April 17, 2014, 05:38:14 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 - Aglet

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 55
Animal Kingdom / Re: Birds in the back yard.
« on: October 27, 2012, 04:25:56 AM »
Love your picture. I've been thinking of getting a 100-400 for my 7D. How do you like yours?..

Thanks Doug :)

I really like it, and there's nothing else out there like it.  I'd love to find something in this range that's affordable to try on my Nikon gear but so far I don't see that option.

It's not TOO heavy, the slide zoom takes a bit to get used to but once you do it's very quick for things like running animals and even birds and bugs in flight; I could use more practice. 
I was getting some decent images from it with my older bodies but it didn't really shine for faster work until I put it on a 7D. After I got used to the AF system, or at least got better with it, it's been quite amazing with that lens.  I've been getting bang-on AF using servo tracking for small subjects using spot-AF.  Not easy to keep single spot AF point on target but I've found the assist/group AF doesn't tend to work as well for my shooting with busy backgrounds.  But that's just me and the 7D..
AF performance on a 5D3 or 1Dx should be really good.  On 40D, 60D and even 350D it worked quite well too, just not up to fast tracking like the 7D (or other fast bodies.)

The lens is really sharp up to 200mm then gradually softens towards 400mm.  Not much, mind you, it's still quite decent and I'm often shooting with it at the long end.
Bokeh can be rough in transition zones with fine detail like grass or branches but acceptable otherwise.
CA isn't bad and easily corrected.
The IS could be improved for handheld static subjects but at least it helps.  I'm usually panning with it so IS is of limited value.  Surprisingly, with birds in brush or clutter I'm often manually focusing too with decent results.

It's definitely great for bird close-ups at typical backyard distances, wildlife, even some kinds of landscape shots.  I tried a few long range shots with a 40D and 1.4 extender on it but the AF missed a bit and subject  (running fox in evening light) was not in sharp focus.  Longer range work tends to require fast and pricey 600mm glass.

OTOH, some say the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II with a 1.4x or 2x extender (latest versions) works pretty well too if you already have that lens.  I haven't tried it to compare since I only have the 1.4x v2 and already had the 100-400mm.

So, it's not an ideal lens, but it covers an extremely useful range and performs pretty well optically and AF.
If you can find a used one in good shape and good price I think you might enjoy what it can do for providing a new perspective.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's new 70-200mm f/4 VR rated 5-stops
« on: October 27, 2012, 03:59:28 AM »
??? Hmmm... No weather sealing...

not likely a very robust version from what I've heard so far.
I think it's to have a flange gasket and be sealed enough to be "weather resistant"
I'd hope for more at that price tho.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D600 High ISO Examples
« on: October 27, 2012, 03:57:24 AM »
...the newly announced 70-200 f/4 will probably be my next purchase.. if it's any good.  I loved my Canon version and was sad to give it up...

I just ordered the 70-200/4 today, store tells me they expect it in by mid December, one other's advanced ordered ahead of me already.
I was hoping to handle one at a photo trade show this weekend but apparently the local Nikon rep has not (yet?) been successful in getting one in for a demo.
From what little I've read about it so far, MTF looks really good and DPreview I think stated that when they handled one the MF felt smooth and lightly damped.  I hope so! I bought the Tamron 2.8 version because I could not manually focus Nikon one properly with so much stiction in the MF ring.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon 70-200 F4
« on: October 25, 2012, 01:28:12 AM »
What are your thoughts on the newly released Nikon 70-200 F4?

I'm thinking that this lens is the highest claimed VR rating of any lens yet, so even if it's one stop less effective in real life, as many claim they are, then it's still going to be impressive VR, especially for a medium-tele lens!
I've got 4 stops from a cheap 18-55mm at times so would love to have 4 with the possibility of 5 on something this long.

  • I hope it's AF is damn fast and accurate!
  • I hope it's MF is smooth and lightly damped, not like the 2.8 VR2 version
    • I hope it's going to have very pleasing IQ with smooth bokeh at all settings.
    • I hope it's sharp as a scalpel
      • I hope it's free of CA
      • I hope it has very little distortion
        • I hope 200mm is within 10% at all focus distances
        • I hope it's better than my EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II
        - because if it is then that's one more pricey Canon lens and full frame Canon body I can sell to pay for it and more.
        I'll wait to sell that lens until I see test results from the 6D and whatever "new sensor tech" Canon's alleged to bring forth in the next series of bodies. My 70-200L is just wicked sharp and contrasty, I don't want to have to buy another one if I keep using Canon bodies and Nikon's 2.8 does not please me for handling quality but it's IQ is excellent too.[/size])

        I think I'm going to have to be patient and wait to see what this new lens performs like when it's put to the test and results are publish by someplace like Photozone, DPreview, or slrgear.

        Just saw NR posted a feature comparison
        I think the max repro-ratio should be 0.36x for the f/4, not 1.36x!
        the MTF charts for the f/4 look like it's going to perform considerably better than the 2.8, especially at the long end. Wide end's not much better.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D600 High ISO Examples
« on: October 25, 2012, 01:10:05 AM »
Thanks Imagination!

I can't believe just how "head-over-heels" I already am with this camera!  I was out practicing some sunset shots in my backyard tonight... and the camera _just works_.  I love it!

I'm not quite head over heels with my D800, but love it just the same.  Use it every chance I get. My 5d2 is being ignored, hopefully it doesn't sulk when I go to use it.
I wanted to love the D600, but it's SO not comfortable for me to hold.
I've found I can rely on my D800s AF points as well, the thing just works like a good tool.
One thing I didn't try, is the D600's low light live view good?  D800's is not, very noisy. 5d2 low light LV is awesome.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: 6D Need To Change Something..
« on: October 24, 2012, 02:46:41 PM »
Germany already has the 6D avail?

The hardware is bound to be here, but maybe they're still working on new parts of the firmware (gps, wifi) and the mobile phone controller. But the main reason for the delay will be that Canon doesn't want the 5d2 to compete with the 6d in parallel - initial 6d sales numbers might look disastrous otherwise.

by the pricing looks like they're trying hard to dump 5d2 stock ASAP so they can get the 6D to wide market release in time for holiday buying w-o causing the confusion of choice to new FF consumers.

Third Party Manufacturers / Nikon's new 70-200mm f/4 VR rated 5-stops
« on: October 24, 2012, 12:30:26 PM »
I've been looking forward to this lens and hope it performs well and handles better than the very sticky manual focus on their f/2.8 v2.
Also hope it doesn't have the focus-breathing issue. I want my 200mm to be 200mm at close focus.

If this thing can perform at least as well as Canon's f/4 IS then I have one more mainstream zoom in my Nik-kit.

Price for the tripod ring is nuts!  but so is Canon's.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Birds in the back yard.
« on: October 24, 2012, 03:23:39 AM »
Playing w 7D and 100-400mm in back yard, caught this blue beastie with a guilty look on his beak.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: 6D Need To Change Something..
« on: October 23, 2012, 02:12:42 AM »

The 6D needed to have a multi-selector. Instead it went with the awkward ergos of the 6D. Ehhh.....

This is actually a signficiant thing turning me off of the 6D.  The multi-selector from the 60D is just awful.

I like my 60D but yes, the non-tactile buttons that are hard to use, worse with gloves, and that rebel-esque selector are really annoying compared to previous x0D bodies.
6D with such an interface is a poor decision.  Yet one more difference Canon has engineered into the design to reduce its pro appeal.

D600 doesn't fit my hand very well and I don't even have a big set of meathooks. I held one and got a cramp after about 5 minutes because there was just no room for my fingers; the front grip is too small. D800 is much more comfortable.  The weight difference was also negligible so I'll keep the better-featured D800 instead of trading down to the D600.

Still very curious how 1dx and 6d will dxomark.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1Dx simple DR stress test
« on: October 21, 2012, 09:01:43 PM »
..camera off the bag and started approching more closely then few minutes later I was stopped by security telling that to use professional camera and lens without park authorities permission is not allowed (((.

THAT is certainly even more disconcerting than low ISO FPN!

I've only had someone ask me to stop taking pictures of plants at a retail greenhouse with my little point'n'shoot camera...  HAHA!  Not like this was going to be a source of commercial poster images, I was just trying to record them so I could remember what plant was what as I was planning what I wanted for my garden.

Since that was private property I complied with their request. But did my best to explain the above and make them feel silly for asking when other people were doing the same thing with their cell phone cameras.

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« on: October 21, 2012, 01:35:28 AM »
And the other take-away from that link is the rumors section mentioning the D4x at 54 MP, right where I'd expect it to be, 2.25x the D3200's sensor.

When that comes out we can start a whole new round of, uhm, sophisticated deliberation when its merits are measured by DxO and published against whatever Canon will have to compare to it.

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« on: October 21, 2012, 01:32:49 AM »
Has anyone looked at the results posted at Senscore:


Even though I am aware their dynamic range results are averaged over the entire available ISO range, I cannot see how the 5D3 can be that much better than the 5D2 and 1Ds3. Comments?

thanks for the link, never looked at them before

5d3 is significantly better than 5d2 at high ISO from what I've seen of it, possibly enough to cause this scoring because we don't really know what weighting they give to what areas of performance to come up with a vague final score like that.
Like they also considered the 5D3's excellent AF system as worth more pts.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1Dx simple DR stress test
« on: October 20, 2012, 11:07:31 PM »
40d less noise than 5d2? Yeah, okay...

If people like myself that think the 1d X is the best I have ever tried didn't balance the noise (again, nerdypun) people make, people that don't know this would think the 1d X was just a very expensive paperweight and buy a 40d thinking it was the best ever.

I am all for facts and people can care or not. But to say the rubbish useless DR of 1d x is end all is just completely wrong in my experience, and even if the fact is there. I never experience it in real life, that also is a fact.

Really not sure what you're trying to say there..
But what the OP just showed us is that the 1Dx, even if it's canon's best body to date, still has FPN at base ISO.
If your real life experience with it doesn't run into problems then you fit that category of Canon shooter for whom this information is not relevant. So if this information is not relevant to you, what are you adding to this topic?

And yes, my 40D has less obvious FPN than my 5D2 at lower ISO values.  Doesn't yours?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1Dx simple DR stress test
« on: October 20, 2012, 04:31:51 PM »
.. Here is  another example of 1Dx shot in normal daylight conditions using 70-200 2.8L IS USM II.
This  100% crop to get close-up of the subject.   Not too bad I belive for the camera and lens combination)))

Looks like the AF nailed it.

I'm curious tho, what software created the 100% crop jpg?
There appears to be a slight bit of a black halo/edge along the left side of duck's (duck's R side) white feathers where it borders with the water background.  Looks a bit like a strong unsharp mask was applied.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1Dx simple DR stress test
« on: October 20, 2012, 04:23:13 PM »
  I do not understand why  some are so emotional about just one aspect of harware performance - this hardware is just piece of metal and  silicon  -  nothing emotional inside.
  Also it seems that some people confused between technical aspects and art aspects of using photographic tools.  Some do not see beyond borders of  their own small world - illustrated by arguments like " why on the earth you need to raise shadows  - in my world I do not do that so you MUST NOT do that because I do not do".  But there is not a one small confined world - there are many of them.

Neutral, from me, and perhaps I'm also speaking on behalf of a few other open-minded people here on CR, WELCOME to CR forums. :)

Many of us here do appreciate basic technical information about the tools we use and their limitations.
But as you have quickly observed, there are also many others who seem to have an emotional response to this information and the way it is presented because it may differ from procedures they use or would never consider using, for whatever reason.

I only wish I would have known, a few years ago, this very kind of detailed information on the camera bodies I was considering.  I may not have chosen the 5D2 if I'd have known how much FP noise it had, or the 7D for the same reason.  At the time all I could find was plenty of over-the-top positive reviews about how fabulous these new cameras were.
Back then my best camera was my 40D and when I saw the output from my new 5D2 I immediately wondered what all the fanboy fuss was about, the raw files were noisier than my 40D!  I was under the impression that the new 5D2 was so vastly superior so to see the per-pixel performance was no improvement was very disappointing.

I did buy the 7D because of its AF system but was again very disappointed to see its very banded low ISO FPN problem was far worse than any camera I'd used previously or since.

I have a much more cautious and facts-oriented approach since then.

When I gathered up a bunch of black-frame raw samples from various cameras, compiled and posted them on my web site, I did so because no information like this was readily available anywhere else.
I don't know if you were reading CR forums here back when I did that but it unleashed quite a bit of discussion, much of it just like we've seen in this very thread.

I don't understand some peoples' strong aversion to facts, or how those facts are presented.  It's just information; valuable to some but if it's not of use to someone else, I don't understand the latter groups motivation to denigrate the information or the person providing it.  I guess some people feel the need to express their opinion on matters which they claim do not matter to them and some will even show some immaturity while doing so.

I hope you will continue to participate in CR and not let some of those negative behaviors that occasionally display themselves discourage you from being a part of this group.  Overall it's a pretty good bunch. :)

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 55