February 26, 2015, 07:53:27 PM

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 - Ew

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11
Third Party Manufacturers / D7000 replacement in April...
« on: February 04, 2013, 01:57:18 PM »
Nikon rumors puts the d7000 replacement for April...
I'm betting that canon will play catchup as we've been seeing of late, and they will be forced to push out whatever pre-prod version of the 7d replacement by May.

What I'm really hoping for though is that Canon doesn't bite, and starts to lead with their own timeline...

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS Resolution Tests
« on: February 03, 2013, 03:23:51 PM »
The more I think about it, the more the 24-70 f4 seems like a replacement for someone moving from a crop+17-40 to FF ... with a bit more range.... but the price kills the deal.

PowerShot Cameras / Re: The love for AA size batteries
« on: January 29, 2013, 09:23:39 PM »
+1 on AA for battery grip as backup power.

I used this little adapter to save myself a few times.

Yes it was more cumbersome but worked great. Also helped a great deal when filming all day (casting tests) - 4× batts for 5D2 & 7D - the recharge was not keeping up with the usage by the 2nd half of the day. Swapped to the AA for thw grip on the 7D - and we were able tto finish off th3 day without issues.

Power went out during my son's birthday tonight and so I had to crank the ISO to 5000 and shoot with ambient light.  This shot is straight out of camera, ISO 5000, 1/50th second shutter speed at 70mm (Tamron 24-70mm VC):

(Even at 100% the grain looks like about ISO 800 a generation ago)

Nice pic. Im still trying to save for 6d. Your 24-70 seems a very nice lens.

6D is a great camera.  It is popular with some to bash it without trying it, but other than a couple minor quirks I find it to be a great camera - it is my favorite that I have used so far.  By all accounts it is capable of as good of image quality as just about any Canon ever.

I have been really happy with the Tamron.  I have no problem recommending it.  I would recommend buying it from a reputable retailer that will let you exchange copies if necessary.  There seems to be some sample variation, particularly with early copies.  I felt my first copy was not entirely on spec, so I exchanged it for a second that I have exceptionally pleased with.

Has anyone kept track of the serial number (ranges) of the returned / NG Tamron 24-70 VC ??
I'm wondering if we can get some sort of guideline of the range yo avoid.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D + 24-105 vs T4i + 24-70 II
« on: January 14, 2013, 05:57:46 PM »
Consider the 6D with a Tamron 28-75 2.8

Bought it originally for my 7D when I could not justify the cost of the 24-70, but enjoyed it a great deal. Fell in love with it again when I added the 5D2 to the mix. Sold it only because I had to provide a good general lens when I sold the 7D.

Its a great lens for 1/2 the price of a 24-105. Nice center, but you need to work with the vignette in post upto 4.0 if you're not into those types of images.

Tried the 24-105 a few times, and while a nice lens that gets results, it never really inspired me. I always felt that its a bit laking in character - almost brilliantly sterile. Great for a 1 lens setup.

As stated above, the 6D will give you much more joy than a rebel series body. No sence in spending $£€¥ on a compromise now if you're planning on going FF - it seems that your decision has been made. While I still really like my 600D, the 5D3 gets a 30:1 usage ratio based on meta data stats.

Lenses / Re: Prime Lens for 6D
« on: January 10, 2013, 01:02:21 PM »
I've both the 40 and the 50 1.4.

I find that for me, they are different animals.

I'm not sure if its the size or the optics, but with the 50 1.4 I tend to be very hands on, opening wide, adding NDs to stay open in full light, turning the manual focus, lots of futzing, lots of joy.

 With the 40 its more of a photo journalistic.  I'll set it and go - 5d3 in M, ss=100, ap=3.2, auto iso 100~12800 and forget about it. Feeling free to hand the camera to almost anyone to take a shot once I've set the AF to a simpler mode. The 40 fly by wire mf is kida sloppy, so I'm never there.

I enjoy both, and as previously stated in this forum (multiple times) - you can't go wrong with the 40's price point.

Would this lens work with a canon 1.4 extender??

Lenses / Re: which one
« on: January 08, 2013, 04:38:24 PM »
Don't mean to hijack this thread...

I love the 17-40 on 5d3, and strongly recommebd it. I've tried the 16-35, but the benefit was negligible for me.

I have been searchin for a 15mm 2.8 fish for over 6 months though, and have started to think about the 8-15  though.
In the mean time cropping away at the Samyang 8mm T3.8 due to its massive vignette on ff.

Excellent notes everyone.

Lets not forget - we also need to calibrate our monitors and at times compensate for the final presentation. Be it a gallery, or a cinema (especially if were goibg to a film recorder and need to pass through lin-log/xyz conversions applying various luts depending on neg/pos stock.) Much like getting the right icc matching the printer and paper.

Lenses / Re: AFMA w/ 1.4 extenders
« on: January 06, 2013, 09:32:18 PM »
Thank you!

Lenses / AFMA w/ 1.4 extenders
« on: January 06, 2013, 07:39:27 PM »
Haven't gone through the run myself, but has anyone gone through AFMA with and without an Extender? Do both results hold in the camera?

Lenses / Re: 135mm + 1.4 extender _VS_ 70-200mm f/2.8 IS mkI
« on: January 06, 2013, 06:45:49 AM »
I have both 135 f2 and 200 2.8. The 135 does not really like TC (i tried it with the 2x) . It is OK sometimes but IQ decreases a lot. 200 2.8 works better with TC.
200 2.8 is awesome, I think i like it more then the 135. And its bokeh is fantastic.
I would go for the 200 2.8

I've tried the 135L w/ the x1.4v2 - and I didn't seem to notice a big hit on autofocus, definetly need to bump up shutter speed though.  Just a few test shots here and there, but planning on seeing how this works out during the week.  Would be interested in seeing a direct comparison with the 200 2.8L.

Canon General / Re: Photography magazines
« on: January 06, 2013, 05:18:06 AM »
Have a look at David duChemin's new quarterly:


Lenses / Re: Canon 135L f/2
« on: December 30, 2012, 11:42:39 AM »
Any noise on during focusing on your 135 compared to the 70-200?

My 135 is considerably louder than the 70-200 4L IS.  Are your findings similar?

I've been shooting basketball this winter with the 135 f/2L at f/2, f/2.2, and f/2.5, depending on lighting.  I absolute love this lens.  I use it with the 70-200 f/2.8L II IS.  If lighting gets bad, I can depend on the 135L for an extra stop of light, and it's still razor sharp at f/2.

Lenses / Re: Canon 135L f/2
« on: December 30, 2012, 09:04:04 AM »
I finally picked up my 135L and joined the club today.  Feel as though I've been putting it off forever.

Did the normal run throughs in-store - but once back home, I noticed that the autofocus "sound" while the lens shuttles min-inf and back is quite loud - considerably more so than I've experienced with any of my other lenses. 

Not the grinding kind, more like pieces of plastic slipping against each other.

I know there are some big chunks of glass to move - but is this normal?

Thank you in advance.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11