February 27, 2015, 08:11:28 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 - raptor3x

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 20
Software & Accessories / Re: Bag that will fit 5D3, 24-70 and 70-200?
« on: December 23, 2014, 09:57:53 PM »
I use the Ona Brixton and it will fit that combination quite comfortably.  I have the dark leather version and it's a fantastic bag although a bit expensive.

Lenses / Re: Any ideas on getting good focus when shooting thru glass pane?
« on: December 23, 2014, 05:46:36 PM »
Are you able to get right up against the glass?  If so, buy one of those cheap collapsible rubber hoods and use that pressed up against the glass.  It will make it as if the glass isn't even there.

EOS Bodies / Re: Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review
« on: December 21, 2014, 02:12:03 AM »
Here´s a short video, where he is demonstrating the fantastic (in his view) autofocus with facial recognition on the D4S:
Even for a totally still, well (over)lit face, it still hunts ...

In his D4S review, which he claim has the best AF system in the world, he is using his kid on a swing, as "the ultimate AF challenge" ::)

My favorite part of his D4S review is how he spends the entire article talking about how the D4S has the best AF system ever created and is so much improved over the D4 and then in the last paragraph or so admits that the 1DX can do everything the D4S can do but just needs to have the AF options configured correctly.

Lenses / Re: Quick Comparison: Canon's new 400mm Options
« on: December 19, 2014, 11:19:38 AM »
He must have picked an excellent copy of the original 100-400 for his comparison.  I'd say my version 1 lens is average but the version II lens is excellent.  My copy of the new one is much sharper wide open plus the much improved IS and twist zoom is a "must upgrade" if you use this lens a lot.

They tested four copies of each generation 100-400, and averaged the numbers.

Yeah but all four of those copies had been tuned on their optical bench so it's not like he picked fours copies at random from out in the wild.

Quote from: RCicala
One thing I'll just throw out for discussion regarding 100-400 comparisons. It's a lens we find we have to optically adjust fairly frequently over time (maybe 10% of copies) and the problems are always at 400mm only. The 4 copies I tested had all been optically tested and screened on a bench prior to this measurement.

Lenses / Re: Canon 100-400 ii Image Quality Review Posted at TDP
« on: December 19, 2014, 10:35:20 AM »
I was skeptical that this lens could live up to the hype.  It appears the hype was justified:

Roger at Lens rentals disagrees. He just posted a comparison of the old and new 100-400mm and there isn't that much difference between them.
He also posted on the 400 DO. Which appears to be significantly better than the mark 1.
Hopefully Roger will get some Sigma 150-600mm's soon and run a comparison between them,the Tamron and the Canon 100-400mm II

Over on FM, Roger mentions that he was very suprised by the results as the lmatest numbers didn't quite match what he saw in his own test shots.

Quote from: RCicala
I was a bit surprised at the 100-400 results myself, I expected more difference. Shooting test charts (same ones as TDP uses) I could see a difference that the Imatest results didn't measure. Perhaps it's a decrease in some aberrations? I'm not sure.

Lenses / Re: Canon 100-400 ii Image Quality Review Posted at TDP
« on: December 18, 2014, 03:22:41 PM »
Slightly off topic but is the new Nikkor 80-400G really as bad at 400mm as TDP is showing?  Those results seems completely unacceptable for a nearly $3K lens.

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 17, 2014, 12:57:38 PM »
Sir, I do not think, that Conon will release an "bad-sensored" camerabody. Maybe the IQ is not the the IQ you get from the Nikon D800E or Sony A7 36MP.  I hope -  it will be on an equal level like the IQ of todays Canon products.
Just think of, what will happen to Canon if this Camera is rubbish? They will never release an under-average product.
Maybe it took so long to developa an good high MP sensor.

Wasn't that what the EOS-M was considered to be by many... even Canon themselves(recently)?

EOS-M was only under-average on AF ...and corporate support of the basic idea.  The IQ is actually quite good and I think APS-C is not a terrible call to split the difference between the mirrorless world that wants everything made smaller and the mirrorless world that wants best possible IQ.  They clearly need products for both camps, but APS-C is not a terrible starting point and the EOS-M could have been successful as a result.

But I still don't think Canon has launched a mirrorless system until they give us a @#$%ing EVF and more than two native lenses to choose from at B&H.   The embarrassment of the EOS-M is not the product so much as Canon pushing a ship in flames out of port with a vague intention to 'put that fire out soon'.

- A

That 22mm pancake is one hell of a lens.

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 17, 2014, 12:26:03 PM »
The 5DIII will be 3 years old in March next year. A move to 50MP will pretty much follow Moor´s law. That same law should indicate just over a doubling of its computing power and given the speed of new memory cards, we should a least expect a camera that could chew 50MP at a slightly higher speed than the 5DIII and thus see at least 6, probably 8 fps.

If it was following Moore's law and we have a period of 36 months between releases, then we'd expect to see a ~88MP camera, not a ~44MP camera if we also assume that pixel count scales like transistor count.

It's great to know who makes generic plates, but who else does decent lens-specific replacement feet with integrated ArcaSwiss rails?  Being lighter, more compact, and directly attached to the collar could be great.

Sunwayfoto actually does make lens specific replacement feet with integrated arcaswiss rails as well.

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Canon to Target The GH4 With New DSLR Type? [CR2]
« on: December 15, 2014, 03:06:02 PM »
Low light performance is just happens to be the most important video feature, it is the one feature that can get you the shot or miss it. The GH4 is basically useless for video past ISO 1600, and not that great at 1600 either. The 5D3 gives great results up to about ISO 10,000 and with Magic Lantern you get zebras, peaking, magic zoom, and a ton of other goodies, so the GH4 doesn't cut it for me. The Sony A7s will be a great option when they get a good selection of native FF lenses, but Canon will probably have an offering before Sony gets the lenses made.

Does anyone actually use the FE lenses for video?  I would have thought that the way the manual focus rings are setup leaves them pretty much dead in the water for video.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: FYI: D750 light leak issues
« on: December 14, 2014, 02:26:21 PM »
I suppose this happens to all manufacturers nowadays.
(to summarize, there is a light leak when shooting into backlit scenes using live view)


Looks like they were determined to copy the 5DIII as closely as possible.

It's a very different issue from what happened with the early 5D3s.  It's more like the effect you see with the non-flocked EF-FE adapters where you can get some very strong flaring that's artificially cutoff whereas the 5D3 issue was purely a metering thing.

Software & Accessories / Re: An Easy Magic Lantern How-To from CNET
« on: December 12, 2014, 11:09:52 AM »
I find it funny that the article fails to mention two of the most important features of magic lantern: DualISO and RAW video.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: iOptron SkyGuider
« on: December 11, 2014, 04:58:02 PM »
Up to now I have used 14mm, 21mm  and 16-35mm (and once in the past 300mm f/4). The nice thing with this mount is that I can trust it with a heavy setup since the attachment is at its center and it has no need of counterweights.

I would not trust a 500mm lens even on the new device you mentioned mainly because I would fear the excess size would make it prone to accidents...

It seems like you could alleviate any concern of that by using a ground screw anchor and a tie down strap to keep the tripod from moving.  It wouldn't be practical for landscape type photography where you're moving quite a bit, but should be fine for astrophotography where you're more likely to sit in the same spot for long periods of time.

7D II (horizontal, red cast):

That's surprising.  The DPReview samples have no sign of banding no matter how hard you push them and yours is definitely the first mention of any kind of banding I've heard about from the 7D2.  Even at +7 stops there's nothing but random noise in the DPReview samples, although they don't supply lenscap shots =).  Are there RAW files available for those samples?  Do you know how much they were pushed? 

This is the kind of scenario where I would be looking a m43 very seriously.  You could bring a 7-14, 12-40, and 40-150 along with two E-M1s and a crapload of batteries for the same pack space as you 24-70 and 70-200.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 20