September 19, 2014, 08:00:03 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 - weixing

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 18
106
EOS Bodies / Re: Hybrid Viewfinder Coming To Canon DSLRs? [CR1]
« on: January 16, 2014, 02:29:12 AM »

It's a Bower. I think it's the same generic brand as Rokinon/Samyang.

It may not be the Bower TC that causes the IQ loss. I mean, it will cause some, but the 100-400 sucks even with the EF 1.4x III (which it doesn't even function properly with), and while it functions properly with the much-loved Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 GDX 1.4x TC, the IQ still sucks (a little bit more than the Canon 1.4x, but the differences aren't huge.) I think it's just that the old 100-400mm lens design was built in the film era, at the early dawn of the digital era, and the bar for quality wasn't as high back then. It is most definitely a softish camera at f/5.6 and f/6.3, and only really starts to sharpen up by f/7.1 and f/8. With a TC, you would be at f/11, which imposes a significant hit on either shutter speed (which increases softness from camera shake) or ISO (which packs on the noise, especially on a 7D).

It is possible that your $80 Bower TC is just fine, and that it just doesn't pair well with 100-400 (because, well, NO TC pairs well with that lens. :D )
There's probably something to do with the age of the 100-400 and its dislike of TCs, but I've tried the Bower TC on my old 28-135, and the TC definitely degraded the sharpness there too.  Maybe I got a bad copy.  I imagine the Kenko brand is a tad better than Bower.  I hear the Bower/Rokinon/Samyang conglomerate makes fairly good lenses, so maybe they just don't make good teleconverters.  It's probably very difficult to optimize a teleconverter for a bunch of very different lenses.

The Kenko is decent, but it is definitely not as good as the Canon TCs. It allows just barely visible improvements when attached vs. when not attached. Subjects are definitely larger in the frame, but you don't get the same kind of increase in overall detail as with a Canon TC.

Something else I've noticed with the Kenko TC...boke circles look TERRIBLE. They have this funky warped star effect which just looks rather bad, so I don't really use it much anymore. It's great though, for people who want f/8 AF on camera bodies, like the 7D, that don't normally support it (so the boke issue just doesn't matter in those cases). It does allow f/8 AF, and in good light, even the 100-400 will focus automatically, albeit slowly.

If you have a good lens, and a body that supports AF at the smaller apertures, get a Canon TC. No question they offer better quality. If you have a body that does not support f/8 AF and you need it (probably best with the 400/5.6 L prime), the Kenko is the best bet. (Actually, the Kenko MC4 seems to produce better IQ overall than the Kenko Pro 300 DGX, so I actually recommend getting that one...I simply couldn't find one for sale when I bought mine.)
Hi,
    I use the Kenko Pro 300 DGX 1.4x (blue dot version) on my 400mm F5.6L and 6D all the time and the bokeh look normal to me... focusing speed is only slightly slower. Anyway, bokeh is cause by the aperture blades, right? So the quality of the bokeh should be determine by the lens design.

   Have a nice day.

107
Lenses / Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« on: January 12, 2014, 09:40:36 PM »
I do have 1 question, does anyone have a Moon shot with the 600mm by it's self and a Moon shot with the 600 and 2X? I can use this in a way to gauge my reach. I would love to do some Moon shots and there is a full moon comming up on the 16th of Jan. I will be using my 70-200 with a 2X this time around to give me an idea on how much more reach I want to achive.
Hi,
    Hmm... Full Moon at high magnification don't look nice... the surface contrast is very low during Full Moon, so the image will look flat.

   Have a nice day.

108
But they have no right to sell that many cameras until they increase DR. This is just madness, did no-one tell the rest of the world that Canon is using horrible old tech?

Ahem.

It's cool to see mass automation actually being implemented, hopefully more industries move in this direction.
Hi,
    May be the rest of the world don't actually see the different?? May be the improvement is not as big as we thought?? May be there are other features in Canon camera that are more important and better than other brand?? May be they just don't believe those who doing the testing... just like NASA said that they send human to Moon with pictures and videos, but there are still a lot of people don't think so...

   Have a nice day.

109
Hi,
   Good for all as long as the Japanese government don't do anything stupid again to provoke one of the world largest market...

   Have a nice day.

110
Hi,
   IMHO, the major obstacle for mirrorless camera is AF speed in all lighting condition especially AF on moving objects.

   Dual Pixel AF is one major step forward and once they are able to achieve reliable AF speed in all lighting condition, I think more mirrorless camera will be out in the market. Other minor obstacles such as battery life, heat, EVF lag & etc will be solve with faster and lower power electronics component.

   I think may be in the next 10 years (remember all camcorder are already mirrorless camera), mirrorless camera will be more common, but still a long way to become "solid state camera" since I'm not sure how to make a lens that have no moving parts.  :P

   Have a nice day.

111
    Err... "solid state camera"?? Already exist and it's meet 95% of your requirement... you have it, I have it and a lot of people have it, it's call "Camera Phone".... it's better than what you describe... it's can browse internet, send/received email, read documents and communicate wirelessly, but I think only the cheapest "Camera Phone" is the only true "solid state camera" with no moving parts... the higher end model got zoom (require moving parts) and IS (require moving parts).

Have a nice day.

hehe. you are right. And I was not specific enough. :-)

So, could you please point me to a Camera Phone with 36x24mm imaging sensor and associated image quality  plus a mount to attach various lenses with focal lengths ranging from 8mm to 800mm?   ;)

Thanks, and have a nice day too.
Hi,
    The most difficult part is to design a lens with no moving parts to go with your no moving parts camera.

    Wish you luck in finding one in the near future.

    Happy New Year to all.

112
Hi,
It seems that there are people with hatred of the old and good mirror. :P If relying on my opinion, there may be interesting mirrorless cameras for specific uses, such as photo studio and landscape. But I honestly do not see a future where mirrorless will do better, what 1DX does today. ::) Ironically, Canon has the most revolutionary technology to mirrorless (dual pixel AF) and not yet built any mirrorless camera with this asset.  ???

I have no hatred against the "good old" mirror. It has served me as well as it has served most of us here ... for many years up to now. When the world was still mechanical and analogue, mirror plus prism were the best possible way to let photographers see the world exactly as the their cameras were seeing it. No more "parallax problems" as with any rangefinder or two-eyed camera ... it works with any lens of any focal length from ultra-wide-angle to super-tele. The moving mirror also allowed cameras to measure ambient light levels "Through the lens" (TTL) and adding "auto-exposure" later on.

The advantage over rangefinders was so large, that over time (1960s & 1970s) the overwhelming majority of photographers anywhere on earth was willing to accept the increase in size of the cameras to provide the space for mirrorbox and prism. In the long history of pohotography and cameras, it was the first time ever, that larger boxes succeeded smaller ones. Up to then, it had alsways been the other way round: smaller, lighter, faster gear that could be used in many more places and in many more situations than the larger gear before. Maybe some compromise in image quality [smaller format imaging surface], but always huge advantages in the ability to actually GET shots: speed, handling, less bulk, less weight. That's why Oscar Barnacks invention and the small & light rangefinders were so successful. All of a sudden photographers could easily leave their studios and roam the streets, capture images "in situ" at all sorts of events from weddings to inaugurations to olympic games and any sort of sports competition.

Size does matter! :)

Thanks to digital imaging we now have the possibility to take things back on track: making phtographic devices smaller again, ending the "SLR detour". Combining everything that has made SLRs so successful [TTL, "seeing the framing as it will be captured"] with the superior portability and flexibility of small rangefinder cameras along with very compact lenses for the focal range used to capture probably more than 90% of all stills pictures [24mm to 100mm]. And "seeing the image as it will be recorded" ... in real time. [EVF with no discernible lag or blackout between shots].

In addition we can finally jettison all mechanical, moving parts inside a camera, allowing for much faster, more responsive, absolutely vibration-free and totally silent cameras. They stay perfectly calibrated and deliver crisp images in all sorts of environments and ambient temperatures and can be much better protected against dust and liquids (all it takes is a hi-grade, optically neutral protective piece of glass directly behind the lens mount) and against shocks / G-forces (any cheap USB-stick survives a drop from 5 feet onto concrete floor).

Basically we are talking about exactly the same advantages solid state "disks" (SSD) have over hard drive disks (HDD). And why and how quickly much smaller "solid state" memory has been replacing larger storage media that involves mechanics and moving parts. USB-sticks, flash cards vs. CDs, DVDs ... same thing. 

Size matters. Speed matters. Convenience matters. And ... price matters. :-)

Luckily, "Solid State Cameras" are much cheaper to build (even with today's tech) since they can be assembled fully automated by fairly simple robots and/or by a much smaller, fairly unskilled and cheaper workforce than DSLRs. Far less hassle than aligning tiny mechanical components. Far easier to control quality. No lubrication oil splattering around inside an opto-mechanical precision device. No mis-alignment of mirror or sub-mirror assembly possible. No mis-alignment of AF-sensor and sensor focal plane possible. No mis-alignment of matte-screen and/or viewfinder prism possible. Image will always be captured by sensor "as seen on screen" [EVF and large screen on back].

Full, unfettered "video capability", no obstacles in the lightpath. Not that I personally would care for video. But camera makers seem to care about it all day long. ;-)

Yes, there are still a few challenges to be met and problems to be solved. But really nothing too difficult. AF-speed ... solely dependent on processing power and smart algorithms ... the latter can be implemented via firmware upgrade. Battery charge ... with clever design 500+ shots would be possible today in a still very compact body size with ergonomic grip and more battery charge, as better battery tech gets available. Still better EVFs ... no problem, they are coming fast and almost for free as a byproduct of ever improving smartphone technology. 

So all that's needed is Canon (and Nikon) moving ahead rather than holding back. I do not want to buy another old-tech, soon obsolete mechanical beast. I want my solid state camera, and I want it soon. :-)
    Err... "solid state camera"?? Already exist and it's meet 95% of your requirement... you have it, I have it and a lot of people have it, it's call "Camera Phone".... it's better than what you describe... it's can browse internet, send/received email, read documents and communicate wirelessly, but I think only the cheapest "Camera Phone" is the only true "solid state camera" with no moving parts... the higher end model got zoom (require moving parts) and IS (require moving parts).

   Have a nice day.


   

113
Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« on: January 04, 2014, 09:58:13 AM »
Hi,
    It's a long time since I last do some Astrophotography due to the unpredictable weather...  :(

I found, aside from tracking, the biggest improvements were made by adding an astronomical filter (I currently use a UHC filter that clips into the camera body - Astronomik do a range, APS-C only), and using wider aperture lenses. Although shooting wide open adds some optical problems, the extra light gathering at f/1.2 versus f/2.8 is stunning for the night sky.
    Any problem when you use those fast lens with the Astronomik filters?? I thought they are design for f3.8 to f15...

    By the way, now they have clip on filters for Canon 5D and 6D full frame camera, but I think you had to lock the mirror in up position to install the filters, so might not be that useful if you need the viewfinder to aim.

    Have a nice day.

114
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: The unbreakable is broken.
« on: December 30, 2013, 09:20:58 PM »
Hi,
    I remember when I got my pelican case a few years back, I saw this in the "LEGENDARY PELICAN UNCONDITIONAL LIFETIME GUARANTEE OF EXCELLENCE" disclaimer: "The above guarantee does not cover sharkbite, bear attack or children under 5."... ha ha ha  :P

   Have a nice day and Happy New Year eve.



115
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D610 yes D600 minor upgrade!
« on: December 29, 2013, 09:23:08 AM »
Hi,
Nikon really dropped the ball with the D800 and D600. Canon have really picked up their game with the 1Dx, 5DIII and 6D. The new 610 specs look very much like a feature plugged responce to the 5DIII and 6D.

If it were a response to the 6D, it would have GPS and Wi-Fi.  Unless by that, you mean it's a response to the 6D not flinging oil all over the sensor.  :D
   It's not a response to 6D... we all know it's a response to D600...  :P

   Have a nice day.

116
Hi,
    Found a review in Japan:
http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?from=&to=en&a=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.trinitylumberton.org%2Fcategory29%2F

 The reviewer do a compare using a 7D and 6D with the following lens:
1) Tamron SP 150-600 mm Di VC USD F5-6.3
2) EF300mm F2.8L IS + Extenderx2.0 Ⅲ
3) EF500mm F4L IS Ⅱ + Extenderx1.4 Ⅲ
4) EF800mm F5.6L IS

   Look very good to me...

   Merry Christmas!

117
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 150-500mm f/5-6.3 VC on Thursday
« on: December 13, 2013, 10:30:27 PM »
Hi,
    This new Tamron MTF @600mm "look" better than the Canon 400mm F5.6L at wide open... "IF" it really better or at least same, then I'll be getting this lens to replace my Canon 400mm F5.6L.   

   Have a nice day.

118
Hi,
    Try out the Sony 7R... quite like the build and the design, but don't like to the EVF (especially in low light) and also the shutter release... the first time I press the shutter, I thought something had fallen off the camera...  :P I still prefer the feel of my 6D silent shutter.

    Have a nice day.

119
Software & Accessories / Re: Photoshop CC & Lightroom 5 for $9.99/mth
« on: November 23, 2013, 01:21:04 PM »
Hi,
    The price is good, but I'll still stay away from it.

    The reason is that I mainly use Lightroom 4 to catalog my photos. If I sign up the offer and upgrade to Lightroom 5 and if they raise the price later to amount that I can't afford, then I'll have a big problem as I don't think Lightroom 4 can read Lightroom 5 catalog. So even if I reinstall Lightroom 4, I might have to redo all my tagging which is a lot of work.

  Have a nice day.


 

120
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Teaser Appears in Korea
« on: November 10, 2013, 11:37:23 PM »
Hi,
    An EF mount Mirrorless Camera??

    Have a nice day.
A mirrorless like SL1, compatible with EF lenses is not a bad idea. Just use the 70D sensor and will be a serious competitor for micro 4/3.

That's pointless because the focal plane won't move forward with EF lenses, resulting in a 'fat' body that has room for a mirror but no optical VF or fast AF. Hmmm....
Hi,
    AF might not be as fast as traditional PDAF, but potential is there.

    With dual pixel sensor technology, may be Canon can come out with user definable AF points... it'll be very nice to be able to define the number of AF points, where your AF points and the size of your AF points.

   Have a nice day.

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 18