July 28, 2014, 11:43:54 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 - GMCPhotographics

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 47
121
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS Real World Sample Images
« on: June 09, 2014, 06:06:18 AM »
My advice was to buy the new one outright, compared them and then sell the f2.8....but I guess this advice is a little late now!
That was my plan, too, but I thought I'd go ahead and get my lens out there before eBay is saturated with them.  With 3 days left in the auction, my lens is at $1085 with 12 watchers, so I think I've timed it well.  Also, when I get the new lens, I'd rather be using it instead of shooting comparison photos :).  If the lens isn't amazing, I'll just return it and use my TS-E 17 until the 14-24 f/2.8 or whatever comes out. 

P.S. Okay, I admit that I might have to indulge in a few 16-35 f/4 IS vs. TS-E 17 f/4 comparisons...

The 16-35L f/2.8 II market has softened quite a bit already.  I got mine used about 2 years ago for about 1200 (lens, caps and hood only) when most of used copies were going for 1300, and I sold mine on eBay for 1150 (even with 30+ watchers).  I tracked a few others before selling mine and they were going in the 1150-1250 (with box, pouch, etc.) range unless scammers were involved (i.e. 0 feedback accounts bidding the prices up).

Ideally, I think I would have preferred a 16-35 f/2.8 III to the 16-35 f/4 IS if it is at least as good as the 16-35 f/4 IS's MTFs.  I tried the 24, 28 and 35 IS, and I don't find the IS as useful at these shorter focal lengths, but the 16-35 f/4 IS looks so much better than the 16-35 II that I'm switching now and am willing to lose the 10-20% of the price until the 16-35 f/2.8 II's replacement comes to market, whenever that may be.

Of the 10+ lens I have bought, this is the first that I've ever ordered before it was widely available and reviews were already out.  I blame the Canon store's error in giving 125 off the new lens price for my hastiness/impulsiveness.   ;D

@GMCPhotographics:  I agree that the used market prices for the 16-35 II won't change much now.  I've been considering selling the 16-35 II for months, especially after snagging a refurbed Zeiss 21.  If canon can design the 16-35 f/2.8 III as good as the 16-35 f/4 IS with good coma control wide open, then I'll be looking to the 16-35 f/2.8 III to replace both the 16-35 and the Zeiss 21.

It's too bad Canon couldn't stretch the 16-35 f/4 IS to be a 16-40 design.  All this typing to distinguish between the 16-35 f/2.8, 16-35 f/2.8 II, 16-35 f/4 IS and the 16-35 f/2.8 II replacement (III?) is going to be a pain!

The 17-40L was expanded at the long end so that it could perform two specific roles. An ultra wide zoom for the full framers and die hard film users. Full frame digital users were very few in those days when this lens was released. The other crowd was the other 99.9% of Canon DSLR users who were mostly 1.6x crop users. This lens predates the EF-s mount. It was envisioned as a cost effective standard lens range for those users (28-65mm effective). The only other option was the very expensive 16-35L and out of the pocket for most users....so much has changed! In those days, Canon saw the 1.6x crop as a temporary thing and had a plan to make their entire range full frame within 10 years. When Canon saw that many users liked the 1.6x crop, they backtracked and started to develop the ef-s mount and lenses. So the long term future of the 17-40L has always been questionable. I'm sure Canon has thought...hmmm, 17-40 f4L needs replacing and it's original mandate is no longer valid....so lets start with a blank sheet of paper...an ultra wide f4 lens...lets make it a 16-35mm with an IS unit....yeah that'll work well. 

122
EOS Bodies / Re: Reports of EOS 7D Reaching End of Life [CR2]
« on: June 09, 2014, 05:53:11 AM »
I remember reading there will be no 7D mk2 or a camera by that name. the newer body will be digi 6 which is far ahead of the game and also, the 70d was suppose to be the new 7D new version, so if there is a replacement maybe its out already and if there is a camera coming out I dont think it will have anything to do with a 7 at all. just my 2cents, only time will tell what it really going to be.

The 70D shares a lot of 7D specs, which really underlines my earlier point about the 7D being a very advanced camera when it was launched. I get the impression with the 70D, it was Canon cutting into the second hand sales of the 7D. The 7D is hardly selling anymore on the new market but is selling very well on the used market. Canon only recieve income with the same of new cameras, not used ones. So the way to fix this is release a nearly identical camera with a nearly identical spec, but built to a cheaper cost base and sell it for the same price as a used 7D....and this is exactly what the 70D seems to have done. The same it true of the 6D and 5DII.
Sure there are few minor upgrades and a few dumbed down specs, but generally this seems to have happened.

The Problem Canon seems to have with the 1DX and 7DII, is that the 1DX is still selling well and the second Canon release a 7DII, those sales will tail off pretty fast. It's just not possible to make a 7DII without it being a 1.6x version of the 1DX. The 5DIII is already a full frame 1DX lite....so a 7DII must therefore be a cropped sensor 1DX lite also. Ergo, simular frame rate, AF array and 18mp as the 1DX.

123
Lenses / Re: Canon 24-70 II + 70-200 f2.8 IS II is one GREAT combo
« on: June 09, 2014, 05:15:28 AM »
Bottom line is: 24-70 II + 70-200 f2.8 IS II is one GREAT combo

Great combo for shoulder and back pain as well... Oh, you meant for taking pictures? 101% agree to that :P

The BR dual strap works really good - it gives a better balance. I didn't feel any pain during or a day after.

Off topic: I saw 2-3 Nikon shooters with their big guns and flashes. I really wanted to show them my 400mm f2.8 IS II, but the shooting distance was too close. Anyways, it was indoor low light, ISO4000 to ISO5000 photos still look amazing.

I use a holdfast moneymaker system. I can hook up 2 or 3 cams. It's comfortable and very reliable. I sometimes get a bit of pinching but it's pretty much the best multi camera harness I've seen so far. Mine is brown leather and it looks fantastic too.

124
Lenses / Re: Need a 600mm. Don't want to pay for one
« on: June 09, 2014, 05:10:53 AM »
One of the other reasons for getting a native 600L instead of a 300L and a 2X converter, is that the 600L can be used with converters to extend the focal length even further. The 600L makes a great 840mm f5.6L and a very good 1200mm f8 lens when using converters.
My 400L pretty much maxxes out at 800mm. I've tried it with a 2x and a 1.4x and the results weren't good, even by stopping down 2 or 3 stops. The 2x is usable wide open and a bit better stopped down a stop. The 1.4x is pretty much as sharp as the native lens wide open.

125
EOS Bodies / Re: Reports of EOS 7D Reaching End of Life [CR2]
« on: June 07, 2014, 08:40:04 AM »
The 7D is so old that it's been end of life in the market place for a long time. It's been said before, it's not the camera which is dated, but the sensor inside it. It's seriously behind in iso ability and clarity at 100%. Sure the AF could do with a tweek, but I found the 7D's array to be very good.

Ummm...it is not just the sensor, it as all the electronic circuitry in the camera that is dated.

The 7D actually has a better processor than the 5II of the same generation. The 7D to get it's data through put of 8fps and 18mp used a dual Digic 4 design. While the 5DIII and 1DX use Digic 5 and Dual Digic 5 designs, the through put of the Dual Digic 4 and a single Digic 5 are remarkably similar.
Other than AF systems, a 19 point to 61 point AF system, the 7D is remarkably modern except for it's sensor. If fact much of the 5DIII's development was carried over or progressed from the ground work laid in the 7D development. The 7D really was a 1D4 lite....so one wonders if Canon has the will to put out a 7DII / 1D-X lite?

126
EOS Bodies / Re: Can Canon deliver a FF sensor that is class leading?
« on: June 06, 2014, 08:06:28 AM »
At the extreams of contrast, yes I agree with you. But in generall use (99% of the time) I would say taht a few stops of shadow area pull ability isn't going to be a game changer. If anything, it's a just a bit more convienient when poor technique over steps it's mark.

At least for what I do I can say this is not true - I'm taking wildlife pictures at noon all the time, and 15 ev of Magic Lantern the subject can be in the shade, the sky doesn't clip and I can still get ok resolution out of the shadows with the 6d. I now also often take backlit shots with the subject on sunset, also with enough shadow resolution and no sun clipping. This is not just my subjective impression, but I can check the scene dr with ML's raw histogram.

Admittedly, you can also just use high dr as "isoless" lazy exposure and/or avoid extreme postprocessing hassle to pull up the last shadow bits or desperately try to recover the whites...

... but now that I know higher-dr capability I'd really switch systems if you'd try to take ML away from me :-). 11.5ev (6d native) and ~15ev (ML dual_iso 100/1600) is a *big* real world difference if you shoot scenes you cannot bracket-hdr.

Marsu....please read what I said more carefully...."At the extreams of contrast, yes I agree with you"
I wasn't disagreeing with you but agreeing.
I currently use a 2 or 3 shot exposure blend to capture the contrast range which i need for low light landscapes. For me, I want clean and noise free images at 100%, so at the moment multi shot exposure blends is still the way to go. Here's an example:

127
Lenses / Re: Canon 24-70 II + 70-200 f2.8 IS II is one GREAT combo
« on: June 06, 2014, 05:59:30 AM »
Last Jan, I got a chance to be a primary photographer to shoot Tet celebration http://www.tetvietnamsj.com/ at Saint Columban Church. It’s a small private catholic school.

Long story short, the Vietnamese parents did an outstanding job organizing the Tet celebration. They got strong supports from school principle and all the teachers.

As always, I brought all the gear I have including the 400mm f2.8 IS II to the event. I took about 700ish photos.
1.   85% of the photos taken with 24-70 II + 70-200 f2.8 IS II combo
2.   15%  taken with 50L + 135L combo

Shooting with 2 bodies including 24-70 II + 70-200 f2.8 IS II combo is so much easy. Missing shots is almost impossible. I’m glad I pulled trigger on second 5D III.

Here is the link of Tet celebration: http://albums.phanfare.com/isolated/qT0bsDqk/1/6425720#imageID=208599092  These are just preparation photos. There are so much more photos that I wish I can share with CR community – kids getting red envelop, dragon dances etc…but I must respect the parents & students privacy.

Bottom line is: 24-70 II + 70-200 f2.8 IS II is one GREAT combo


Yep, I tend to shoot with three cameras...multi cameras is the way to go, no question. Pounding mounts and changing lenses just causes mount wear, finger marks on rear elements, dropped lenses, increased sensor and mirror dust and missed shots....although Cartier Bresson did say when loading a new roll of film..."If I don't shoot it....it didn't happen".

128
Lenses / Re: What was your first L lens?
« on: June 06, 2014, 05:56:55 AM »
Mine was a 17-40L which replaced my 2nd broken Tamron 16-35 Dii lens. It was a lens which also taught me the true value of Canon L lenses....I later sold it for a profit 3 years later when I needed an f2.8 version. The 17-40L was heavily used but looked and functioned in mint condition. Canon L lenses are exraordinarily well built and resistant to casing scuffs. Unlike Tamron and Sigma.

129
EOS Bodies / Re: Can Canon deliver a FF sensor that is class leading?
« on: June 05, 2014, 11:26:17 AM »
The best sensor and all the DR in the world won't make anyone a better photographer.

Not relative to everyone else, but I'd argue that you'll take better shots with a better sensor.

I experienced this myself when moving 60d->6d, the fact that I don't have to worry about "iso 400, 800 or do I really have to use 1600?" anymore all the time frees up capacity for more creativity. The same with dynamic range, at least when using 14+ev with Magic Lantern I can take better action shots because I don't have to be afraid of clipping anymore if the camera happens to overexpose a bit.

At the extreams of contrast, yes I agree with you. But in generall use (99% of the time) I would say taht a few stops of shadow area pull ability isn't going to be a game changer. If anything, it's a just a bit more convienient when poor technique over steps it's mark.

130
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS Real World Sample Images
« on: June 05, 2014, 11:23:33 AM »
I did put a caveat in there about upgrading, and alas, the 16-35 f/2.8 II is on the auction block of eBay as I type this.  Yes, I realize that some don't see it as an upgrade, but for someone who has pretty much never used f/2.8 on the 16-35 and doesn't use wide angles for sports, the new lens is a much better fit for my uses.  The only catch is that I am blown away by the TS-E 17's sharpness making me question my need for this lens.  It's possible I have a lousy 16-35 and a brilliant 17, but my 17 absolutely destroys my 16-35 (sharpness, CA, flare resistance, etc.), even when tilted & shifted.  The 17 isn't the most practical lens in terms of weatherproofness, size, or being a prime, which is where I see this new zoom fitting into my line up.  My 16-35 won't be missed.

Sold my 16-35 f/2.8 II, and lo and behold, I could have used it during the Memorial Day parade.  I didn't use the 16-35 II much, but it came in handy when I wanted to use it.  IQ is not among its greatest strengths but AF and its focal length range are.  I only used it for travel situations; for all else, I opted for the primes.

The S/H value of the 16-35IIL isn't going to tumble for quite a while. There's still a lot of users who need the f2.8 option. New sales might plummet though, but generally the S/H price stays stable. My advice was to buy the new one outright, compared them and then sell the f2.8....but I guess this advice is a little late now!

131
Lenses / Re: Need a 600mm. Don't want to pay for one
« on: June 05, 2014, 11:19:37 AM »
If you are going to get one white super-tele (and trust me there is no substitute) then either the newer 300mm f2.8 LIS II or an older 400mm f2.8 LIS would be top of my list. The 300 is great for it's size, portability and relative lightness. it takes tele converters every well (1.4x and 2x) and will get you to 600mm f5.6 with ample IQ and can be shot wide open with great sharpness.
The 400L (my personal choice) is very big and very very heavy, but optically, it's one of the finest lenses ever made. It's pretty much untouched optically by a teleconverter. Pop a 1.4x on it and it's a 560mm f4, which is just a bit focal shy of the 600mm f4. Pop a 2x on it and it's a very capable 800mm f5.6.
Anything else is a compromise in my opinion.

I used 24-70 II and 400 f2.8 IS II combo yesterday. I carried this combo on dual BR strap. The weight is not that bad. I have the hood removed to keep it compact, plus I constanly checking the BR connection to make everything remaining nice and tight.

Like you said "it's one of the finest lenses ever made"

I'm using the mkI 400L and that's a LOT heavier. It's a lot cheaper on the S/H market too. Optically, there is nothing between them except for copy variation. I'd love a mkII but at the moment it is way out of my purchasing power. Maybe next year....

132
EOS Bodies / Re: Reports of EOS 7D Reaching End of Life [CR2]
« on: June 05, 2014, 05:26:51 AM »
The 7D is so old that it's been end of life in the market place for a long time. It's been said before, it's not the camera which is dated, but the sensor inside it. It's seriously behind in iso ability and clarity at 100%. Sure the AF could do with a tweek, but I found the 7D's array to be very good.

133
EOS Bodies / Re: Can Canon deliver a FF sensor that is class leading?
« on: June 05, 2014, 05:24:37 AM »
I guess it really depends on how we define class leading. Canon is an international business, it's not there to appease techhie geeks, but to provide it's share holders with a reasonable return on their investment. So if we look at the market, the Canon 5DII and 5DIII are big sellers for Canon. But the Nikon D800 isn't shifting any where near as many units. So, which camera is the more commercially viable? If you really feel that the Exmor sensor is more important to you than your current Canon one, then feel free and jump ship. It's the only metric Canon is really concearned with. If enough people buy a D800 and not a 5DIII then it will cause Canon to listen. In the mean time, Canon's market placement has been skillfully played out and the 5DIII is a brilliant product. The only way to get Canon to loose faith in their market research and placement is to show them it's wrong at a sales level.

134
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's D800E 30% sharper than D800
« on: June 05, 2014, 05:02:40 AM »
That is laughable for several obvious reasons, first, they are saying the Ziess lens is perfect and causes zero resolution loss, that is impossible, it is either breaking the laws of physics, or their measurements are suspect yet again. And, just read any Nikon forum where people own both, and there are a surprising amount, they will tell you that is simply not true, yes the E does resolve slightly more, but 30% more, no.
unhindered by a normal AA filter, tell us why the camera cannot resolve a line-pair per line-pair of pixels using a lens that can resolve at even finer levels.

From what I've seen with people and their cameras, MegaPixels area little like horse power in their cars....at some point every one says..."I think that's quite enough". For some, that's around 100 bhp....for other's that's around 400 bhp (me a Jag XKR), others aren't happy until they have a Veyron or a LaFerrari. Everyone has compromises, desires and needs which vary from each other.

135
I went out shooting today with my 5D3. Got some great shots.

Then I thought...you know what would make these photos even better? Zero freaking shadows!!!! I pushed and pushed in post processing until there was nothing left to push. Man...the noise in the blacks was awful. I could barely make out a sign that was in some deep shade in the far upper left corner of my photo. After some noise reduction, and zooming in to 400%...I saw what the sign said:

Beware of Internet Trolls.


I was blown away. Had I been using the D800e, with its 30% better sharpness compared to the regular 800...and it's amazing dynamic range, I wouldn't have had to spend so much time figuring out what the sign said.


Tomorrow I'm going to go back to a creepy looking bridge I found and see what Trolls I can find in the shadows when I post-process.



Pro Tip: Since trolls have never seen people in real life, they easily get scared when an actual human is near by.  ;)

I'll shoot from a distance and just crop in.

Oh no! Damn...I wouldn't be able to crop as far because of my low 22 megapixel count!!!! If only I had the 36 MP monster that is the D800.

Damn Canon, again! Ugh.

Yes you can crop to a 100% to see the soft and mushy lens optics on a 36mp camera. You can see your AF being slightly off, and  your camera shake being slightly more apparent. You can see all your lens defects more clearly and the real world resolution being only slightly higher than the 5DIII. Ho hum...but yes you can crop harder....

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 47