Messages

61

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: 5Dmk3 doesnt play with kenko teleconverters

« on: December 03, 2012, 07:35:26 PM »

To get the Kenko 1.4x to cooperate with your 5DmkIII, you must first disable AFMA and then *take one picture*. After that you can swap on your TC and everything should work normally – apart from having AFMA. You can also re-enable AFMA immediately as long as your TC+lens combo doesn't actually use it (i.e. has +0 setting).

I tested this with 100L and 200L/2.8 using the "blue dot" TC.

I just tested this with 5D III, 100L, and Kenko 1.4x "blue dot," and nope, it still doesn't work.  After the "workaround," when I press shutter, the camera STILL freezes up, with taking the battery out the only way to revive it.

62

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions

« on: November 21, 2012, 05:18:43 PM »

I always welcome any good third party lenses.  That really is the only way to force Canon from pricing their lenses so stratospherically in the long run. 

BTW. For the gallery.  For the several Sigma lenses I've used, I have noticed a little bit of color balance difference from Canon L glass.  Anyone else notice this?

63

Lenses / Re: Hold out for EF 35/2 IS or jump in with classic 35 1.4L

« on: November 20, 2012, 03:53:23 PM »

Shoot, Rokinon 35mm f/1.4 at Groupon for $399.  35mm isn't so bad to manual focus..

http://www.groupon.com/deals/gg-rokinon-wide-angle-lenses?utm_campaign=UserReferral_rp&utm_medium=raf-121015-10r1act-lk&utm_source=uu5948210

64

Lenses / Re: My unscientific 50mm macro shootout: Canon vs Zeiss

« on: November 18, 2012, 09:24:10 PM »

Well, when Canon releases the next 50mm, I sure hope it can match the sheer sharpness of the f/2.5 compact macro, while improving on its 6-blade bokeh, with USM.  Add wider aperture, hopefully at least to f/1.8 and retain 1:2 macro ability, and there's a lens I would definitely buy!

65

Canon General / Re: Travel to Thailand/Laos should I bring my 5d mkiii?

« on: November 17, 2012, 06:43:36 PM »

Thailand is a great place and worthy of bringing your top gear.  Last time I went to a humid place, I noticed quite a bit of condensation on the lens as the Hotel-cooled camera/lens was taken outside to humid air.  I would recommend bringing an air-tight plastic bag of some kind to keep your camera/lens in when you walk out of air-conditioned hotels.  If you take them out once temperature equalizes between camera and air, you can avoid condensation.  If you have to shoot something right away, make sure to bring lens cloth, as you will likely need to keep wiping away condensation from your lens until camera comes to outside temperature.

66

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Cruise to the Cancun. What lenses should I take?

« on: November 16, 2012, 02:55:18 PM »

drjlo, you got that party shot with a point-and-shoot?  I'm impressed.

Just an old Powershot SD790.  Next time I go to Cancun, hopefully I will have something smaller with a bit larger sensor.


cancun1 by drjlo2, on Flickr

67

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Carl Zeiss ZE 35 f/2

« on: November 14, 2012, 09:21:24 PM »

DXO rates it a lot higher than the Canon 35mm L.  Even though the Canon has higher resolution, lower distortion, and about the same viginetting.  The 35mml does have more CA, but that is because its f/1.4.
Somehow, DXO seems to give CA a huge weight, unless you are looking at Nikon lenses with super high CA's and then it doesn't seem to count at all.
 
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Compare-Camera-Lenses/Compare-lenses/(lens1)/342/(lens2)/797/(brand1)/Zeiss/(camera1)/483/(brand2)/Canon/(camera2)/483

That is an odd conclusion by DXO even if you go by their own numbers.  When I had Canon 35L, Canon 35 f/2, and Zeiss ZE 35 f/2, I personally thought the 35L gave the best IQ, not even considering its autofocus capability. 

68

Lenses / Re: 135mm L

« on: November 14, 2012, 05:35:48 PM »

I have both 135L and 70-200 f/2.8 II, and the latter is plenty of lens for most situations, superior even, when longer shutter speed is needed due to the IS.  70-200 certainly is not lacking in sharpness, either.

What 135L has is bokeh, magical bokeh, with great center sharpness wide open at f/2.  Below was shot with 5DIII with 135L at f/2.  The next photo is a crop in the middle to show the sharpness.



World Melting by drjlo1, on Flickr



100% Crop! by drjlo1, on Flickr

69

Lenses / Re: 5D3 and TC's

« on: November 13, 2012, 06:29:03 PM »

I found this TC comparison article very accurate and helpful.

http://www.deepgreenphotography.com/2011/01/the-new-canon-teleconverters-image-quality-comparison/

70

Lenses / Re: 50mm

« on: November 09, 2012, 12:07:47 AM »

I would recommend reading this first..

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01/the-great-50mm-shootout

71

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Cruise to the Cancun. What lenses should I take?

« on: November 09, 2012, 12:00:51 AM »

I would try to have as much fun as possible!  When I was in Cancun, all I wanted to carry was a little point-and-shoot, and I highly recommend:


IMG_6352ps by drjlo2, on Flickr


IMG_6329 by drjlo2, on Flickr

72

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Best flash for 5Dmk3?

« on: November 07, 2012, 07:49:51 PM »

5D III has some issues with AF-Assist Beam under low light - Speedlite 600. You might want to double check.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=10706.0

+1

Based upon this I change my earlier vote for the Canon 600EX and vote for the Yongnuo YN565-EX instead. It can provide focus assist in total darkness (went into a bedroom closed all doors and curtains at night and could take pics of anything in any corner of the room with almost instant AF on my 7D + 24-70).

The AF assist beam is absolutely crazy; will effectively light up a dark room. Just took this with my iPhone of the weird beam it throws out Kinda looks like Lips with heavy Pink Lipstick

That's the same AF assist beam thats on the Yongnuo YN568EX as well, and my 5DIII focuses very fast in the dark with that.  Canon 580EX II comparatively puts out AF assist beam that is much less obvious.

73

Lenses / Re: 35mm lenses vs 24-70

« on: November 07, 2012, 01:08:02 PM »

I heard not so great things about the bulky 35L and with 4 stops IS the new 35 f/2 the 35L has little to offer (or am i wrong)

Hmm.  There is a very good reason the 35L is in the Canon "Holy Trinity" (35L, 85L, 135L).  Perhaps a good strategy will be to wait for the Canon 35 f/2 IS to actually start shipping, then pick up a recent vintage used 35L off eBay when used prices drop (perhaps). 

As with all things Sigma, I strongly recommend waiting to see if the Sigma 35 f/1.4 turns out to be reliable with accurate AF before jumping in. 

As far as Canon 35 f/2 IS, it really should have been $200 less, and I would try to pick it up with some sort of rebate/sale down the line, if you so choose.

74

Lenses / Re: 24-70/4 MFT charts

« on: November 07, 2012, 12:48:13 PM »

http://eosdoc.com/manuals/?q=jlcalc

your working distance is 0.9 cm, i.e. to get that almost 1:1 magnification, your subject is less than a finger-width from the front element.  Yikes!  H-IS for longer exposure or not, with the apparent light loss at high reproduction ratios, it's going to be pretty hard to use this lens for macro.

As scary as that sounds, those of us coming from the MP-E 65 macro lens at least understand what that entails.

Honestly, 0.7x is pretty darn good already, and if I ever buy the 24-70 f/4 IS, I likely will forgo extension tubes and just shoot at 0.7x and crop a bit in post..

75

Lenses / Re: 24-70/4 MFT charts

« on: November 07, 2012, 11:03:46 AM »

I must admit 0.7x magnification at minimum focusing distance of 7.87 does seem awfully handy, especially since a small macro extension tube (with electrical contacts preferably) will easily make it a true Macro lens.

No, actually - it won't. Add a 12mm tube, and the max mag goes down. Add a 25mm tube and it goes up to a 0.72x (at the wide end, it's 0.4x at the long end with the 25mm tube).

Huh, can you point me to the calculator or formula you are using?

I'm getting 0.94x magnification with 20mm extension tube added to the 70mm telephoto end using the stated minimum focus distance of 20 cm.  I'm using this calculator:

http://www.flybacon.com/Cameras/Macro.aspx