March 04, 2015, 07:20:50 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 - GMCPhotographics

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 51
The rear element barely touches any gel filter at 11mm

Image from:

It's a lens like this that makes me glad I hardly ever use filters ;-)

Hi Keith, it looks like an amazing lens...although certainly a my 8-15mm fishy and my TSe 17L!
I'm wondering what the diameter of the lens hood is? It'll be the first stop to give us an idea if the Wonderpanner 145mm filters will be wide enough to cover the objective lens. I'm also guessing that it'll be the first thing we butcher to make a temporary filter holder (like I did with the Sigam 12-24 and TS-e 17L). 

I'm wondering if the Wondapaner filter system will work with the new Canon ef 11-24mm f4 L lens?
It uses the largest diameter filters currently available. They are like dinner plates, nearly as big as the front element on a 400mm f2.8 LIS (I know because I currently have both). I use my Wondapanner with my TSE 17L and it's possible to achieve max shift in all directions and be vignette free. It's great to be able to use a polariser or a 3 or a 5 stop ND. The ND isn't very neutral but it's useful when an exposure blend is required to get the right shutter speeds. I find on the TSE-17L that I can only use one filter at a time with full shift. But if I stack 2 filters, I loose a few mm of shift. The flare with these filters is pretty bad, far worse than the naked lens element. Which leads me to think that these 145mm filters are not very well coated compared to the native lens...and one has to ask why they are SO expensive as a result.

Lenses / Re: 300-4L or 70-200-2.8L with extender?
« on: February 27, 2015, 05:16:57 AM »
The MkI doesn't take TC's very well from an IQ and AF point of view, I have owned that lens and the TC's since it came out, the 300 f4 is blindly sharp and has IS.

The MkII 70-200 IS does take TC's very well and even though the AF slows down a touch it is still pretty darn fast, especially with the 1.4, the IQ is much better with TC's than the MkI, much better.

Yes that's my findings too. My copy of the 70-200 f2.8 L IS II is fantastic with a 1.4x TC. It's a lot heavier than the native 300mm f4 LIS but it's IS is better and the IQ is about the same. When I tried the 2x mkIII I found that it was just as sharp as the 400mm f5.6 L but it's AF was less accurate (and a lot slower) and very prone to camera shake....more than the 400mm prime. So it really needs a tripod and good tripod craft. If I used live view focus, it's was very very sharp. If I used the normal focus system, I got inconsistent results.

EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 23, 2015, 04:57:03 AM »
For me, the specs look interesting but I would want to see a higher DR, interchangeable view finders and I would want the resolution to stay at around 22mp.

EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 23, 2015, 04:55:16 AM »
That's just the thing, in order to get that 30fps rate you have to go mirrorless.

No, that's a marketing-myth from the mirrorless department. You can leave the mirror open and use the same techniques as the mirrorless does. The DPAF is even better for this than the existing solutions. You will loose the good AF-Modul, but you can do anything else as "they" do.

Taking a 4k Video ist nothing more than shooting @50/60 fps... (and a smaller images of course).

Or use a semi transmissive fixed mirror. Then you get fps and no view finder blackout at all....but still being able to look though the lens.

Lenses / Re: Which Lens to buy for Portraits
« on: February 18, 2015, 08:09:43 PM »
I've been thinking about getting a new lens mainly for portraits. I currently use a Nikkor 50 F2 with an adapter on a EOS 650D. The image quality of the lens is outstanding in comparison to the Canon 24-70 F2.8 MK I and the Canon 50 F1.4 I compared it to.

I've been thinking about buying one of the following lenses.
1. Canon 85 F1.8
2. Canon 100 F2
3. Tokina 100 F2.8 Macro
4. Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS USM II

I'm mainly shooting and making money with business portraits. I'm not into macro photography. I'm mainly considering the first 3 because of the cots and I guess that the image quality of primes is a lot better. I'm going to upgrade to FF within a year or two. So I'm only considering FF lenses.

What lens would you recommend. How is the image quality of the Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS USM II compared to the Canon 100 F2? What lens could you recommend? What are they reasons why you would choose one over the other?

It really depends on what you are trying to achieve.
A 70-200 would be the most versatile.
But even a fisheye could be used for portraiture. It just depends on what you are trying to achieve.

Lenses / Re: Why does 7D II seem COMPARATIVELY soft with certain lenses?
« on: February 16, 2015, 07:37:46 AM »
I used to get some intermittent soft images with my 70-200 f4 LIS on a 7D, shooting landscapes. I would see some shoots where nearly every image was slightly soft, other shoots and each image was pin sharp. The camera / lens was on a very sturdy tripod (Gitzo systematic) and a Markins M20 ball head. I couldn't understand it until I realised that on some shoots, I'd left the IS on and that lens can't sense the tripod. It sent the gyros into panic mode, trying to find some shake to cure...
So what I'm saying here is go check the obvious mistakes, it's easily done even when one is an experienced landscape photographer. It's rarely a gear issue and nearly always a user error.

EOS Bodies / Re: Skipping the 5D-s. What do you want in 5D4?
« on: February 16, 2015, 07:05:40 AM »
AF linked spot metering
EC with Auto ISO in M
Min increase to 1/250th Sync
7-8 fps with larger buffer
AF confirmation sorted (Not sure if it already has been on the 5D3)
Cross type AF points at 3rd's position
24MP sensor (at most)
1 stop higher ISO
1 stop DR improvement

I truth if I could afford a 1Dx I'd have got one a year ago. Maybe I just need to man up  :'(

I agree with your list, but it's not enough for me to drop £6K on a pair of cameras to replace my existing 5DIII's.
The DR is important. The AF is already excellent, but I'd like to see the same face and colour tracking the 7DII and 1DX have. I'd like a bump in fps, not fussed with the increase in MP. An interchangeable fine focus view screen has been noticeably missing on the 5DIII. it's really helpful with the 85 f1.2 II L. I'd like to see MP4 option in movie mode, the current .Mov file is pants and I seem to spend a lot of my life transcoding into a useful format. A little better weather sealing, erm....I'm struggling here because the 5DIII is such a fine camera.
Maybe a button which directs more high paying customers my way? No? Though not.....

Lenses / Re: Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art announced..
« on: February 11, 2015, 08:40:45 AM »
This should be an interesting battle with Canon & Nikon as both of them have well-regarded 24 f/1.4 lenses.  Yes, coma, and vignetting are issues, but they are very sharp lenses.  This was not the case with the 35mm and more so with the 50mm lenses, so unless the price is right, I think it's going to be a tougher sell to anyone other than people who shoot starry skies (assuming excellent coma correction).

Also, given Viggo and Eldar's experiences with the Art series AF, I'm staying far away from this line of lenses.

I believe the Canon 35mm is more widely regarded as sharper than the Canon 24mm wide open. In fact, in my experience I felt that the 24mm was not very sharp except for the center wide open. Have no experience with the Nikon, of course.
Another aspect is price. One big reason for people buying the 35A is the lower price. I am sure a lot of people will go for a 24A if it is $ 500 cheaper than the 24L.
I agree with staying away from Sigma lenses due to AF issues though. A pity...

my 35L WAS sharper than my 24L mk I,  I got the sig 35 1.4 because it was sharper than the canon wide open
...gave my brother the 24L mk I, ...tried the 24L mk II...lower chromatics but too much vignetting...

I believe the sig 24 1.4 will  fit right in with my sig 35 1.4... both of them better than current canon offerings
in most places...35L had a very slight BOKEH edge over sigma 35 IMO...

24mm and f1.4 has a heck of a lot of use for me....
the orig canon 24mm mk I was quite compact....

I also believe the sigma 135 f1.8/f2... with OS will... be a better NEXT lens for them...
I am waiting...and waiting

The ef 24mm f1.4 II L is a sharper lens than either the ef 35mm f1.4 L or the mkI of the 24mm. But only a fool would consider a lens based only on a sharpness metric. The 35L renders far better photos than either the Sigma 35 art or the 24mm f1.4L. The 35L is primarily a portrait lens and in that use, it excels.
I have said it many times here and have been accused of all sorts of stuff by Sigma fans. So i'll say it again, after using Canon's professional lenses and Sigma lenses in a professional context...I have found Sigma products disappointing, fragile and have inherent AF issues. What's the point of a sharp lens if it can't focus properly when you need it to? I have owned a lot of Sigma glass over the years, including their 70-200 f2.8, 100-300 f4 (a complete dog), 180 macro, 12-24, 15mm fisheye, 24-70 f2.8, 120-300 DG OS (many know of my disappointment of this particular lens). All of these lenses have been replaced by Canon optics and they have out lasted, impressed and delivered consistency every time I've used them.

So Sigma have released a new 24mm, I'll be using my existing 24mm f1.4 II L and my advice is this: if you want a great f1.4 24mm prime lens, get the Canon mkII. Otherwise, good luck with your purchase and I hope you have better milage with the Sigma brand than I have. I'm done with the brand.

Lenses / Re: New Unique Macro Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 08, 2015, 02:44:09 PM »
At a guess, I think it'll be a TS-e macro lens. Fairly long, say around 100mm.

Lenses / Re: New Rebel & EF 11-24 f/4L USM Coming Shortly
« on: February 08, 2015, 12:39:00 PM »
Damn you, Canon – you keep coming up with clever ways to deplete my gear fund before it accumulates sufficiently for the 300/2.8L IS II.

It's been a while since it's been said here....but Canon are the ones who make money out of Photography....not the photographer's who use their cameras and lenses. Most of the photographic genres are a drying pool of income, contracting circles or already dry wells. look at stock, look at fashion, look at sports. Even papers don't like to pay for front covers any more. The more photos there are, the less someone is prepared to pay for one. 4

It's an interesting lens, I used to really enjoy my Siggi 12-24mm. I really like my TS-e 17L and 8-15mm fish. I'm sure I'll enjoy this lens once the price has fallen to a sane level.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 5DS & EOS 5DS R Press Release
« on: February 08, 2015, 12:21:49 PM »
It's amazing that nearly every part of the 5Ds/R camera shell is a completely new molding. It looks almost the same as the 5DIII and yet every part is different. The most obvious changes are the radius of each edge, on the 5DIII they are smoother. On the S/R they are tighter and sharper. Canon are able to make a completely new camera look just like the old one! Sweet!

<p><iframe width="100%" height="400" src="" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></p>
<p>Low light performance, billboard-ready ultra-high resolution and super crisp images: impossible?  Not with our brand new 50.6 megapixel full frame DSLR cameras: the Canon EOS 5Ds and 5DsR.</p>
<p>See more: <a class="yt-uix-redirect-link" dir="ltr" title="" href="" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">…</a></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

Ok...look at the 2:08 mark. Before watching this vid I though, ok what lens would I choose to show case a 50mp camera and a few went through my mind. The one chosen here is the softest and lowest resolving optic in the Canon L portfolio....a 50mm f1.2 L I kid you not! So, a lens which looks soft on a 22mp....put on a 50mp that's about 40mp of mush then. I guess their post prod will be using lots of un-sharpening masks to sort out the per pixel level detail for their bill board ad. So then they go hand held with a 70-200 LIS II...a sharp lens, sharpest on a tripod....oh boy. Then they look at the results on "fit to screen" size image on a laptop. Soz guys....nice shoot but this isn't informative in any way. It's a girl on a wire taken by A.Nother photographer with A.Nother camera. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 5DS & EOS 5DS R Press Release
« on: February 05, 2015, 10:32:54 AM »
It sure looks like an interesting pair of cameras. But I'm happy with my pair of 5DIII's, they seem to give me everything I currently photographically need. I think I'll be more suited with a 5DmkIV than a 5DIIIs/r.
I've never found 22mp to be lacking in detail, I've never found that I've needed more. I really like the current iso ability of my 5DIII's, but I suspect that the 5DIIIs/r will suck in comparison. 50mp of high iso mush is quite likely.
Most of my work is hand held, fast apertures, wide open. I'm sure if you use a top tripod, great technique and stop your lenses down to f8 then you could utilize these camera's extra MP....otherwise, 22mp will be better suited.

Lenses / Re: Purple fringing of 85 1.2ii
« on: January 16, 2015, 08:16:37 AM »
My GUESS is that the 85mm 1.2 L is the lens least likely to get an update within five years.
Not so sure. The 85L has two weak spots that Canon should act on; its one of the non-IS "L" primes that encounters most failures (electrical problems) and the sloooow focus (even if its better than the 85LI). Its esspecially sad becasue it limits the use of the lens for action shots at night.

There is also the reflection issue. Those who use the 85L at night will surely have seen occaisional "sparks" of green light from time to time. I expect this can be fixed with some of the new coating techniques Canon continues to develop.

I would expect a 85L III to see improvements on all three issues.

When Canon starts to release new bodies with better AF and software for focussing such as eye recognition the usefulness of the 85L will improve as we can begin to shoot more confidently @F/1.2.

I used my 85II for a lot of low light weddings here in the UK using nothing more than 5DII's centre spot. I used a fine focus screen to assist me and it worked really well. I generally got about 3-4 shots per wedding which wasn't as sharp as I wanted due to focus errors, that's out of about 2000 image taken. On the 5DIII, my average hasn't changed but the single point spot focus is needed to get the best out of this lens but keepers vs losers is the same.

Many people complain about this lens, if you can't use it properly...go back to f2.8 glass and be happy. if not, then stick with it, it's a tough tool to learn but it's worth it. Top tier glass like this which has a thin DOF is always going to require a very high degree of skill and accuracy. Don't blame the lens...

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 51