Topics

16

Lenses / How many times did you return (L) lenses to get a good copy?

« on: January 10, 2013, 05:37:41 PM »

I just bought a new 17-40L, and I'm happy that I didn't get it from ebay (the offers weren't good enough vs the current Canon rebate program) because the lens shows visible decentering - see attached 100% crops of bottom vs. top, my first thought was that the chart was tilted... but it wasn't me or the camera and now I'm going to get a replacement from Amazon.

I wonder how many times your lenses were exchanged (or how many copies you tested side by side) until you received a lens that was a good copy?

Looking at the crops, would you also have returned the lens, or is something like this to be expected and I'm spoiled by better lenses?

Btw, if anyone wonders: As far as I tested it the 17-40L is a good (landscape) zoom lens for the money even on crop, it's just the corners and that it doesn't reach max. sharpness wide open but needs to be stopped down a little to f5.6+

Edit: afma should be no issue @f4+ and my 60d doesn't have it anyway ... with this 17-40L copy I couldn't tell lv from phase af. The crops are of course focused with contrast af and shot on tripod with mirror lockup.

17

Lighting / When (and if) does a "gold" colored flash diffuser make sense?

« on: January 05, 2013, 07:40:59 AM »

I've seen there are "gold" flash diffusers like the ones from sto-fen that are supposed to give, surprise, warmer "sunset-like" light. Since I couldn't find any decent reviews...

... does anyone use this kind of diffuser, when does it make sense (broad range of situations or only as a very special effect)? Any sense buying this over flash gels except that gels are a hassle to mount to the flash in addition to a diffuser?

18

Lighting / How to produce circular flash reflection in eyes?

« on: January 05, 2013, 04:43:10 AM »

I've got some flashes and conventional diffusers, i.e. the sto-fen type. But I'm annoyed by the ugly flash reflection in the eyes, so currently I'm looking for a softbox (larger square "studio-like" reflection) and/or some means to produce a circular reflection.

The best I could come up with is this type, does anyone else the conventional rectangle reflection is ugly and has another solution (or something home-made)? http://www.amazon.de/D%C3%B6rr-PRO-4-Diffusor-Canon-580EX/dp/B001BN4T9S/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1357378741&sr=8-2

19

Lighting / Flash head size 600rt vs 580ex(2) ?

« on: January 05, 2013, 04:37:29 AM »

I'm looking for some flash diffuser equipment, but many shops haven't updated their descriptions since the release of the 600rt ...

... and I'm wondering if something that is made to be stuck to the head of the 580ex(2) automatically also fits the 600rt, or do they have different sizes? Thx for the information if someone happens to have both flashes!

20

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Adobe Lightroom 4.3 & ACR7.3 with 6D support available

« on: December 16, 2012, 03:27:19 AM »

Obviously it didn't take much work to add 6d support (the d600 sensor only had been available in a beta release in 4.1, then final in 4.2) - supposedly because not much has changed by Canon from the 5d3 tech... here are the links:


• http://www.metrodcphotography.com/review/canon-6d-raw-sample-images/
• http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2012/12/camera-raw-7-3-and-dng-converter-7-3-now-available.html

... but now at last everybody can really compare the 6d to the older 5d3 & 5d2 sensors with the raw samples floating around like

• http://www.metrodcphotography.com/review/canon-6d-raw-sample-images-2/
• http://www.metrodcphotography.com/review/canon-6d-raw-sample-images-2/
• http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.focus-numerique.com%2Ftest-1566%2Freflex-canon-6d-presentation-caracteristiques-1.html

21

EOS Bodies - For Stills / What's the advantage of shooting with dslr equipment?

« on: December 13, 2012, 06:10:26 AM »

This question has been bothering me for some time, esp. after procrastinating in forums while trying to decide what expensive gear is eventually "worth it" to me :-) ... please not I'm not trolling and applaud everyone who puts his/her money into expensive gear to get shots just for the sake of remembering his/her kids or such.

So here it goes: When looking at a lot of sample shots, I'm wondering "would have that gear been necessary", and the inverse question "What shots can *only* be taken with this kind of equipment" and why is an expensive dlsr necessary at all?.

My guess is that a good part of the dslr market segment is populated by 30-40+ year old males who made their first photographic good experiences with analog dslrs (me, too). They just stick to the good ol' ways while the companies know these customers are rather well off by now and will respond to "quality" and "feature" upselling, so they exploit these suckers pushing the next $3500 camera or $2000 lens to customers who feel secure when having expensive gear.

I think I'm not alone with this question, and the difficulty often results in pro photogs either recommending "just get a [enter latest model name here], you'll never regret it" or the exact opposite "no need for the latest equipment". So here is my list that a dslr with proper equipment is good at, i.e. as a pro shooter you are well advised to take it into consideration or you'll end up being asked "My grandma could have shot that with her p&s"...

• lighting: multiple off-camera flashes that are reliably triggered with fast x-sync or hss give a distinct "non-p&s" impression
  
• thin depth of field and/or strong bokeh: can only be done with expensive lenses with large glass elements, and esp. fast primes
  
• shooting reliability, i.e. more "keepers": while you can take good shots with nearly every equipment, it is seldom or never known how many shots or opportunities were lost. This concerns button layout, af precision, ...
  
• shooting moving objects: pro dslrs are faster, at least at the moment. That concerns af speed/tracking, shutter release time and fps - the latter being better on mirrorless.
  
• shooting in extreme natural conditions: pro dlsr equipment is sealed and sturdy, but for many usages throw-away equiment might make more sense and outodoor/underwater p&s will be there sooner or later.
  
• shooting in difficult lighing conditions: the best sensors will always be the most expensive and eventually end up in dlsr equipment, meaning more dynamic range (well, with Nikon :-)) and higher iso capability for faster shutter speeds or low light shooting
  
• (super)tele shots: longer focal lenght with decent quality is and will be a domain of expensive equipment
  
• sharpness for large prints: while the next iPhone will probably have more mp than the current Canon crop cameras, attaching a $1000+ lens will still make a difference.
  
• composition: a large ff viewfinder enables you to concentrate on the shot, at least as long as there are no dencent electronic viewfinders for p&s around

... added, though imho only slightly valid because a eos-m takes ef lenses, too:

• macro capability: true 1:1 (or higher), not just 'close focusing' as 'macro' has come to mean in the P&S world
• tilt-shift lenses: ability to correct for perspective distortion, and manipulate the DoF/plane of focus in a way other that a uniform linear distance from the camera

Let me know if anything else comes to your mind what's the sense of buying a dlsr system.

22

Lenses / Lensrentals' Canon 24-70 Mk II Variation test

« on: December 11, 2012, 06:09:24 AM »

Fyi: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/11/canon-24-70-mk-ii-variation

I think this is really interesting and deserves a post over here, because Roger comes to the conclusion that even though the data shows a large variation, the real world difference (well, with the current mp count on Canon) is very small - though shows when pixel peeping or comparing a "good" 24-70 against a "bad" 70-200 or vice versa.

I think most people realize there is sample variation. But this provides a nice illustration showing just how random a test report comparing just one copy of each lens can be. Don’t get me wrong; those reports are totally worthwhile.

But we have to be really careful splitting hairs with camera lenses. With 70 copies tested, I’m comfortable the average (mean) resolution of the 24-70 Mk II is slightly higher than the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II at 70mm. But that difference is much less than the sample variation

I'm wondering how much the difference between lenses will show up when used on the upcoming high mp ff sensors, or when being (dual-)used on crop with higher pixel density?

23

EOS Bodies - For Stills / What is the 6d actually good at (*positive* fact list)?

« on: December 01, 2012, 03:14:17 PM »

With most of the threads about what's wrong with the 6d and what a €2000 camera doesn't do that a €3000 does, I'd like to assemble a (short?) comprehensive list of 6d characteristics that are positive and, if these are required, might make the 6d a good purchase after all over the 7d, 5d2 or even 5d3:

We all know that Nikon has more bang for the buck, and more expensive gear is "better". I also could rave about what Canon audaciously cut from the 6d. But that's not was this thread should be about.

So here's what I think (or assembled) vs. either 7d, 5d2 or 5d3:

• highest dynamic range vs 5d2/5d3 - see http://www.sensorgen.info/CanonEOS_6D.html
• visibly (vs 5d2) / slightly (vs 5d3) higher iso capability, esp. more usable iso12800+
• less banding = higher potential for shadow recovery (esp. vs. 5d2)
• center-point af up to -3lv (and probably no af assist lag like on 5d3?)
• more precise center af (vs 7d/5d2, much worse than 5d3 & 6d cannot use newer lenses' precision (lensrentals))
  
• silent shutter @3fps (same as 5d3)
• gps built-in (but w/o camera direction, thanks, Canon)
• wifi built-in and remote control via mobile device
• long battery life (1000+ shots, but of course w/o gps or wifi)
• exchangeable focusing screen for better mf with f2.8+ (vs. 5d3)
• large ff viewfinder (vs. crop)
• short release time (vs. 5d2, equal to 5d3)
• good metering & auto-wb (vs. 5d2, equal to 5d3/7d)
• hi-res lcd (vs. 5d2)
• top wheel lock (vs. 5d2)
• fast fps (vs. 5d2, but worse than 5d3/7d)
  
• newer firmware (vs. 5d2/7d):
  
  • full support for rt flashes,
  • in-camera multishot/hdr (but only jpg & no save source, thanks, Canon)
  • in-camera ca correction
  • 7x bracketing
  • dual afma for zooms
  • servo af customization
  • flexible min/max auto-iso
  • min shutter speed setting (only up to 1/250s, thanks, Canon)
  • orientation-linked af point (if anyone dares to use the non-center point)

These can be positive or negative according to personal taste or other equipment (like lens' sharpness/vignetting):

• full frame sensor:
  
  • small depth of field
  • uses the whole lens area
  • field of view is like 35mm film
• small, but still an ok/good grip
• light (while retaining weather sealing)
• 60d-type layout for "right-hand only" control
• sd-card support, uhs-1 standard
• less expensive means less need for insurance, worst-case (damage, theft) is less catastrophic
• less innovations means proven tech = less (early adopter's) issues like compat w/ 3rd party tc (?)
• larger af point edges - better to see with f2.8+, in dark environments & af points lit (probably?)

... reduced only 5d2 vs 6d: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=12582.msg226467#msg226467

24

Lenses / Getting a used L lens in long-term production

« on: November 20, 2012, 05:33:34 AM »

I'd like to purchase a used 17-40L because I need some uwa for ff (group portraits in close quarters & some landscape). It might not see much use since I'll most likely get the Canon 24-70/2.8ii for most shots, so I'd like to save some $$$ on the uwa. And the 17-40L will do on my 60d if I don't want to walk around with €4000-€5000 gear.

Question: The 17-40L is in production for a long time, do you think a newer sample has an advantage over an older one because there were some optimizations in the production? I'm puzzled because most offers are rather expensive (80% of new) and they're all in "good condition" yadayadayada... so if you have any other hints please feel free to share :-)

25

EOS Bodies - For Stills / "AF Working Range" & "Metering Range": meaning & real life impact?

« on: November 16, 2012, 08:28:09 PM »

I am confused by two technical terms in the camera specs, can anyone please explain the meaning and real life impact to me :-o ?

1. According to the specs, the 6d has an expanded "AF Working Range": "Center AF Point: EV -3 to 18 (at 73°F/23°C, ISO 100)" - see http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_6d...

• Since afaik all metering is done though the lens, (how) does the max. open aperture of the lens influence this af working range?
• Since the -2ev of the 5d3 is supposed to be nearly moonlight, does a -3ev rating make a difference for real life shots like darker wedding receptions or shots in dim-lit clubs?

2. The "Metering Range" for the 6d (and 60d btw) is "EV 0-20 (at 73°F/23°C with EF 50mm f/1.4 lens, ISO 100)", for the 5d3 "EV 1-20 (at 73°F / 23°C with 50mm f/1.4 lens at ISO 100)" ....

• Since a lens with a smaller max. open aperture will bump up the min. ev of the metering range, how does the difference between 5d3 (1-@f1.4) and 6d (0-@f1.4) matter for real life shots say with lenses of a max. open aperture with f2.8 or f4?

 

26

EOS Bodies / First 6D review up - does [KR] read [CR] ?

« on: November 14, 2012, 12:07:09 PM »

If you enjoy a good laugh, check out what pops up when you google "canon 6d review" - it's the busy bee "Mr. JPEG" Ken R0ckwell (if that guy exists at all and isn't a front for a clever team) that knows how search engines work, so no "hands on" here though it really is a "no hands on" review:

www. kenrockwell. com/canon/6d.htm
www. kenrockwell. com/canon/6d/vs-5d-mark-iii.htm

Actually he has a point when he states that the specs of the 6d are made to upsell the 5d3 to "rich people". But he seems to read this site because he enjoys contradicting some things that are eternal common knowledge here, so esp. the 5d vs 6d is worth checking out :-> ... just that the 5d isn't $3500 anymore, but he didn't notice that.

The 6D has a simpler AF system. You may prefer either; gearheads will prefer the 5D Mark III.

The Canon 6D adds an eight-way up/down/left/right control to the big rear control dial, and thus eliminates the need for the old thumb nubbin.

Top shutter and sync speeds are the same. No one uses 1/4,000, much less 1/8,000, so the 5D Mark III having 1/8,000 makes no difference in actual shooting.

Yes, there are many minor differences in the sensors and shutters as I'll outline below, but these are designed merely to help upsell innocent rich amateurs to the 5D Mark III; they aren't different enough for a real photographer or someone without a spare $1,400 lying around to blow on camera bodies to worry about.

27

Third Party Manufacturers / 15fps with 45 shots buffer, 14mp (2.7x crop), 100% vf for $900. Is it Canon?

« on: October 26, 2012, 06:05:09 AM »

No, you guessed it: It's Nikon :-p ... http://www.nikon.com/news/2012/1024_acil_01.htm

What is interesting is that this really shows the advantages of a mirrorless design, I'll be interested to see how the af performs: "The V2 is equipped with the advanced hybrid AF system, which utilizes both focal-plane phase-detection AF (75 points) and contrast-detect AF (135 points). The speed and capabilities this system offers can be clearly seen with certain capture of the perfect moment with a wide variety of scenes, from moving subjects, even those that move unpredictably such as children and animals, to dimly lit indoor scenes and night landscapes."

28

EOS Bodies / POLL: How much $$$ will the high-mp eos cost?

« on: September 26, 2012, 06:31:27 AM »

Saving for the 3d (if that's the name)? Then predict here what the price of the high-mp body will be!

29

EOS Bodies / POLL: Would you pay for firmware feature upgrades?

« on: September 20, 2012, 03:03:02 PM »

I recon Canon keeps the natural order of camera bodies not only by saving on hardware, but by enabling or disabling firmware features. Examples: afma on the 60d, 1/180s x-sync & 1/4000 shutter on the 6d, 7x hdr 5d3/6d vs 3x hdr on 5d2, af spot metering on 5d3, deeper buffer on the 7d (enabled in 2.0), video on the 5d2 (enabled in 2.0)... the list might get quite long.

Unfortunately Magic Lantern can only intercept keys and control the camera mostly in live-view. More interesting stuff has to be done in the core firmware - and Canon is very conservative here. This is strange since Canon is usually quite creative to grab money, and the way ahead imho is software-driven like "camera apps".

Question: Would you consider paying money for firmware features that extend the out of the box feature set (like no video, 1/2000 shutter, 1/125 x-sync) if the basic camera body would be cheaper in return?

30

EOS Bodies / POLL: With what features would you consider the 6d?

« on: September 18, 2012, 05:34:33 PM »

General opinion seems to be that the 6d is too little, too late. In my opinion Canon should at least have added all the latest gimmicks of the rebels like af with all cross-points, swivel/touch-screen and build-in flash to make it a "ff rebel" - but they fell even short of that.

So what's your opinion, what's missing from the 6d that prevents you from buying it? Please tick only the features you really expect at $2000+, the 6d obviously cannot be a just a cheaper 5d3.

Btw: if I've forgotten something I can still add it to the list.