with the large aperature and still fairly wide on the FF. I will also plan to use the 2x III TC for the more limited times I shoot wildlife. Based on the images you posted it appears this combo can still capture plenty of detail. I figure this way, I get the best tele zoom while still having the flexibility to get the reach.

Does this strategy make sense to everyone?

Makes sense to me, and for portraits, I'd definitely pick the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II over the 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS. 

Good example of the use case you describe was an outing to the zoo with my kids, where I took the 5DII and 70-200 II, along with the 2x II.  The latter came in handy for shots of the animals, and even f/5.6 (on FF) is sufficient to blur out the fences reasonably well:


Thanks for your response  Neuro. The color looks great on that last bird shot.  As much as I like the form factor on the 70-300L, being able to take off the Extender on the 70-200 IS II and having a f/2.8 that is super sharp wide open means the lens has much more flexibility.  In many ways acts as 2 lenses in one, given the IQ with the extender is still rather acceptable, which justifies the combined extra $1k you spend.

One side note to anyone considering the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II's weight (a topic that comes up on this and other forums almost daily!!).

 When I first borrowed this lens from a friend, I ruled it out right away due to the weight, which after carrying it in hand for 30 minutes, I considered to be oppressive.

However!! The second time I borrowed it, I had purchased a Custom SLR Strap, a sling style strap with the glide feature(similar to the BlackRapid) and I was able to easily carry the lens with my gripped 5D Mark II for four hours with absolutely no fatigue. Plus you can easily move it behind your back and have your hands free for other things, in my case, namely my kid!

Long story short - plan on buying a sling style strap with the glide feature aka BlackRapid or Custom SLR strap(which I highly recomend).  The weight issue quickly becomes a non issue, and you are left with one of the sharpest, most versatile lens out there (next to my 35 1.4L that is!!  ;) :) )

34
Lenses / Re: Recommendation 70-200/2.8+2x vs 100-400 f/4-5.6L ?
« on: February 13, 2012, 12:16:39 PM »
I am going to spend money I don't really have...
How much of a budget don't you really have?  While the suggestion of a 300/2.8L IS is wonderful, I'm going to assume that spending several thousand dollars is not an option...

Short version: I'd recommend the 100-400mm - the current one.  IQ is slightly better than the 70-200 II + 2x, the usability is much better, and it's much kinder on the wallet.

Long version:

I personally own both the 100-400mm and the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, plus the 1.4x and 2x II extenders, and both FF and APS-C bodies - so, I'm speaking from personal experience here.

Looking at your other suggestions
  • new 100-400/4-5.6L - lenses that are rumors don't take good pictures.  As pointed out above, Canon's recent track record for delivering even products that have been announced is pretty poor lately.  Sure, if it's available when you're ready to buy, and you can afford it (the $3K price estimate seems quite likely to me), get it.
  • 70-300L - a very good lens, and if you don't need 400mm, it's the best choice.  But, in my experience, for shooting birds/wildlife, you often do need the reach of 400mm on APS-C, and you may end up cropping even more.
  • 70-200/4L+2x - a non-starter.  You'd be at f/8, meaning no AF unless you also buy a 1-series body - except the 1D X - to mount it on.
  • 70-200/2.8L+2x - this one is worthy of more discussion, and it seems you think so, too, based on your post title


converters: so far, I've only read excellent reviews about the Canon 1.4x/2x mkiii - they sacrifice some af speed, but iq is said to be excellent. Am I missing something here?
The extenders are really designed for use with supertele primes (300/2.8 and up, excluding the 300/4 and 400/5.6), which take much less of an IQ hit than any zoom or the cheaper primes like the 300/4).  Canon knows this - it's why they designed the new 200-400mm with an integral extender, one that could be optimized for that zoom lens, even though there is already an excellent 1.4x III.  IMO, an extender should be thought of as an occasional-use item.  In practice, mounting the extender is a pain (unless you happen to have three hands), especially in the field and if you're in a hurry.  I don't think it's wise to buy a lens and plan to use it mostly with an extender.  Rather, get the native focal length you need, and use the extender as a supplement once in a while, for specific reasons.

In this specific case, the first question is, which 70-200/2.8 do you have in mind - there are three of them.  You mention that image stabilization is important, so that rules out the 70-200/2.8 non-IS.  I would not use a 2x extender on the 70-200/2.8 IS MkI, it takes a big IQ hit - here's a comparison.  The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II does take extenders reasonably well - here's a comparison of bare MkII lens vs. lens+2xIII.  Still, considering just IQ, the 100-400mm at 400mm is still better than the 70-200 II + 2xIII (comparison).

In practice, the IQ difference between the 100-400mm and the 70-200 II + 2x is probably not going to be too noticeable (or not at all) in real-world shooting.  But also, as you mention, using an extender slows down AF - in fact, with the 2x extender there's a 50% reduction in AF speed.  That means the 100-400mm will focus faster than the 70-200 II + 2xIII (it's noticable in real-world use, but it's not too bad).   Finally, there's cost - the 100-400mm is over $1000 less than the 70-200 II + 2xIII. 

You mention the variable aperture as a problem, but in Av mode it really isn't.  It can be annoying if you shoot full manual, yes...but depending on your body, Auto ISO may compensate (on the 7D, M mode supports Auto ISO, which would compensate for the variable aperture as you zoom).

You mention using the lens for close-ups, and in that situation, the 70-200 II + 2x has an advantage - the bare lenses have about the same maximum magnification (~0.2x), but if you add the 2x extender to the 70-200 II, you double the magnification without changing the MFD, meaning you can achieve 0.4x with the combo.  However, keep in mind that applies at the MFD, which is 4 feet for the 70-200 II and 6 feet for the 100-400mm.  So, unless you can get pretty close to your subjects, the extra magnification won't necessarily be double.

So...comparing the current 100-400mm to the 70-200 II + 2x, which is better?  Well, the 100-400mm has slightly better IQ at 400mm, slightly faster AF, and is substantially cheaper.  The trade off is the 100-400mm is an older design (not sure why that matters), has a lower maximum magnification, and is not weather sealed (which really only matters if your crop body is the 7D).

The other problem with the 70-200 + 2x is usability.  In one sense, it's more versatile - you have a fast 70-200mm, and a slow 280-400mm, all in one lens.  But you don't have both at once, so, it's often an either-or situation anyway. 

Personally, if I know I'm going out to shoot birds/wildlife, I grab the 7D and 100-400mm, almost every time.  The only exception to that is when I'm going out in the rain - in that case, I'll take the 7D and 70-200 II + 2x for the weather sealing.  Honestly, I found the 70-200mm focal length to be a bit awkward on APS-C - too long for indoor use, too short when I needed real reach (since I have the 100-400 for that).  OTOH, on FF the 70-200mm is an amazingly versatile lens, great indoors and out - so, if I'm going on an outing and taking the 70-200mm for that, I'll often throw in the 2x extender, just in case.

So, the bottom line is that for birds/wildlife/etc., I think the 100-400mm offers the best compromises between IQ, ease of use, and cost.  I don't think there's a better option under $3000 if you need 400mm and want IS.

I'll end with a bunch of examples, since I think it's helpful to back up words with images.  You can click through for a larger image, and View All Sizes in the upper right can get you a 1600 pixel version so you can get a better idea of the IQ.

First, 70-200 II + 1.4x, on a drizzly afternoon:


EOS 7D, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L II IS USM + EF 1.4x II Extender @ 280mm, 1/2000 s, f/6.3, ISO 3200

Next, 70-200 II + 2x, again on a misty day:


EOS 7D, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L II IS USM + EF 2x II Extender @ 400mm, 1/160 s, f/5.6, ISO 3200

Now, a few with the 100-400mm:


EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM @ 400mm, 1/640 s, f/5.6, ISO 125


EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM @ 400mm, 1/640 s, f/5.6, ISO 200


EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM @ 400mm, 1/640 s, f/5.6, ISO 160


EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM @ 400mm, 1/1600 s, f/6.3, ISO 1600

Finally, since you mention shooting insects/plants, too, here are a couple of other subjects with the 100-400mm:


EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM @ 400mm, 1/640 s, f/5.6, ISO 100


EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM @ 400mm, 1/640 s, f/5.6, ISO 100

+1!!!!

Thanks neuro!! You are the best.  Your images are a big help for me.  I have been struggling to decide between the 70-200 2.8 IS II and the 70-300 L. I do mostly portrait and family shots in outdoor/indoors and low light. I use a 5dII so I too think the 70-200 is very versatile for this body with the large aperature and still fairly wide on the FF. I will also plan to use the 2x III TC for the more limited times I shoot wildlife. Based on the images you posted it appears this combo can still capture plenty of detail. I figure this way, I get the best tele zoom while still having the flexibility to get the reach.

Does this strategy make sense to everyone?

I would love any other examples of photos with the 70-200 2.8 IS II + 2x TC

Thanks

35
Technical Support / Re: Hot / stuck pixels on new 5d II
« on: January 25, 2012, 03:55:25 PM »
Manufacturing variations will cause certain pixels to exhibit more leakage than others. This is why you always see the same pixels light up - because they are "inferior" compared to the rest and give out (leak charge) sooner.

When you get your new camera you'll see that different pixels will light up , but you will ALWAYS have this problem to a certain degree (even if you jump to Nikon :-))

Remapping will remove the problem because your camera will simply stop using those "weak" pixels (instead it will clone the data from a surrounding pixel), but if you then attempt an longer exposure, you will notice that some other new pixels are starting to light up. It comes down to what you can live with. You will become more lenient with time, trust me :-)

Thanks sb. I am sure you are right on both the body and the leniency over time.  I have been shooting as an amateur for about 7 yrs, I started with a 350d. This was my first upgrade other than buying a 50 1.8 to replace the kit on the 350d. As you can tell from the small fortune I have spent in the last 2 months on new equipment, I have clearly fallen deep down the rabbit hole!! I will say the 5DII and L glass IQ has really moved me to learn more about how to be a better photographer from both a tech  and artistic / composition standpoint

36
Technical Support / Re: Hot / stuck pixels on new 5d II
« on: January 25, 2012, 03:17:54 PM »
To my knowledge, hot pixels on the sensor is normal and something we need to live with - as it was mentioned earlier in the thread, their number would increase with longer exposures...

I also recall reading individual pixels might be "hot" for some time and then stop being hot (even at the same level of exposure). Nothing regular I imagine... I have been trying to avoid looking at images at 100% so no first hand experience on that.

I do not think a hot pixel on the sensor could be visible on the LCD though. Can anyone confirm?

Cheers!

They show up on the same spot on the frame/image every time. I am not sure what % of full magnification the LCD preview provides compared to viewing at 100% on the computer, but they can definatley be seen on the LCD preview.

I also spoke to Canon support and they said the sensor can be fixed by turning those pixels off (remapped sensor?) but when I mentioned I was still in the return period, I was surprised that the canon rep seemed to encourage replacing the camera vs sending it in for repair under warranty.

37
Technical Support / Re: Hot / stuck pixels on new 5d II
« on: January 25, 2012, 02:50:44 PM »
I am referring to hot pixels on the sensor, not the LCD. If it were happening only after prolonged sensor usage or only at very high ISO, I would be more understanding, but in this case they show up right away and at very low(200) ISO settings/relatively low shutter speeds (1/10).

So I just ordered a new 5dII / 24-105 kit from amazon, still at $2799 and sending the first kit back. I know I might just be pixel peeping, but hopefully the new body doesn't exhibit the same issue ? 

I will have to remove the giottos LCD screen protector off the one I'm sending back.  I have read you have to use a hair dryer to loosen the adhesive.  Does any one know if it can then be reapplied to another LCD?

Thanks again to all that have posted.
+1 CR community!!

38
Technical Support / Re: Hot / stuck pixels on new 5d II
« on: January 25, 2012, 06:57:46 AM »
Thanks for the direction. Like you said, I hate to send my baby back but at least I caught it with a few days to spare. Thank you both for your replys.
 ;D

39
Technical Support / Hot / stuck pixels on new 5d II
« on: January 25, 2012, 01:16:44 AM »
Hi all,

I am new to posting on CR but have enjoyed and learned a lot from reading all of your post, so thanks!

I bought the 5d2 / 24-105 kit over Christmas and have been really loving it!! I also added the 35L to my nifty fifty and am very satisfied withy current kit. I would love to add a tele zoom, but that will be another post.

Today I started noticing some hot pixels showing as either solid red, white or blue. I did a shot of lens cap at both high and low ISO and counted a total of about 7 stuck pixels on the LCD on the camera. I also tried the manual sensor cleaning trick, but had no luck. I am still in my amazon return period and I am thinking about just sending it back for a new one.

Does anyone have experience with this issue and have any adivice?

Thanks in advance for your help!

Pages: 1 2 [3]