December 18, 2014, 07:45:00 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 - tomscott

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 44
197
I agree with anyone who says buy the 24-70mm II because it is one of if not the sharpest zoom lens available.

But only from a professional stand point, I wouldn't agree for a travel companion unless you need the extra quality for publication.

I bought the 24-105mm with my 5DMKIII which I think is brilliant and I have a stellar copy, but then bought the 24-70mm MKI because I wanted the F2.8 for weddings. I bought the MKI because I got a very late copy which was immaculate and is also a stellar copy and at the moment I don't think the double price tag for the new version is warranted although it is a brilliant lens £1600 compared to £750 easy decision. I also like the reverse zoom design, I live in Cumbria one of the wettest places in the UK and the reverse design helps keep water off the lens element 90% of the time with the lens hood being so large.

With that out of the way, I find the 24-70 stays at home unless I'm working. F2.8 isn't used very often when I'm traveling around and F4 is still great, equivalent to F2.8 on APC in terms of DOF so I don't think the OP would miss it. Also the 24-70 is lacking in range for travel photography, and it has no IS. IS is a big deal if your used to having IS on any standard lens and most standard APC lenses have it so most people will be used to it, add that to an upgrade path to a full frame camera with much more mirror slap and a heavier camera results may be disappointing. Where you are used to shooting at 1/30th-1/80th with IS you will probably find with the extra weight and mirror slap that you will end up with slightly blurred images. A learning curve with the way you shoot may be steep and annoying at first.

So in this respect I wouldn't recommend the 24-70MKII neither the 70-200mm F2.8 II. For travel purpose I would suggest the 6D with 24-105 L, 70-300mm L and a fast prime like the 35mm F2 IS or 50mm 1.4 for low light conditions.

This kit is more compact and lighter than the suggested and with weight and space a premium this is a much better all rounder than the big pro guns.

In time I would buy the 24-70MKII and 70-200mm MKII for pro shooting, you simply can't beat the combo.

Infact just buy it all  ;) GAS will set in quick

198
Lenses / Re: New 70-200mm MKII DUST!
« on: June 12, 2014, 06:12:32 AM »
Just a quick update the lens was sent back and found to have a manufactures fault so a new one is being sent out!

Relieved :)

199
Lenses / Re: This thing's gotta go!
« on: June 11, 2014, 05:19:15 AM »
I have an old 40D which is a cracking camera, probably my favourite Canon camera of all time bar the 5DIII (5DMKIII is like a full frame 40D with better AF and had been waiting for it for a long time). Its sat in the closet with my trusty 17-55mm F2.8 IS which is also fantastic. I can't bare to get rid and I use it as a back up camera for weddings etc the 40D at 100-400ISO with a 70-200mm F2.8 MKII is very useful and still creates great images.

Keeping my APC gear simply because I am waiting for a new APC to shoot wildlife, I originally replaced the 40d with a 7D and was never satisfied with that 18mp sensor miles more noise at base ISO where I shot most but didn't mind the higher noise as the 40D was so poor at 800 and above. Having 3200 look like 800 was pretty impressive but wasnt enough for me to keep it.

But saying that if the 7DMKII isn't what I want I will buy another 5DMKIII.

Also got my eye on the tammy 150-600mm to get out and shoot some wildlife.

Also have my trusty 24-105mm love it and use it casually but recently bought the 24-70mm F2.8 MKI and thats been strapped to the 5DMKIII since. So ye I have 3 standard focal length lenses….

200
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8 IS II - Difference between 2012 and 2014?
« on: June 10, 2014, 11:53:05 AM »
Sent it back now  :-\

201
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8 IS II - Difference between 2012 and 2014?
« on: June 10, 2014, 05:48:04 AM »
Ye when I received mine last week it came in the silver box, Unfortunately its been sent back because its faulty hopefully will receive a new one soon.


202
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8L IS II underwhelming
« on: June 06, 2014, 09:12:20 AM »
The pics look ok, at F2.8 and F4 it looks like it may be very very slightly out, but I can't tell if it is front or back focus because the subject you have chosen is flat. If you choose a subject that is slightly more 3 dimensional it will be more obvious. The box looks like it is not parallel with the lens the left side is closer to the camera and appears sharper which make me think its front focusing very slightly. It may need a little AFMA. But nothing to worry about really.

At F8 the results are absolutely perfect, but thats because the whole flat plane should be at that aperture.

Buy focal its fairly cheap and will help sort everything out for you.

Another test you could do is use the AF to focus then take a shot, then turn live view on and manual focus and check the difference, but easier with something with more depth.

203
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8L IS II underwhelming
« on: June 06, 2014, 07:56:52 AM »
Your certainly not wrong!

Wish I could have had access to the gear at 18 tho! At 26 now think my first L the 70-200mm I bought when I was 20 for my 40D as I started doing a few commercial projects at Uni.

I applaud you and your images show great talent and a great career ahead of you.

204
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8L IS II underwhelming
« on: June 06, 2014, 07:48:17 AM »
The link to the other image you have photographed is a controlled environment with no background and it was shot at F16 not F2.8, you don't get the same dreamy bokeh as F16 gives a lot more DOF.

The images you have posted with the Halo effect are all busy situations and you will find the 100L will produce a similar effect those images in the same situation. That images and what you originally posted are unfortunately not comparable.

Try comparing the both at the same focal length in the same situation.

By the way looking at your images on flickr, they are brilliant congrats, nice eye.

205
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8L IS II underwhelming
« on: June 06, 2014, 06:48:13 AM »
No problem

One thing I have noticed is that all the focus areas in your images are off centre, which makes me think you are using either the edge focus points on your 5DMKII and 40D or focus recompose.

I have the 40D and it and the 5DMKII have the same 9 point auto focus system, which is not the best especially the outer points, but the centre isn't bad. Or are you using the centre point to focus recompose? Using focus recompose with a fast lens is very difficult because at say F2.8 the DOF is so narrow that even the smallest movement can create miss focus. It is even worse with faster glass with 1.2 primes etc.

What I would try and do is shoot the same subject throughout the zoom range and at different apertures but use the centre point and centre the subject in the frame as a test and have a look. Back and front focus issues will be blatant, then you can start to narrow down the problem.

Also the halo effect is what is referred to as rim lighting created from lighting behind the subject. Different lighting causes differing sharpness, soft light on a dull day usually creates soft images and hard light gives more contrast therefore sharper images and you get that through front lit scenes where the sun is behind the photographers back, but the subject is facing into the light.

Try a test with a front lit subject as described above and then report your findings and we can help with any obvious issues with the lens.

Hope that helps

Tom

206
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8L IS II underwhelming
« on: June 06, 2014, 06:17:25 AM »
I agree with the above, although I just bought one and it has a manufacture defect with some sort of large particle inside I will be receiving a new copy. So I was pretty disappointed after forking out nearly £2k for it.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21145.0

But in comparison to my 70-200mm L F2.8 MKI it is sharper and the IS is amazing huge difference. I have a plethora of L zoom glass (check my sig) and this is by far the best sharpest zoom L lens I have ever used. Infact it is stated as one of the, if not the sharpest zoom lenses ever made albeit the 24-70mm MKII.

Sorry to hear you are having issues. The images looks ok to me, the halo you speak of just looks like backlit bokeh, and the in focus areas look pretty sharp to me…

I would have a go at having you camera and lens calibrated or have a go yourself with Focal?

Because your using a 5DMKII are you having focusing issues? The centre point is pretty good but the surrounding points aren't really that accurate.

207
Lenses / Re: New 70-200mm MKII DUST!
« on: June 06, 2014, 06:14:44 AM »
Updated the original post.

Here are some much better images now I have had time to evaluate the problem and to help my send back procedure.

TSP_1346_crop by TomScottPhoto, on Flickr

TSP_1346-2 by TomScottPhoto, on Flickr

As you can see I don't think I'm being over the top, there is a rather big, strange shaped object in-between the 1st and second element of the lens, its not a second hand lens it is brand new straight from the factory!

208
EOS Bodies / Re: 50d just died, trip in a week, what should I do?
« on: June 06, 2014, 04:49:03 AM »
Why not rent a body for the trip? One you are possibly looking at to help you make a decision?

I would skip the 5DMKII and the 7D the 70D and 6D are better in most of the key areas, worth the extra money and also you get a warranty with your recent case I wouldn't be without it! Especially if you are shooting weddings you really should think about a backup so you don't panic.

The 5DMKIII is a better all round camera especially with weddings the focus points make life so much easier, no focus and recompose with fast glass. But the 70D also has the ramped up 7D system which is also really good.

I use a crop and a FF combo, I have a 5DMKIII and an old 40D which I still enjoy shooting with although I would like to upgrade it at some point.

If I were you I would stick with crop for the time being, FF is great but if you want to use a 150-600mm you will nearly get 1000mm on the long end with a crop camera.

FF is so much better for weddings much better ISO performance for low light venues, but crop is great in good light, smaller, more zoom with tele lenses etc

209
Lenses / Re: What was your first L lens?
« on: June 05, 2014, 11:18:14 AM »
Mine was the EF 70-200mm F2.8 L 17 years old and still perfect.

Then 24-105mm L and 100mm L which I bought with my 5DIII then most recently Ef 24-70mm F2.8 L MKI and EF 16-35mm F2.8 L MKII bought them in march mint from a guy switching to Nikon…

Then a week ago bought the EF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS MKII

210
Landscape / Re: Milky Way
« on: June 05, 2014, 10:05:43 AM »

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 44