July 28, 2014, 08:35:44 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 [2] 3 4 ... 15
16
Software & Accessories / Re: Gimbal head or not for Tamron 150-600
« on: June 16, 2014, 06:29:12 AM »
Hi,
    IMHO, tripod will always give you the sharpest possible IQ out of the lens. If you going to use flash with flash extender, tripod will be recommended. Handheld will give you the freedom and fastest reaction. There is no right or wrong way, it's depend on your preference.

    For your reference, I just came back on a short birding trip with the Tamron 150-600mm on 6D. Since I'm taking public transport, I decided to bring only a monopod and not to bring my gimbal head and tripod as it's quite bulky. I like the freedom (you can go places where tripod is difficult to setup) of hand holding the lens as you can "take cover" and change shooting angle easily, but sometime I miss my tripod especially when you are trying to point your AF point on a small bird jumping all over the place which is just slightly "larger" than your centre AF point on the viewfinder... even with the IS, sometime I find it difficult holding steady and long enough for the AF to lock on it especially later in the day when you are tired. I use my monopod when in such situation and it does help.

    Anyway, I prefer hand holding, so must practice more hand holding technique and may be train my arm muscle... ha ha ha  :P

    By the way, if you going the tripod way, go for a gimbal head.

   Have a nice day.

17
Lenses / Re: Need a 600mm. Don't want to pay for one
« on: June 09, 2014, 02:58:44 PM »
Hi,
    For your reference, below are some of my lightroom screenshot (at 100% view) of birds I took using my Tamron @ 600mm F6.3. All are without processing (just open using lightroom and took the screenshot):





   Have a nice day.

18
Lenses / Re: Need a 600mm. Don't want to pay for one
« on: June 05, 2014, 09:45:27 PM »
Hi,
   One thing to note is that if you use the Tamron 150-600mm in a hot day, make sure the lens is cover with lenscoat or something... I realised that if I remove the zoom barrel lenscoat (must remove if you want to zoom) and there is direct sunlight hitting the zoom barrel, it's get hot very quickly and AF accuracy and contrast will drop quite significantly... may be this is why Canon Super Telephoto are white??

   Have a nice day.

19
Lenses / Re: Need a 600mm. Don't want to pay for one
« on: June 05, 2014, 09:42:27 AM »
Hi,
I want a 600mm focal length for zoos on my 5d3 but I can't afford the big canon glass.

The options I'm considering are:

Tamron 150-600 @ £950

or

Sigma 120-300 Sport @ £2500 + a 2x TC

I can afford either of these options but not both. My question is, which will be better at 600mm? considering, IQ and AF speed.

I have the canon 70-200 2.8ii so the sigma for its 120-200 range doesn't excite me (neither does the cost or weight). but 300mm f2.8 excites me, so does 400mm f4 but I not sure about 600mm via a 2x TC.

Have anyone come across a direct comparison of these two routes to 600mm?

All opinions greatly welcomed.
thanks in advance.
Alex
    600mm for Zoo?? IMHO, 600mm is too long and minimum focusing distance is too long for Zoo unless the animals in your Zoo is kept very far away... IMHO, I think your canon 70-200 2.8ii with 1.4x TC or with 2x is good enough. Anyway, if you really want a 600mm, Tamron 150-600mm is a very good choice since it had a short minimum focusing.

   Have a nice day.

20
Hi,
Nikon announced the 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR lens.  It's an update, but not a MkII version – it receives the designation FL because it now contains two fluorite elements.  So Nikon's new lens incorporates something that Canon has been using for many, many years.  Woo hoo.

Even more interesting, check out Nikon's updated glossary.  There's now an entry for fluorite (FL) touting it's advantages, but apparently they forgot to update their entry for ED glass, clearly intended to bash Canon's use of fluorite, where they state, "In the past, correcting this problem for telephoto lenses required special optical elements that offer anomalous dispersion characteristics - specifically calcium fluoride crystals. However, fluorite easily cracks and is sensitive to temperature changes that can adversely affect focusing by altering the lens' refractive index."  Despite that easy cracking and adverse effects on focusing, they're now saying it's great for their telephoto lenses. 

Make up your minds, Nikon…or at least pay attention to your own ad-speak.  ::)

    May be they mean that "their new AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR easily cracks and is sensitive to temperature changes that can adversely affect focusing"... ha ha ha  ;D

   The funny part is that DPReview said that "Nikon’s 800mm F5.6 FL ED VR and 400mm F2.8 FL ED VR lenses earn the 'FL' in their names from the coating of fluorine applied to the lens elements."... ha ha ha  ;D

   Also, Nikon’s 800mm F5.6 FL ED VR don't have a flourine coating as the AF-S NIKKOR 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR and AF-S TELECONVERTER TC-14E III is the first to have it... just wonder does DPReview check their facts before publish their article??

   Have a nice day.

21
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M Vanishes from Canon USA Web Site
« on: May 27, 2014, 12:20:45 PM »
Hi,
   IMHO, the only advantage of mirrorless camera is the smaller size. By decreasing the price of entry level DSLR, the entry level lenses, entry level full frame DSLR, making smaller DSLR and lenses and making good high end compact camera (G16 and G1X Mk2), I think Canon had successfully "limit" the grow of mirrorless market share... only those who want a mirrorless camera or those who really need a small interchangeable camera will go for the mirrorless camera now.

   Just my $0.02.

   Have a nice day.


22
Hi,
    I had this on my 6D and will AF (not reliable), but the 1.4x TC is not reported (the 1.4x TC is reported when use with EF400 F5.6L).

   Have a nice day.

23
Hi,
In today's cameras I agree with you that live view is not conducive to action photography.  It is rather slow. I do believe that we'll see more movement in this direction as dslr's incorporate more video features.  Now my crystal ball is about as good as yours, but I could see the functionality I described earlier available with an evf. In that case you could use a joystick on camera to select the focus spot then let the camera track. That could solve your hand held request.
    I don't think 7DII will have an evf... if so, I think a lot of wildlife photographer will be disappointed as a lot of wildlife photographer use the viewfinder a lot even when not taking photo and most of them won't be happy if they need to bring a lots of batteries.

   Have a nice day.

24
Software & Accessories / Re: Gimbal Head: Wimberley Vs Jobu
« on: May 08, 2014, 11:57:11 PM »
Ihave the BWG-Pro Gimbal and it's can convert to both side mount or full gimbal mount. But I prefer the full gimbal over the side mount because you can adjust the center of gravity with a full gimbal... useful when you mount a flash or a mic on your camera which change the center of gravity.

    Anyway, I prefer when I point my lens at any angle, the lens stay there when I release my hand without the need to tighten the tension knob or lock it down.

I don't understand.  Mounting a flash or a mic on the camera, putting a flash on a bracket with a radio trigger on the camera, adding a TC behind the lens, using a different lens or camera – all of those change the center of mass for the load, and both a side mount and a 'full' (bottom mount) gimbal can compensate for that (provided your lens plate is sufficiently long, as the RRS replacement feet are).  When the load is correctly balanced on either type of gimbal, the lens stays where pointed when you release it, with no tension/locking.

The only difference with a full gimbal, where the height is adjustable, is that if you so choose, instead of fully balancing the load, you can intentionally unbalance it (center of mass below the pivot point for the pitch dimension) such that when you release the lens it returns to horizontal instead of remaining at the angle at which it was pointed.
    After reading your reply, I try again and no it doesn't work... :(
If there is no mic, the side mount will point and any angle when release without tension.
But if there is mic, the side mount will not balance when I point at any angle other than horizontal without tension... for example, if I point up and release my hand without tension, the lens will continue moving up until the camera body hit the gimbal base.

    Anyway, it'll work if I applied a bit of tension, but sometime you forgot to applied the tension in the field (especially after some actions) and release the camera...  :P

   Have a nice day.

25
Software & Accessories / Re: Gimbal Head: Wimberley Vs Jobu
« on: May 07, 2014, 02:40:02 PM »
Hi,
    I have the BWG-Pro Gimbal and it's can convert to both side mount or full gimbal mount. But I prefer the full gimbal over the side mount because you can adjust the center of gravity with a full gimbal... useful when you mount a flash or a mic on your camera which change the center of gravity.

    Anyway, I prefer when I point my lens at any angle, the lens stay there when I release my hand without the need to tighten the tension knob or lock it down.

   Have a nice day.

26
Lenses / Re: EF 400L f/5.6 vs. Tamron 150-600
« on: April 28, 2014, 09:32:46 PM »
Hi,
if the key is to get the shot, only one of the choices goes to 600mm w/o a teleconverter.  I have more "winners" by far with my Tamron 150-600 than I ever had with my 100-400L, 300 f4 L + TC, etc etc

My experience as many tests have shown is that at 500mm the Tammy outperforms the 100-400 at 400. At 600mm  I never shoot under F8 and am happy with it.  The 400 5.6 L is great too, but again, it's only 400, no IS/VC, etc

My only dislike of the Tammy is the weight, I personally must use a monopod or tripod to keep it steady. But I couldnt even get a 600mm F4 out of the case if that was my other choice.
   For a 600mm lens, the Tamron 150-600 is light and the IS work very well. I'm not a strong guy, but I can handheld the Tamron 150-600 at 600mm steady for just long enough for me to frame and take a decent shot... I was unable to do that with my EF400mm F5.6L.

  Attached is a 100% crop of a shot I recently took at 600mm F6.3 handheld. Just crop and export using lightroom default setting with no other processing done. I think the lens sharpness is not bad at F6.3 if you get the focus right... the only problem is that the DoF is very thin at 600mm F6.3... when the eye area is in focus, the back of the bird is out of focus... ???

  Have a nice day.

27
Lenses / Re: EF 400L f/5.6 vs. Tamron 150-600
« on: April 27, 2014, 09:56:46 AM »
Hi,
    I had both the EF400mm F5.6L and Tamron 150-600mm. Here is my experience on my copy of EF400mm F5.6L and Tamron 150-600mm on Canon 6D.
On sharpness at 400mm, basically my Tamron 150-600mm is as sharp as my EF400mm F5.6L... ok, at F5.6, my EF400mm F5.6L is slightly sharper, but only visible at 100% crop. But when compare with EF400mm F5.6L + Kenko 1.4x Teleplus Pro, my Tarmron 150-600mm (500mm to 600mm) is sharper even at wide open.

On AF speed, the Canon EF400mm F5.6L is faster and more consistence than the Tamron 150-600mm on my 6D as expected. Also, my Tamron 150-600mm had one issue when using AI servo AF... when continuously AF on an object, sometime it'll "jump" out of focus a bit and then re-focus back... I don't remember this happened before on my EF400mm F5.6L even with the kenko 1.4x TC on, but not sure whether is this a common issue, so if you mainly shooting action shots, you might want to consider again.

Anyway, for me, I now mainly use the Tamron 150-600mm for my birding as I seldom shoot action shots and the Tamron IS is quite good, so I don't need to bring my tripod and gimbal head all the time when out for birding, but I think I'll still keep the EF400mm F5.6L as a backup... frankly, I'm not sure how reliable the Tamron 150-600mm is in the long run.

   Have a nice day.




28
EOS-M / Re: Canon EOS M3 in Q3 of 2014?
« on: April 15, 2014, 08:54:43 PM »
Hi,
Looks like Canon is pasting feathers on a turkey hoping it will fly.  They ought to lay off the whole group that
worked on this - and then fire the management team that approved it.
    For your info, wild turkey can fly... :P

    Have a nice day.

29
EOS-M / Re: Canon EOS M3 in Q3 of 2014?
« on: April 15, 2014, 09:12:28 AM »
Hi,
    IMHO, may be a hybrid DSLR will be the answer… just installed an EVF on the prism, so when the mirror went up, the EVF will turn on. There will be a physical switch that will lock the mirror in place when in mirrorless mode.

     So, those who want a small body, go for the M and those who want a bigger form factor or OVF, go for the hybrid DSLR.

     Have a nice day.

30
Landscape / Re: Astrophotography - which camera?
« on: April 11, 2014, 01:00:20 PM »
Hi,
    I photograph it 2 years ago using my Canon 60D and Canon EF400mm F5.6L + Kenko 1.4x (560mm @ F/8). Pre-focus and meter using Jupiter. The ISS is very small in the image... I think SCT/MCT telescope are more suitable.

    Anyway, the attach image are from the best shots I got... all enlarge 2x... that's how small ISS is using 560mm lens. For those who interested to try, I use manual mode, shutter speed of 1/1000s and ISO 1000. The above settings is only for your reference as ISS brightness vary a lot.

    Good luck and have a nice weekend ahead.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 15