October 22, 2014, 06:01:39 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
196
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….

197
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  :-\

198
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.


199
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.

200
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.

201
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.

202
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

203
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.

204
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!

205
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

206
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

207
Landscape / Re: Milky Way
« on: June 05, 2014, 10:05:43 AM »

208
EOS Bodies / Re: Reports of EOS 7D Reaching End of Life [CR2]
« on: June 04, 2014, 11:34:24 AM »
Didn't we all think this about 18 months ago? lol

209
Lenses / Re: New 70-200mm MKII DUST!
« on: June 03, 2014, 04:47:53 AM »
It doesn't effect the IQ nor does it show up at all by shooting a longer exposure as a dust mark.

You pretty much answered yourself right there bro.  To continue to worry about it is ludicrous.

Although, I suppose, it also depends on what you're using the lens for.  Did you pay $2500 to use the lens to photograph stuff?  If so, shutup and go shoot since it doesn't affect quality.  Did you pay $2500 to look at the internal mechanisms and expect perfection?  If so, then you have a problem, and should return it.

My final words in closing: be logical about this.

I dont think there is any need for your tone tbh.

Ive had a 70-200mm L F2.8 for 5 years and its had a few owners before me, its nearly 20 years old and had nothing in it not a spec. To spend nearly £2k and its not $2500 its $3000 equivalent here in the UK and have a rather large piece of what looks like dust but like said looks like a spec of metal. If that is acceptable to you then…

I am being logical about it. Which is why I asked the forum opinion. I am a professional photographer and have never had an issue with any of my L lenses coming from the factory with any sort of large particles already present, after years of use you do expect it then you have them serviced, but not straight out of the box

The reason for asking is I think it may have had a bit of a bang in transport and don't really want to be a year or so down the line out of warranty and have issues with it. I don't think that is unreasonable. If it is serviced and they still can't sort it the likelihood is that they won't take it back with it being tampered with.

If I come to sell it and being honest in my description I say there is a large particle toward the rear of the lens, (with Zoom lenses particles are accentuated toward the rear) most people would browse over it or want it at a good deal less than if it was in better condition. To start off with a good version I don't think is unreasonable, especially with how much the lens retails.

Thank you everyone for your opinions and help :)

210
Lenses / Re: New 70-200mm MKII DUST!
« on: June 02, 2014, 01:16:38 PM »
Its hard to get a good pic of it through the lens. But here is another, this is from the rear of the lens.

TSP_1069 by TomScottPhoto, on Flickr

It is certainly big and right at the back of the lens like I said between the 1st-2nd element, right in there. It also looks like it could be a flaw in the lens almost like a chip, very reflective or could be a shard of metal?

Anyway I certainly don't think this is acceptable when the lens was £1825 the equivalent to $3060

Ive been in touch with the vendor and Il see where to go from there.

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