Messages

241

Lenses / Re: Upgrade 70-200 2.8 is to version II and add 2x TC, or get 100-400L?

« on: June 01, 2012, 05:49:06 PM »

Is that image cropped heavily?

I just ordered the Kenko Pro x2 TC DGX to go with my 5D III and 70-200 f/2.8L II, as I gave up trying to buy a "good and affordable" 400mm AF lens.  The Kenko x2 can be bought new for around $180 on eBay from the usual Hong Kong sources, way cheaper than the Canon x2 MkIII TC.  I could have gone for the Canon x2 MKII, but I am already very happy with my Kenko x1.4 TC on my 70-200.

Is this the one you are buying?
http://www.amazon.com/Kenko-2-0X-Teleconverter-Canon-Digital/dp/B002BIBDUU

I am interested in Canon 2x EF Extender III, but 500 is just too much for me.

Yes, and $100 less on eBay.

242

Lenses / Re: 400mm f/4. Anything good and "affordable"?

« on: June 01, 2012, 05:47:16 PM »

With the 100-400 ending at 400mm at f/5.6, it doesn't make sense to have a 400mm f/5.6 prime.  Perhaps Canon should introduce a 400mm f/4 prime instead.  Will it be expensive -- absolutely, but a lot less than the +10k 500mm or 600mm primes and only a stop slower with an 1.4x.

I sure hope 100-400 MkII comes along, but honestly, waiting for these rumored Canon lenses is becoming very tiring. 

243

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss users: Do you ever wish for auto focus?

« on: June 01, 2012, 05:37:34 PM »

After going back and forth between the Canon and Zeiss i ended up getting a second hand copy of the Canon 35L. I loved the IQ and build of the Zeiss but i'm just not ready to get rid of auto focus.
No regrets with the 35L! 

You made the right choice.  I had the Canon 35L, Canon 35 f/2, and Zeiss ZE 35 f/2, and I just don't see what all the Zeiss fuss is about.  Yes, it produces a different, warmer color than Canon, but to my eyes the Canon reflected truer colors to what my eyes see, and MF is fine for static subjects that are patiently waiting for you, but precious moments WILL be lost if people/children/bride, etc are moving in hectic environment. 

Another great thing about sticking to Canon lenses is Canon DPP's Digital Lens Optimizer, which works much better than just CA correction software for sharpness and CA correction.

244

Lenses / Re: 400mm f/4. Anything good and "affordable"?

« on: June 01, 2012, 04:53:24 PM »

After doing lots of research, I've failed to get excited about the illusive good, affordable 400 f/4 lens.  It's curious why Canon has not updated the aging 300 f/4 L IS (only 2 stops) and 400 f/5.6L, and those are not exactly cheap, either.

I just ordered the Kenko 2x DGX TC, as the IQ of my Kenko 1.4x DGX is stellar, and I will make do with the 2x TC on my Canon 70-200 f/2.8 MkII until something more exciting looms ahead..

I hope it works for you, however i don't know if it will stand up to the canon 2x Mk.iii and hence comparisons with the 100-400L might fall shot with the kenko. On the plus side... it will fir almost all EF lenses where as the Canon does not.

The clincher was I could order the Kenko 2x for $180 new from eBay.  Can't argue with that, and pretty much every user report I've read says Kenko 2x is indistinguishable from Canon 2x MkII, so even if Canon MkIII is a little better, who knows..

245

Lenses / Re: Upgrade 70-200 2.8 is to version II and add 2x TC, or get 100-400L?

« on: June 01, 2012, 04:45:53 PM »

Just testing my 5Diii with 70-200mm f2.8L is ii and Kenko Pro x2 TC today:

Is that image cropped heavily?

I just ordered the Kenko Pro x2 TC DGX to go with my 5D III and 70-200 f/2.8L II, as I gave up trying to buy a "good and affordable" 400mm AF lens.  The Kenko x2 can be bought new for around $180 on eBay from the usual Hong Kong sources, way cheaper than the Canon x2 MkIII TC.  I could have gone for the Canon x2 MKII, but I am already very happy with my Kenko x1.4 TC on my 70-200. 

246

Lenses / Re: 400mm f/4. Anything good and "affordable"?

« on: June 01, 2012, 04:28:27 PM »

After doing lots of research, I've failed to get excited about the illusive good, affordable 400 f/4 lens.  It's curious why Canon has not updated the aging 300 f/4 L IS (only 2 stops) and 400 f/5.6L, and those are not exactly cheap, either.

I just ordered the Kenko 2x DGX TC, as the IQ of my Kenko 1.4x DGX is stellar, and I will make do with the 2x TC on my Canon 70-200 f/2.8 MkII until something more exciting looms ahead..

247

Lenses / Re: downward pressure on EF 24-70mm f/2.8 USM L pricing, Tamron's version tests

« on: June 01, 2012, 03:04:03 PM »

I'm thinking this could put significant downward pressure on the original version of Canon's lens.

Again, not necessarily: The distance to the mk2 is very large, and the Tamron's 24-70's af is not good as Canon's which might make a decisive difference to event photogs.

The AF comparisons I've seen puts Tamrons AF speed/accuracy very close to Canon 24-70 mkI, and certainly "good enough" for event photography.  The MTF test from Photozone is actually a little better than I was expecting, and the great center sharpness at f/2.8 from about 35mm to 50mm bodes well for that critial range where 35mm and 50mm primes usually rule. 

I think a sensible event photog could EASILY produce fabulous photos for clients with this Tamron, and with the money saved from not buying the Canon 24-70 MkII, a nice, fast prime lens could be added to the bag.  And when lights go low during receptions, the IS on Tamron could spank the Canon 24-70 II no matter how much better the MTF may look in lab. 

I hope the stiff competition being put up by Tamron for lenses and Nikon for bodies will at least give pause to those Canon Exec's who seem hell-bent ONLY on pricing their gear as high as possible as they can get away with.

248

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: My first time using the 5D Mark III for a Wedding!

« on: June 01, 2012, 01:55:36 PM »

That's nice.  What video editing software, lens, and rig (shoulder?) setup was used? 

249

EOS Bodies / Re: Odds & Ends - Mirrorless [CR1]

« on: June 01, 2012, 01:43:33 PM »

I expect a totally mediocre and underwhelming "G1X with a lens mount" ...
same unnecessary 4:3 mini-sensor plus a mediocre EVF and 3 utterly unexciting, dark but still not very compact kit-lenses along the lines of:
- 18-55/f3.5-5.6 equivalent kit-lens
- 55-250/f4.5-5.6 equivalent tele-zoom
- plus something like a boring 40/2.8 pancake macro   
BUT certainly prices will be at least 50% higher than for a corresponding Rebel and EF-S lenses.
It is so very predictable and irksome.

I'm afraid you are probably correct given the recent Canon moves.

250

Lenses / Re: 400mm f/4. Anything good and "affordable"?

« on: June 01, 2012, 04:39:46 AM »

The simplest, cheapest and most effective option is a 7D.

It will multiply any lens by 1.6 with no loss of aperture speed and better quality than any teleconverter. Cheaper than many of the options being suggested here.

Well, if I were to do that, I would buy a 7D after the rumored 7D MkII is launched and price of 7D goes down.  If 7D II retains the same tired 18MP sensor as widely believed, that is..  Actually, I already have a 550D that already shares the same darn sensor, so the need is not that pressing. 

Of course, on some nights, I still have strange thoughts of buying a D800 as my "backup."

251

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Considering an EOS 35mm (film) body

« on: May 31, 2012, 04:05:37 AM »

I just held the EOS-3 with battery grip again, and it feels darn solid to me.  I do still sometimes miss my 1v.  Hey, I just found the Elan-7N in the closet, too..


eos1v by drjlo1, on Flickr

252

Lenses / Re: 400mm f/4. Anything good and "affordable"?

« on: May 31, 2012, 03:46:46 AM »

Is the 400DO suitable?

Really?  For a $6500 400 mm lens, it seems to underperform. For example:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-400mm-f-4.0-DO-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

BTW, what are people's feelings about Canon 300mm f/4L IS vs. Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS?  I do like my 70-200L MkII, so I wish there was a reasonably priced 200-400L, but alas..

253

Lenses / Re: 400mm f/4. Anything good and "affordable"?

« on: May 30, 2012, 08:17:28 PM »

Looks like I may just go for Canon 300mm f/4 IS with 1.4x TC.  Not as much reach as I wanted, but at least it should be more portable.

254

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: 3rd-party AF assist for the 5D Mark III

« on: May 30, 2012, 08:05:43 PM »

I've also found that the Yongnuo ST-E2 doesn't work with the 5d iii and 580 flash, seems to be out of sync with the shutter.

woah really? i'll have to check mine
I havent really uses the ST-E2 since i got the odins

My Pixel Kings also go crazy when mounted on 5D MkIII.  It's indicator light flashes continuously and does not trigger the off-camera flash.  Sometimes if I dismount the flash, do a power cycle of everything in the chain, then remount the flash, it works for awhile. 

This should teach me not to mess with third party gear for Canon, which I should have learned but didn't after the last Sigma debacle..

255

Lenses / Re: 400mm f/4. Anything good and "affordable"?

« on: May 30, 2012, 07:28:00 PM »

Not AFAIK. You'll need to go to f/5.6 for a modern lens.  I believe there are some old manual lenses that would work, with adapters (probably f/4.5).

Well, the Canon 400mm f/5.6 would have been perrr..fect, if it was f/4.  This is when I start cursing Canon for no f/8 autofocus (with 1.4x TC).  Seems like there is a huge gap in 400mm f/4 lenses.