Messages

181

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark II with my 3 lenses question

« on: July 01, 2012, 06:05:28 PM »

I use a 17-40 with my 5DII.  It's an excellent combination for wide angle work.  I shoot real estate and its my go to setup for that.  For fun I do a lot of landscapes and it works very well for that.   It is perhaps canon's best wide angle zoom lens.  Better then the 16-35 IMO. 

It does not work well with a 10 stop VARI ND filter, so If I am using that for long exposures I switch over to my 24-105. 

I would never sell my 17-40.  It is far to useful and valuable for the type of shooting I do.  I will say that on FF it is a bit too wide for a walk around lens.   I only have it mounted on my camera body when I intend to shoot Wide.... for walk around I use my 24-105 or 70-200.  Both excellent lenses and being FF give you a fairly wide view.

You will be amazed how much wider a 5DII will shoot when compared to the same focal length on your Rebel.

182

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III vs 5D Mark II Raw Image Quality

« on: June 19, 2012, 09:25:57 PM »

Budget aside, The 5DIII is a lot more camera and well worth the extra $$$.

I had to laugh here, because "budget aside" and "worth the extra $$$" don't really fit together :-p ... you can only tell if the 5d3 is "worth it" if you *do* include one's budget and the return of invest for a pro. For me trying to go pro, nearly double clearly isn't though I would of course exchange a 5d2 for a 5d3 for free.

Depends on your profession.  Wildlife shooter or sports... 5DIII would be well worth the extra $$.   Wedding.... Probably no big deal.  Real Estate Photography like me... 5DII is the perfect tool for the job.

Sorry for the contradiction.  Trying to state that the 5DIII is a lot more camera then the 5DII.  By far.  They are worlds apart with customization, AF ability and much more.  I own a II and have used a III and if I had the money and was shopping... I know where I would put it. 

183

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III vs 5D Mark II Raw Image Quality

« on: June 19, 2012, 06:48:35 PM »

If you shoot and print on normal size, I bet you wont tell much difference between a good compact and the 5DII. focus on your shooting. Less talking.

Had to laugh at this one... Following up "less talking" with quite the rambling post...

5DII is a great camera.  It's IQ is outstanding.  Where it does lag is with AF and FPS.  Even with very fast glass it still doens't snap into focus on moving subjects.  Its really not that great for wildlife and sports, so depending on what you will be using your camera for this might make a big difference to you.  I love my 5DII, but if the subject is moving or if I need more frames per second on quick action then I always use my 1DIV.

I will agree with Physicx that the photographer makes great images... not the camera. Budget aside, The 5DIII is a lot more camera and well worth the extra $$$.

184

Lenses / Re: My 100-400 is Not focusing consistently specialy when the light is not optimal

« on: June 13, 2012, 06:08:59 PM »

Good luck.

There is a similar discussion on another thread about FoCal right now.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=7287.0

185

Lenses / Re: microadjustment advise?

« on: June 13, 2012, 06:03:25 PM »

well if you call that working then it might be so.
i call it pretty useless if you adjust for just one end of the focal length....   

Great.  If you think it is useless then I certainly don't recommend getting it for yourself.

I have a 70-200 f4, 24-105, 17-40 zoom lenses and focal has worked like a charm for me on my 1DIV and 5DII. 

If you are like me (which I am not saying you are) I tend to shoot at the max end of my focal length on my tele zooms.  Because I shoot here 90% of the time then it makes sense to calibrate my lens for the longer focal length.  If you are a shooter who uses the short end of the focal length often you could just calibrate it for the short end using FoCal, remember the MA setting, and change it manually when you are going to shoot at that shorter focal distance. 

I have the MA adjustment menu on my custom functions menu on my camera so I can easily adjust the MA on the fly.  FoCal will help you determine the optimal MA setting for any focal lenght and you can simply change it as needed if you are using using a specific range on your zoom lens.

Also, at very short focal lengths, unless you are shooting really really close to your subject.... the wide depth of field renders the MA argument moot.    If you are shooting at subjects very close to the minimum focusing distance then it is VERY important that the optimal MA setting be accurate at that short focal length.

Every shooter uses their gear differently and for me, FoCal has been priceless.  We have only begun to scratch the surface of the uses of this software in this thread.  I have done testing to compare WH200 setups to sidekicks, hand placement locations to mitigate vibration,  etc....

Just make sure you shoot in a controlled environment with a consistent light source.  I shoot indoors with two 500 watt floodlights on my target.  The literature with the software explains all of this very clearly.

186

Lenses / Re: microadjustment advise?

« on: June 13, 2012, 05:54:11 PM »

Does the FoCal software tell you what parameters to put in the camera once its tests are complete?

Yep.  The software will tell you the optimal MA point.  Its really quite easy.  I just used the software with a friend on his 5DIII and even though the test was not fully automatic and you needed to adjust the MA manually before each test shot it was still very easy and the final test results are just as accurate.

All versions of FoCal will find the correct MA.  The Pro one will give you more IQ data on how it arrives at the optimal AFMA.  And you will have nifty charts like the one below:

Canon 1DIV+600mm Lens (NON IS) Mounted on WH200 + Gitzo Systematic Caron Tripod

187

Lenses / Re: My 100-400 is Not focusing consistently specialy when the light is not optimal

« on: June 13, 2012, 11:59:11 AM »

I recommend the pro version.  At $120 it is still a bargain but will give you access to the analysis and reports and will give you more tools and parameters for testing should you be interested in some of those features.

You get a nice graph with the anaysis showing you what the IQ is across the MA range and will alert you to any severe abnormalities within the body or lens. (I.E your shutter is bunk or the lens is really off and further servicing is required by Canon to correct for the issues)

Email FoCal to see if the RAM will be an issue.  Reiken emails me back personally when I email them.

The service is great.  You may be good to go as is.

Good luck.

188

Lenses / Re: microadjustment advise?

« on: June 13, 2012, 11:55:33 AM »

well microadjustment is only really usefull for prime lenses... just as a reminder.

and you should see if you need microadjustment or not.
because the focus is slightly off then but other portions of the image are tack sharp.

if the whole image is not that sharp then it´s nothing you can cure with microadjustments.

Not true at all.  The AFMA works just fine with zoom lenses.  You just calibrate it at max zoom, which is where your DOF will be the narrowest.  It wont matter if it is off a little at MIN Zoom because at shorter focal lengths the DOF is so much larger that it will be a non issue.    Also, the 5DIII allows you to AFMA for both ends of a zoom lens.

189

Lenses / Re: microadjustment advise?

« on: June 13, 2012, 11:53:08 AM »

I now use FoCal software.  It takes all the complications out of lens calibration and works like a charm.  It is the best calibration tool out there and at a fraction of the cost of Lens Align... (Which I don't recommend.  It is very difficult to use and takes FOREVER, IMO)

Good luck

What version of FoCal software do you use - there appear to be three versions; Standard, Plus and Pro.

I use the Pro Version.  It gives you more information and access to analysis results along with many other testing parameters and options.  (Still easy to use and has the fully auto test, just gives you more to work with) (the 5DIII isnt fully automatic but still allows you to perform the same test but you just need to manually adjust the MA.  Turns a 2 minute test into 4 minutes... so no biggie)

190

Lenses / Re: microadjustment advise?

« on: June 13, 2012, 09:29:45 AM »

I would definitely recommend micro adjust, but also keep in mind that shutter speed and aperture also play a very significant role. 

I have several lenses that I can shoot wide open and get tack sharp results, but I also have some that I need to shoot at a smaller aperture to get the same crisp results.

I also shoot at faster shutter speeds then most.  The old saying is shoot at a shutter speed that is at least as fast as the reciprocal of your focal length.  I.E if you are shooting 200 mm.... shoot at 1/200 or faster.  I tend to shoot at speeds even faster then the reciprocal of my focal length and the percentage of tack sharp keepers went way up as well.

You can adjust the MA easily on your own for free or you can invest in some software.  I used to go down to the lake and get really low to the water and shoot moorings with the aperture wide open.  It is easy to see the line of focus against the water and this will roughly calibrate your MA.  Its not foolproof, but free.

I now use FoCal software.  It takes all the complications out of lens calibration and works like a charm.  It is the best calibration tool out there and at a fraction of the cost of Lens Align... (Which I don't recommend.  It is very difficult to use and takes FOREVER, IMO)

Good luck

191

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Is it safe to shoot my DSLR at the beach?

« on: June 13, 2012, 09:21:19 AM »

I insure all of my camera equipment on a personal articles policy.  There are many out there like mine that offer replacement coverage with no questions asked for very affordable rates. I think I pay $1.25 for every $100 of coverage.

I have had the coverage for years and never had to make a claim, but that one time I drop something expensive or someone smashes my window and steals my stuff... im covered.

I take exceptional care of my equipment, but with my insurance policy, I never worry about going into the "field" to get that shot Im looking for. 

Have fun,

192

Lenses / Re: My 100-400 is Not focusing consistently specialy when the light is not optimal

« on: June 13, 2012, 09:15:53 AM »

Its soft.  If you are really struggling with the AFMA adjustment and want to take the guesswork out of it you might consider FoCal by Reiken.  His program will calibrate your MA point and I have found it to be extremely useful and consistent.  I used to fool around with my MA as much as aperture it seems, but after running FoCal I have left it alone and consistently get tack sharp images.  A much higher percentage of my shots are in focus now.

I have calibrated all my lenses to both my bodies now.

(I am in no way affiliated with FoCal, I am just an extremely happy customer.)

Also, you may consider shooting at a faster shutter speed and smaller aperture to see what you end up with.  The 5D3 will give you very clean images up to 2000 ISO and keepers up to 6400 ISO. There is really no need to shoot at 500ISO especially when you are in lower light.  Get your shutter speed up to 1/800 or 1/1000 and shoot at a smaller aperture.  F5.6 can be fairly soft on this lens but if you shoot at f/8 through f/11 you will get much sharper images.  (At a cost of shutter speed of course, but with the 5D3 just bump up the ISO and fire away)

Some people love this lens and some people hate it, but you can stack the deck in your favor if you pay attention to the camera settings.  IMHO it is a great lens.

193

Lenses / Re: First Impression - Canon EF 600 f/4L IS II

« on: June 13, 2012, 07:38:29 AM »

Canon Rumors

The images look pretty sharp!

However please supply proper 100% crops so we can take judge!

Should be easy to do.

Could we have a moon shot or two as well with/without 1.4xTC when weather conditions are right.

I suspect these latest very expensive long lenses from Canon are "birder" lenses designed for max sharpness at close range - say 50Xfocal length ie not exceptionally sharp at infinity - say 300 metres and beyond.

Just click on the image and click on it after it has loaded and you will get pretty much 100%.  These files are very large JPGs so determining IQ from them is a fair assessment.

In my experience lenses that are very sharp up close are very sharp far away.   As long as you are shooting with a calibrated AFMA you can expect the same IQ across the distance range.  The limiting factors are not the glass, but rather less pixel density across your subject and more atmospheric factors to contend with.

I agree, it would sure be nice to see more test images, and of subjects shot at a variety of distances and not only birds but mammals, people, brick buildings.... etc...

194

Lenses / Re: First Impression - Canon EF 600 f/4L IS II

« on: June 12, 2012, 06:49:15 PM »

I'm actually stunned.  I expected it to be a bit sharper but maybe AFMA was not calibrated prior to testing.  I compared these shots to some of mine recently taken with the 300 2.8L and 2XIII and I think mine are actually a bit sharper than these.

I'll wait for more samples to show up before I cast total judgement on the new lens.

It'll be pretty tough to beat the IQ on the 300 2.8L.

The IQ of the 300 f2.8 is very tough to beat.  Add a 2xIII converter and most prime tele lenses will knock its socks off...  Which is how the comparison to the 600 was made by bkorcel 

195

Lenses / Re: First Impression - Canon EF 600 f/4L IS II

« on: June 12, 2012, 06:46:19 PM »

Hi guys,
I didn't have a chance to MA calibrate the lens on my 1D4 body - there wasn't time (I only had the lens for a very short  time). Any softness could also just be the result of my own technique. Lack of sleep plus swarms of black flies made for a challenging shoot! 
cheers,
Ethan

Ethan,

Thanks for the clarification.  Hopefully you get another chance to play with this lens.... if the owner is willing to part with it again.   I'm sure this much lighter version was quite nice to hike around with. 

Take care,

Chris