April 19, 2014, 01:19:20 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 - KKCFamilyman

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 27
196
Hello I have a budget of $200 and I was looking for two umbrellas or softboxes to do portraits but wanted them portable. Any ideas.

197
This one I shot at 70mm f 3.2 iso 3200 and for an ooc jpg its pretty sharp and very accurate color.

198
I am glad I started this thread. I actually was dreaming of taking my 60d with 17-55 to a FF setup and now I have all the new toys
5d3 24-70 II + 70-200 2.8IS and 600ex-RT. Really cannot ask for more Much better shots along the way.

199

"Ok So your telling me I spent all that extra money for nothing to gain an extra stop but not IS. Is that what your saying. That does not make me feel good about my purchase anymore."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not a camera geek, I just take my new lens attaches to my 5D III and go out take pictures. If the pictures look sharp on my 24" monitor, then I'm good. If pictures are soft, then return it and get another one.

When budget is allowed, 24-105 users will end up with 24-70 II. Until then, their 24-105 is the best.

Just like food....see and smell are not enough, you gotta taste it. ;)

JUST ENJOY YOUR NEW TOY and take picture of kid(s)


Thanks that makes me feel better so far pretty pleased. I think i will do a 70mm comparison to my 70-200 and see what I get. The colors are way better to me and it is sharp. So far I am not pro so really this kit is waaaaaay over kill for candids of my family but someday I want to do this professionally and I love the art of taking pictures and capturing that moment. The thing about primes are yeah they can shoot at lower iso's but you doc is so shallow too much is oof. I generally shoot 2.8-8 depending on what I want in focus. To shoot at 1.2 or 1.8 would be too hard.

200
It sounds like it will be a very good lens.  Some are reporting issues at the long end, so I'd check that out.
I'm waiting for the eventual price drop to decide if I'll get one.  By then,there will be a lot of feedback from users.


What issues?



Just thought I'd clear things up.
Softness, particularly at the edges and 70mm. 
Two pretty respected reviewers have seen this.  There have been some that claim to have seen the issue in poosts on this forum, but I tend to look to experienced testers with a good track record of spotting issues.
  It is undoubtedly a fantastic lens, and there may be some samples with issues, which is why I'm waiting for more reviews to come in.  I've had 5 of the old version and they were not impressive.  I have high hopes for this one.
 
Let us know what you see.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-70mm-f-2.8-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
 
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/773-canon2470f28mk2ff?start=2


Yeah that sounds the case but I feel it's much better than the 24-105 and if I go professional I could always get another copy later if that's the case. Either way after selling the old lens it cost me an additional $1,400 and I figured I could use it for the holidays so not sure how much waiting I could endure. I hope I made a wise investment. Let me know if you get one. How could I check if my copy was soft?



Just an FYI I compared 4 different copies of the 24-70mm II to the 24-105mm (which is a consistent lens). When averaging the areas where each lens was better or worse overall there was NO difference between the quality of the 24-105mm and the 24-70mm II.

Here's the write up for the comparison:

vs 24-105mm (@ f/4.0)

24mm

Center: Equal

Mid Frame Copy 1: Much Better

Mid Frame Copy 2: Much Better

Edge Copy 1: Much Better

Edge Copy 2: Much Better

28mm

Center: Equal

Mid Frame Copy 1: Much Better

Mid Frame Copy 2: Better

Edge Copy 1: Better

Edge Copy 2: Equal

35mm

Center: Equal

Mid Frame Copy 1: Equal sagittal resolution, better meridonial resolution

Mid Frame Copy 2: Much Worse

Edge Copy 1: Equal

Edge Copy 2: Much Worse

50mm

Center: Equal

Mid Frame Copy 1: Equal

Mid Frame Copy 2: Worse

Edge Copy 1: Much Worse

Edge Copy 2: Much Worse

70mm

Center: Equal

Mid Frame Copy 1: Equal sagittal resolution, better meridonial resolution

Mid Frame Copy 2: Better sagittal resolution, equal meridonial resolution

Edge Copy 1: Better sagittal resolution, equal meridonial resolution

Edge Copy 2: Much Worse

Conclusion:

(formula is +1 per copy that: shows better -1 for worse -1.5 for better +1.5 for much better (+0.5 per partial improvement)

Total score. 0 ZERO between these two copies and the 24-105mm it's equal.


Source of the info:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-70mm-f-2.8-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

Note on their testing methodology:

The camera/lens is multiple-laser-aligned to the target which is mounted on 60" , 1/2" thick sheet of glass.

Tests are conducted using externally-magnified Live View manual focusing and center-point-only autofocus (initial focus is gained using autofocus and then adjusted manually). The best of the many re-focused shots (typically at least 10 sets - often 15-20) are used for the results for EACH camera/lens/focal-length/aperture combination.

His variances are measured in a few ten thousanths of a degree.

Live view focusing laser aligned cameras and lenses on a target so flat that it needs a 40 lb sheet of glass to keep it level is a pretty serious way of testing that will show few errors, especially when doing 20 repeated trials and refocusing each time. He gets the depth of field within at the least 99% of the sharpest possible setting by my calculations (99.3% to be exact) for an f/1.4 lens. His testing method is so accurate, that the actual thickness of the chart he uses is at the least 14 times greater than the deviation he has from ideal focus for a f/1.4 lens. The tests are done to the accuracy of small fractions of a sheet of paper.

It's also worth mentioning when comparing the 24-105mm to the 24-70mm II that the 24-70mm II is better than it if you get a good copy, but worse if you get a bad copy, so it depends, and this is just speaking with a 4 copy sample which may or may not represent the norm or future improvements in manufacturing tolerances form Canon.


Ok So your telling me I spent all that extra money for nothing to gain an extra stop but not IS. Is that what your saying. That does not make me feel good about my purchase anymore.

201
It sounds like it will be a very good lens.  Some are reporting issues at the long end, so I'd check that out.
I'm waiting for the eventual price drop to decide if I'll get one.  By then,there will be a lot of feedback from users.


What issues?

Softness, particularly at the edges and 70mm. 
Two pretty respected reviewers have seen this.  There have been some that claim to have seen the issue in poosts on this forum, but I tend to look to experienced testers with a good track record of spotting issues.
  It is undoubtedly a fantastic lens, and there may be some samples with issues, which is why I'm waiting for more reviews to come in.  I've had 5 of the old version and they were not impressive.  I have high hopes for this one.
 
Let us know what you see.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-70mm-f-2.8-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
 
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/773-canon2470f28mk2ff?start=2


Yeah that sounds the case but I feel it's much better than the 24-105 and if I go professional I could always get another copy later if that's the case. Either way after selling the old lens it cost me an additional $1,400 and I figured I could use it for the holidays so not sure how much waiting I could endure. I hope I made a wise investment. Let me know if you get one. How could I check if my copy was soft?


I have 4 friends(pro-wedding), all their 24-70 II are sharp end to end. My is sharp even before AFMA.

Do you use Reiken FoCal? I ran my 5D III with 24-70 II through FoCal, results I got from the software are -5 @ 24mm and +1 @ 70mm.

If not, you can always try to compare Live View Focus Vs regular focus.

Enjoy your new lens ;)


I think I will get that. @ questions would you recommend plus or pro and is there a way to calibrate without a tripod. I do not have one?

202
It sounds like it will be a very good lens.  Some are reporting issues at the long end, so I'd check that out.
I'm waiting for the eventual price drop to decide if I'll get one.  By then,there will be a lot of feedback from users.


What issues?

Softness, particularly at the edges and 70mm. 
Two pretty respected reviewers have seen this.  There have been some that claim to have seen the issue in poosts on this forum, but I tend to look to experienced testers with a good track record of spotting issues.
  It is undoubtedly a fantastic lens, and there may be some samples with issues, which is why I'm waiting for more reviews to come in.  I've had 5 of the old version and they were not impressive.  I have high hopes for this one.
 
Let us know what you see.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-70mm-f-2.8-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
 
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/773-canon2470f28mk2ff?start=2


Yeah that sounds the case but I feel it's much better than the 24-105 and if I go professional I could always get another copy later if that's the case. Either way after selling the old lens it cost me an additional $1,400 and I figured I could use it for the holidays so not sure how much waiting I could endure. I hope I made a wise investment. Let me know if you get one. How could I check if my copy was soft?

203
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to proceed?
« on: October 12, 2012, 11:14:32 PM »
5D2 or 5D3? 5D3 certainly.
Will the 5D3 deliver better "picture quality" than the 60D? For the most part yes.Will buying all this gear help put an end to obsessive day dreaming? No.

My 2cents.... NOT most part. 5D III is better than 60D in everything, from chassis, IQ, AF, speed etc.

Yes I had the 60d with 17-55 2.8 and now I have the 5d3 with 24-70 ii and its better in everyway. Never regretted my decision. I do not shoot professionally so I could have considered the soon to be released 6d which may be an option for you but the 5d iii is just a great body like dual cards af system etc. great iso performance.

204
Software & Accessories / Re: OS Questions
« on: October 12, 2012, 11:08:43 PM »
I much prefer windows 7 64 bit over XP.  However, if some of your hardware does not have drivers for Windows 7, then that will be a issue.  Fortunately, most of the mainstream hardware does support it, but older scanners, and older cameras that use firewire do not have 64 bit drivers.
I did not have any issues with my hardware. 
If you want to use a SSD, for example, get Windows 7.

Agreed windows Xp does not support trim. Win 7 flies on ssd. You can get a 128gb Samsung 830 for $90 for your os and out a nice wd 2tb 7200rpm sata iii drive for workflow. Done.

205
It sounds like it will be a very good lens.  Some are reporting issues at the long end, so I'd check that out.
I'm waiting for the eventual price drop to decide if I'll get one.  By then,there will be a lot of feedback from users.

What issues?

206
I am on my way to completing my 2.8 zooms. Just think it is so sharp and I love the way the hood locks on like the 70-200 ii. I had to part with my 24-105 but feel it will be worth it during low light shots. Plus it seems sharp wide open. Just need to learn to live without IS. Anyone else just as happy?

207
Software & Accessories / Re: OS Questions
« on: October 12, 2012, 07:56:38 PM »
I would probably go to Windows 7. A few reasons to do so:

- Continue to get the newest security updates, most of the machines I see with viruses are running xp
- There is no direct upgrade path from XP to 7. So if you decide to upgrade in the future you have to start over
- IMO Windows 7 is going to be here for a while, I don't see Windows 8 being a better option at this time
- Overall I like Windows 7 better and have been recommending it to my customers

+1

I have been using windows 8 since I have the ram version and it does not natively play well with imported images unless you use 3rd party apps. Windows 8 will however offer better touch integration for editing down the road. Just make sure your system can handle windows 8 and your great to run 7 for now then do an in place upgrade later to 8. Just my 2 cents. You can pm me with questions.

208
Lenses / Re: What lenses do you own?
« on: October 11, 2012, 12:07:25 AM »
Speaking of lenses considering selling my 24-105l to help finance a 24-70 ii I can get for $2200 new. I do want the extra stop but just curious if anyone else agrees if the extra coin is worth it.

209
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Going to my first wedding the the new 5d3
« on: October 01, 2012, 08:49:04 PM »
here is a good one

210
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Going to my first wedding the the new 5d3
« on: October 01, 2012, 08:47:19 PM »
I even tried HP and still some were ok and some were bad but I was fighting the paid photographer for shots. Surprisingly she shot all night with some Uwa that looked like a fish eye by tamron on a Nikon d7000 she just shot without looking like it was a weapon. Am I trying too hard is that not what composition requires you to actually look thru the viewfinder?

It's probably just a misunderstanding of your words but I am assuming you just mean that the paid photog was getting in your shots and not the other way around right?  You weren't actually getting in the paid photographer's way?  Because if you were - you were screwing with someones living for no good reason. If you mess up your pride is hurt and you write on an internet forum.  If they mess up it costs them money / reputation / future income.  You don't have to be impressed by them or even their photography.  It's just courtesy.

I understand. I feel attacked here. I am just trying to get better at photography as it is my passion and hopefully want to do it professionally at some point. I did respect her and stayed out of her way as much as possible. It just felt like everytime I wanted to just get those few candids she was there or I was in her way. She said no flashing when i'm flashing so I had to do it without a flash. I was there helping watch my two kids and the ceremony so pics were hard to concentrate on. I just took a few here and there. Unfortunately the only ones that turned out good where the bride and groom. The wife is now mad and said all the one's I was meant to take of the kids were bad. I was respecting the professional that is why I did not get the shots I wanted. Very frustrating to hear it on this forum and from the wife. Maybe this is not my calling.

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 27