Messages

16

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: A Quick Color & Noise Comparison: Canon EOS-1D X vs Canon EOS 5D Mark III

« on: September 22, 2012, 11:48:21 AM »

Glad I own a 1D X.   
But then again the noise and color accuracy are fixable.
You can't fix the price difference. 
Still, I must say the settings are kind of ridiculous.
1/6400 at F2.2?
My best friend has a 5D III. I will try to do a comparison too to see how they perform with the new 24-70 II

17

Lenses / Re: 24-70 vs 24-70 II Outdoors Test! WHOOAAA!!!b

« on: September 19, 2012, 08:46:25 PM »

You would need the original RAW files to accurately judge color... Never know if the camera changed the value slightly between the shots. If you had the RAW file, then you can put both at same WB and compare. But using JPEG's is not accurate.

Most of the reviews I've seen say the lens is warmer. Warmer means more reds and yellows... Great for skin tones but bad for greens...
Easily fixable in Aperture, Lightroom or Photoshop...

18

Lenses / Re: 24-70 vs 24-70 II Outdoors Test! WHOOAAA!!!b

« on: September 19, 2012, 08:04:50 PM »

First off, thanks for putting up some actual pictures using both the old vs new 24-70 lenses.

I looked at all 3 test crops and there is visible handshake in all 3 tests in the 2nd photo in each series. On one example you cannot read the SubWay sign plus there looks like a circular smudge in the trees just an inch or two below that green billboard. If you had used a tripod and shutter release, it would have been a lot better.

However, my main interest is colour. I use the 24-70 mark 1 and I've always noticed that it requires minimal to no colour correction in Photoshop CS6. I took both of your original images the JPeG ones into PS because there is a huge colour difference between them - just look at the grey tarmac road surface on the bottom left of the image (including the car parking spaces); on the mark 1 it appears grey, but on the new lens it appears reddish (plus the trees in the forest have more of a brownish hue).

The RGB histogram in PS shows that there is much more colour saturation using the older lens - clearly by a big margin.

Secondly, I performed a simple test and used the Auto Tone, Auto Contrast, and Auto Color in PS and re-saved the jpegs (see below). Don't know if PS screwed these up or not, but all I know is that a lot of people use the Auto features to save time.

The new lens may be sharper, but I still prefer the colour from the original.

Check this out

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=787&Sample=1&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=101&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

19

Lenses / Re: 24-70 vs 24-70 II Outdoors Test! WHOOAAA!!!b

« on: September 19, 2012, 07:56:56 PM »

Landscapes are one thing, but how is the af for fast close up stuff? I actually find the old 24-70 to have very good af. Is the new one like the 70-200 that doesn't rotate but jumps to focus?

It does't miss at all... Perfect focus out of the box. When I have some time I will try to do some micro adjustments. It should make it even better! I'm really happy with the new lens. Totally worth the steep price.

20

Lenses / Re: 24-70 vs 24-70 II Outdoors Test! WHOOAAA!!!b

« on: September 19, 2012, 07:55:23 PM »

First off, thanks for putting up some actual pictures using both the old vs new 24-70 lenses.

I looked at all 3 test crops and there is visible handshake in all 3 tests in the 2nd photo in each series. On one example you cannot read the SubWay sign plus there looks like a circular smudge in the trees just an inch or two below that green billboard. If you had used a tripod and shutter release, it would have been a lot better.

However, my main interest is colour. I use the 24-70 mark 1 and I've always noticed that it requires minimal to no colour correction in Photoshop CS6. I took both of your original images the JPeG ones into PS because there is a huge colour difference between them - just look at the grey tarmac road surface on the bottom left of the image (including the car parking spaces); on the mark 1 it appears grey, but on the new lens it appears reddish (plus the trees in the forest have more of a brownish hue).

The RGB histogram in PS shows that there is much more colour saturation using the older lens - clearly by a big margin.

Secondly, I performed a simple test and used the Auto Tone, Auto Contrast, and Auto Color in PS and re-saved the jpegs (see below). Don't know if PS screwed these up or not, but all I know is that a lot of people use the Auto features to save time.

The new lens may be sharper, but I still prefer the colour from the original.

Perhaps, but you can fix the color balance in 2 seconds in Photoshop but you can't fix the lack of sharpness or the edge distortion. 

21

Lenses / Re: 24-70 vs 24-70 II Outdoors Test! WHOOAAA!!!b

« on: September 16, 2012, 04:34:32 PM »

I can't fault your work, it's very nice. But, i don't know about your numbers. 10% brighter does not = 2 stops. 10% brighter is nothing. and iso 640to iso 400 is not 2 stops either. these numbers just don't make any sense but again, your photos are very good, so who cares about math anyway?

The 10% is a sure thing. I tested it out in photoshop.
I am just guessing the stops. It really feels like an F2.0 lens.

22

Lenses / Re: Should I sell 35L f/1.4 to get 24-70II?

« on: September 16, 2012, 06:05:58 AM »

I have never shot a wedding but I assume that a fixed lens will limit your mobility.
In a studio you can control the "zoom" of a prime lens by moving back and forth.
How can you do that in a place full of people? The
35mm is either too short or too tight. Composing shots must be difficult if you can't or are not allowed to move around. A zoom lens let's you move in and out from a static
Position. I think it Makes more sense...
Forgive my ignorance on the subject. I know nothing about wedding photography. I just think a
Zoom has the advantage.
Cheers
Pat

23

Lenses / Re: 24-70 vs 24-70 II Outdoors Test! WHOOAAA!!!b

« on: September 16, 2012, 05:52:28 AM »

Landscapes are one thing, but how is the af for fast close up stuff? I actually find the old 24-70 to have very good af. Is the new one like the 70-200 that doesn't rotate but jumps to focus?

As I said, I am not a landscape photographer. I just did this comparison because people asked for it.
I used it for the first time in the studio today. It was perfect. Didn't miss one photo. Great and fast.
I was having a lot of out of focus pictures with my new 1D X and the old lens. Problems I never had with the 1D Mark IV. I thought I had a defective camera or that it wasn't good enough. Turns out it was the Old lens that couldn't keep up with the speed of the new AF system...
I will be selling the old baby right away. If anybody is interested, let me know before I throw it on eBay. 

Thanks, but in studio is hardly fast action now is it?

I find it very strange your old 24-70 was worse on the 1d X than on the 1d4 though af-wise. I have had all sorts of lenses and with better bodies they have always been better, at least with AF. The worst AF-lens of all (at least speed) the 85 L II is twice as fast on the 1d X than it was on the 5d3 for example, I can use it for moving subjects now.

And when you said in studio, where you still in One Shot mode?

BTW, checked your website, and you have some seriously good skills, cudos! Oh, and pretty models as well

I don't do fast action. Just girls. I move around a lot. I zoom in and out all the time and wait to hear the AF beep and visually see the red point Light up to shoot in One Shot.  I usually focus on the face but since the focusing points are
Too close to the center, if I'm shooting full body, I have to pick a part of the body  that Is contrasty.

24

Lenses / Re: Should I sell 35L f/1.4 to get 24-70II?

« on: September 16, 2012, 03:31:01 AM »

Yes yes yes!
I just had the last for one day, but it took me five minutes to realize it is the best lens ever. I have had a 24-70 2.8 L for the past six years. It was the only lens I had. I didn't need anything else. I just do studio and outdoors modeling photos, and this lens was always perfectly versatile for me... Until today.
I was expecting a little improvement over the old one, but I was actually blown away.
This really is the best zoom Canon is ever made. It is so sharp and so fast that It will never leave your camera.
The better news is that I found it to be about 10% brighter than the old lens. That means you won't have to pump up your ISO too high. I believe it is almost 2 stops brighter. It actually feels like an F2.0 lens.
I guess the new glass let's more light into the sensor and it is probably engineered specifically for the new full frame cameras like the 5D III and 1D X.
I know the price is a little steep, but if you can afford it, I assure you you will not be disappointed. It is worth every dollar.
Check out my two posts on the forum. There is a comparison between the old and the new lenses. You will be very impressed.
Good luck

25

Lenses / Re: 24-70 vs 24-70 II Outdoors Test! WHOOAAA!!!b

« on: September 16, 2012, 03:08:20 AM »

Landscapes are one thing, but how is the af for fast close up stuff? I actually find the old 24-70 to have very good af. Is the new one like the 70-200 that doesn't rotate but jumps to focus?

As I said, I am not a landscape photographer. I just did this comparison because people asked for it.
I used it for the first time in the studio today. It was perfect. Didn't miss one photo. Great and fast.
I was having a lot of out of focus pictures with my new 1D X and the old lens. Problems I never had with the 1D Mark IV. I thought I had a defective camera or that it wasn't good enough. Turns out it was the Old lens that couldn't keep up with the speed of the new AF system...
I will be selling the old baby right away. If anybody is interested, let me know before I throw it on eBay. 

26

Lenses / Re: 24-70 vs 24-70 II Outdoors Test! WHOOAAA!!!b

« on: September 16, 2012, 01:08:09 AM »

Great demo, it's crystal clear. Thanks for posting. As far as the horizon goes, I am right to observe that the bottom of the 24-70 I pic is sightly tilting to the right. Could this explain ?

I shot these hand held so I straightened both photos slightly. The red horizon line went from left to right almost perfectly on the new lens and dropped at the edges on the old one. The flat line falls only at the edges. Is not an angle issue. I just couldn't believe how bad the old lens is... I thought I had the best lens for the last 6 years.
Canon waited too long but the wait is over and now, a perfect match for the 1D X...
My new "perfect" setup: 1D X, 24-70 II, SpeedLite 600 EX, Lexar
Pro 1000x 16GB Compact Flash. Just doesn't get any better than this.

27

Lenses / Re: 24-70 vs 24-70 II Outdoors Test! WHOOAAA!!!b

« on: September 16, 2012, 12:20:38 AM »

Patrick, FYI, the second and third links are the same...
However I put in http://clicstudio.com/2470test3.html and it worked.

Thanx. I Just fixed it. 

28

Lenses / Re: 24-70 vs 24-70 II

« on: September 15, 2012, 08:19:53 PM »

Thank you. This comparison pretty much hits the nail on its head. It seems I shall pick up this 24-70mm Mark II at some time.

Check out my outdoors test... UNBELIEVABLE!
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=9420.0

29

Lenses / 24-70 vs 24-70 II Outdoors Test! WHOOAAA!!!b

« on: September 15, 2012, 08:18:41 PM »

Since people asked... Here are some outdoors comparisons...
First thing I must say is the new lens is exactly 10% brighter. For this comparison, I adjusted ONLY the brightness and made them both as close as I could.
At first glance, they look almost the same. There are 3 crops. Center, Left and Right.
Not only the old lens gets blurry on the edges, but also the horizon line drops significantly! I drew a red horizon line on all crops to illustrate the effect... The new lens has an almost perfect horizon line all the way thru... Amazing!
Sharpness is just awesome. The buildings on the center are probably 3 miles away and the 2 towers on the right hand side are over 6 miles away... Still there is enough detail in them and this is just a 70mm lens.
Check out the Subway billboard on the right... Unbelievable!
I am not a landscape photographer but I used the lens for the first time to shoot a model. In another forum topic I complained about how many out of focus or soft images I was getting out of my 1D X. I was disappointed and frustrated. I must say that I didn't miss any today. ALL images are super sharp and the focus is spot on! I am happy again! The old 24-70 will be on ebay tomorrow! 

Here are the links to the comparisons... Just rollover the image to switch and prepare to be amazed!
If you are an outdoors photographer, the perfect horizon line and the sharp edges should be a life changing experience 

One more Thing. Since the lens is brighter, it seems more light goes into th sensor, it is even better for low
Light situations. I would guess it's
Like 2 stops brighter. At the studio,  When i used to need ISO 640, today I used ISO 400! Same
Lighting setup! Awesome!

Hope u enjoy!

Cheers

Patrick

http://clicstudio.com/2470test.html

http://clicstudio.com/2470test2.html

http://clicstudio.com/2470test3.html

30

Lenses / 24-70 vs 24-70 II

« on: September 15, 2012, 11:57:46 AM »

Just got my new 24-70 F2.8L II today!
I ran some simple focus test for fun.
I took a photo of my studio with available light. Handheld 1/160 F2.8 ISO 800.
Single focus point on the red lamp in the center of the frame.
The out of focus "things" on the image are an Ikea lamp in front of me. I did other test shots for sharpness and bokeh.
The bokeh is just a little smoother on the new lens but almost identical... You can see the lamp on the last attachment.
First thing you notice is how much brighter the new lens is. Look at the tufted white pattern on the right.
Then at 100% you really see the difference. Notice how much sharper everything is.
At first I thought I could add some edge sharpening to try to match, and it does get better but adding sharpening also adds noise and artifacts. So a subtle sharpening is fine but it won't match the quality of the new lens.
Color seems similar although I noticed a lot less Chromatic Aberration on the new lens.
I will do more tests when I can. This is a simple, good start, I think.