February 01, 2015, 07:09:16 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 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 50
361
Lenses / Re: Two Lenses Coming for CP+? [CR2]
« on: December 15, 2013, 11:18:05 AM »
35 L II and the 50 f1.8 IS  8)

+1

Could also be update of 135L, but 35L is in more need IMO.

Really? I use my 35L day in day out for professional weddings and it's an amazing performer. Sure it could do with a warm over but it's not going to make a huge difference over the current model. Sure, better AF in lower light, newer coatings and weather sealing would be nice...but don't be fooled, it's one of the finest picture taking optics in Canon's catalogue. 

362
Lenses / Re: List of rumored lenses
« on: December 13, 2013, 02:38:18 PM »
I think (hope) we will see the 100-400 IS replacement, the 17-40 L replacement, the 14-24 2.8 L, the 24-70 2.8 IS lens, the 50 mm 1.4 replacement and the Tilt-Shift replacements.

Me too. The long rumored 100-400 replacement is a bit of a mythical unicorn....along with a 35mm f1.4 L replacement.
Personally, I'm not too fussed with a 24-70 L IS...I know some are looking forwards to it. But the mkII non IS is very very good. A 14-24L would be nice, a 12-24L would be better and not preclude the need for a 17-40 or 16-35.

363
Lenses / Re: Canon 400mm f/5.6 L
« on: December 13, 2013, 02:35:22 PM »
I'm a bit puzzled as to why your 70-200mmL f/4 IS has issues at 200mm.  It is much sharper than the 400mm.  Get it fixed, its one of the best lenses for the price.

It s pretty well known the 70-200 f4 IS perfoms poorly when at 200mm and at or close to MFD. I have it and this problem is noticable. Mine also suffers from the dredded slipping focus problem. Buyers beware to check for this issue if buying new or second hand. Sorry for going off topic. Otherwise its a very sharp lens.
I'm with Mt Spokane on this one, and "well-known" to whom?  I owned the 70-200 f4 IS and it was as sharp at 200mm as any other focal length and even with the 1.4x at 280mm, it's sharper than most other lenses.  I think you definitely need to have your lens calibrated/repaired.  Here are some results at 200mm from DxO, LensTip, and Photozone, all showing the lens to be extremely sharp.  Now back to the 400mm 5.6...

I had a 70-200 f4 LIS and I currently use a 70-200 f2.8 L IS II...and to be fair, there is so little between them. I think there is more copy variation between 70-200 lenses in general to speculate which one is generally better. Lens charts are only a rough guide and only pertain to the quality of the tester, the distance from the lens to the chart and the quantity of lens samples used in the test. Unfortunately, one or two copies usually aren't enough to formulate a reasonable expectation.

If the OP's 70-200 lens isn't performing it is either two factors at play, the lens is out of spec or the user isn't handling it right.

364
Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 22, 2013, 11:11:22 AM »

I shouldn't have to read posts carefully if they are written out clearly enough....tricky posts are the mandate of trolls...

Absolutely right ... I stopped reading your post right after this sentence.

Yep, I thought I was wasting my time with you....now I know I was :D

BTW,  not everyone who posts here has English as their first language.  So basically calling a less than perfectly worded post "a mandate of trolls"  is myopic.

Actually I wrote "tricky" it was you who implied poor spelling...maybe you should read the post more carefully too? Or stop twisting my words and making a bigger issue out of them?

365
Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 21, 2013, 10:38:40 AM »

I shouldn't have to read posts carefully if they are written out clearly enough....tricky posts are the mandate of trolls...

Absolutely right ... I stopped reading your post right after this sentence.

Yep, I thought I was wasting my time with you....now I know I was :D

366
EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 21, 2013, 06:52:14 AM »
Of course I care about the camera as a whole but that does not take away from the FACT that that Canon sensors are lagging behind. Perhaps other brands do not have things that are going for Canon but this does not change the fact that Canon sensors need and a bit of a fix. How can anyone argue with that? I use 5d3 and will use it but how am I wrong in wishing it's sensor gets better?

Sure, Canon could improve their sensors.  Nikon could improve their lenses, their ergonomics, etc.  Both of them could lower prices, too.  There's no such thing as a perfect system - you pick your compromises and make your choice. Maybe you use both. Maybe you get a Fuji.  There's no right or wrong answer for an individual. 

Earlier, Canon was referred to as a tech company.  How many tech companies have held the top spot in their market for 10 years?  Not that you're doing this, Sanj, but some are crying doom for Canon because they don't see Canon addressing their specific, individual needs.  Those folks aren't seeing the forest for the trees...Canon continues to meet the needs of a majority of customers.

Yes Neuro, even mine! My needs are completely taken care of especially by the 1dx.
My one and only point: We Canon users cannot hide behind the great things that Canon has and the flows that others have and refuse to admit that Canon sensors need fixing. Thats all.

The 1Dx is a great camera and very versatile. I feel the same about my 5DIII...it serves all my needs and I don't have much need for 12fps! I enjoy the 5DIII's slightly higher resolution (although that's not a deal breaker),  enjoy the lighter weight and near silent shutter (a serious plus for me).

367
Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 21, 2013, 06:40:12 AM »
Yeah. What lunatic continues to buy gear they hate?

you have not read, what he wrote. He is using multiple Canon bodies for stills and video. Out in the wild.
The last thing I'd want out there is a body from another manufaturer, with different user interface, different sensor characteristics, different batteries, etc. ... how about you?

If my livelihood depended on it, I would.

I might still do that in part (even though I do this for a hobby). I did not like the WA lenses of Canon so I might just pick up a used D800 (sell quite cheap these days) and the 14-24.

It's such a common perception that pros NEED the best cameras. In most cases they don't, infact they get by using quite humble equipment. The things which amatures prize, are not the same things which pros need or desire. MP count is typically very low on our lists. Reliability and build generally are they highest factors. A client usually doesn't care if a quality image is 18mp or 36mp, as long as it's the image they want, it's sharp and clean.

I don't think you read the posts carefully enough. The question here was not if a PRO needs the best camera. AvTvM's question was that why would you buy into a different system? My view is, why not? Learning a new system is by far a better option than buying gear you hate and rant about in internet forums.

Coming to your post, it all depends on what you shoot. Maybe a wedding shooter can get by with the previous generation equipment but wildlife / bird shooters do usually buy the best and the latest equipment to come out with standout photos, or do you mean to suggest that a 1DX with a 600mm f/4 offers no improvement at all?

BTW, isn't it funny how some Pros come out citing humble equipment when they themselves  -

use a 35mm f1.4 L, 24mm f1.4 II L and 16-35IIL day in day out professionally and have for many years.

:D

I shouldn't have to read posts carefully if they are written out clearly enough....tricky posts are the mandate of trolls...

Yes I have a lot of high end kit. But I also serve a lot of different genres in my professional guise. I shoot a lot of weddings, landscapes and a bit of wildlife (although the latter is more for fun). All three genres generally need a different approach to kit requirements. For weddings, I generally use fast primes. Of which my 35L and 85L are my main lenses. My landscape work needs xoom versatility, so my 16-35IIL, 24-70L and 70-200L are mostly used in that context. My wildlife protfolio sports a 70-200L, converters and a 400L. So 2-3 lenses per genre.
Camera wise, I use the same 5DIII for all three and they are working well for me. On my last trip to the Saltee Islands, were a number of photographers with the new 500mm f4 L IS II mated to 1Dx cameras. A very capable and light combo. I look my heavy 400L and looked quite tired for most of the time. There were a few guys there with the new 300mm f2.8 LIS II and 60D/ 70D combos...fairly modest gear for this genre but I have to say the imagery from these cameras and lens combo was nearly as good as my 400L...so one has to wonder. It was quite a low spend (from nothing), light and very capable. The 70D with a 300mm f2.8 had a nice reach and with a 1.4x or 2x tc easily matched my 400L on a 5DIII for framing (with converters). He eyed the slight quality and DOF difference beween my kit and his enviously, I looked over his kit with an envious eye for the weight and size considerations!
So choosing humble gear is relative and very genre specific. Ultimately it's the photos which matter and where a photorgapher is prepared to draw the line and put their compromise.

368
Lenses / Re: The 100-400 or the 70-200 f2.8 II+2x Mark III for wildlife
« on: November 21, 2013, 06:24:10 AM »
I am in the process of making the same decision myself.  I find the image quality to be equivalent in real-world shots, although when I set up my ISO 12233-type chart, the 100-400 fares ever so slightly better at 400mm.  My concern is less about weight, and more about the shorter (retracted) length of the 100-400 compared to the combo.  I intend to go on a few subsequent outings with the 70-200 II and 2xIII to see how the combo handles for routine use.  If it's okay, I plan to sell the 100-400, with the proceeds going toward a 300/2.8 IS II (for times when my 600/4 IS II is too big to bring).

Ok, I've given the 70-200 II + 2xIII a shakedown for routine use, and I'm keeping the 100-400 (for now...if I'm $1K shy of the funds for the 300/2.8 II, it'll go, or if there's an updated 100-400). 

The IQ is fine, there are two issues for me. The first is handling - the combo is not very convenient to carry.  I normally retract the 100-400, the push-pull means racking it out is very fast, and I do that automatically as I raise the camera.  The 70-200 + 2x is front-heavy, and also doesn't balance well on the BR strap, so it bounces around more.  I can balance it by sliding the lens plate to the opposite end, but that defeats the anti-twist (not a big deal, it didn't twist anyway), but also means it has to be loosened and moved again to unmount the lens, else the plate hits the body.

The other issue was the AF - the combo is slower than the 100-400, noticeable when it racks out to infinity hunting...and it seemed to hunt more often. The 70-200+2x did fine in good light, but in poorer light with a complex subject (bird in tree branches) or backlit subject, it would hunt more than the 100-400, and sometimes miss focus locking at all, where the 100-400 would have often locked.  Those are situations where the 100-400 has some problems, but the 70-200 + 2x was worse.

I think individual lens variation might be the key point here. No two lenses are the same unfortunatly. The AF on my old 400mm f5.6 L was slightly better than with my 70-200 LIS II and a 2x mkII. But, it wasn't enough to justify owning both. So I sold the 400mm f5.6 L to fund a different lens purchase.

369
EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 21, 2013, 06:20:52 AM »
The perception that Canon's sensors lacking in DR (I would challenge the ISO noise comments though) hasn't effected their sales. The 1Dx is selling astonishingly well considering it's high ticket price. The 5DIII is also selling extreamly well. So one has to wonder about the high DR arguments in the commercial context.
While I'm sure Canon are working hard to improve their sensor tech to bring it in line with the competition...the rest of the camera (1DX and 5DIII models) are more advanced than anything else in their sector and I personally this is the reason they are selling so well.
The other side to it is that the Nikon D4, their version of the 1Dx, has been pagued with lockups and issues from it's launch. I know of a number of pro wildlife guys who jumped into the Nikon D3 / D700 combo only to be really dissapointed with the D4 issues. The D800 isn't really a replacement for the D700 and many felt abandonded by Nikon when the D800 came out. While this has been addressed with the D600, it's been a long time coming and it's still not a direct D700 replacement.
Canon's full frame line up is so strong it's hard to compete with it. The 1Dx is the best there is, the 5DIII is so versatile and offers so much, the 6D is very effective while being cost / feature conscious. It's no wonder it's all selling so well. Add to one of the finest pro lens portfolios currently available...it's no wonder Canon are number 1. I have a number of unique to Canon lenses in my collection (8-15L fish eye, TS-e17L) and a number of top/excellent performers (35mm f1.4, 85mm f1.2, 135mm f2, 70-200 f2.8 LIS II, 400mm f2.8 LIS).
When I look at other brands, their camera bodies or lens porfolio don't come close to what Canon offers.     

370
Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 18, 2013, 06:09:45 AM »
Yeah. What lunatic continues to buy gear they hate?

you have not read, what he wrote. He is using multiple Canon bodies for stills and video. Out in the wild.
The last thing I'd want out there is a body from another manufaturer, with different user interface, different sensor characteristics, different batteries, etc. ... how about you?

If my livelihood depended on it, I would.

I might still do that in part (even though I do this for a hobby). I did not like the WA lenses of Canon so I might just pick up a used D800 (sell quite cheap these days) and the 14-24.

It's such a common perception that pros NEED the best cameras. In most cases they don't, infact they get by using quite humble equipment. The things which amatures prize, are not the same things which pros need or desire. MP count is typically very low on our lists. Reliability and build generally are they highest factors. A client usually doesn't care if a quality image is 18mp or 36mp, as long as it's the image they want, it's sharp and clean. 

371
Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 13, 2013, 06:44:52 AM »
They have a very good value for money 85mm 1.8 and a superb 85 1.2L II that most probably focus much better than Sigma... :)

I keep hearing the 85mm f/1.2L II focuses so slowly... ;-)

It's slow to move from MFD to infinity...so if it hunts it's pretty laborious. But minor AF adjustments are quite quick and repsonsive. It acn certainly handle AI Servo movement. It's slower than most L lenses, although not much slower than the 50mm f1.2 L which never seems to get critised for it's slow AF. What it looses in speed it gains in accuracy. It's certainly more accurate than the Sigma. I would prize AF accuracy over AF speed any day.
I tend to find the 35mm f1.4 L less accurate but fast AF in low light.

372
Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 12, 2013, 05:39:46 AM »
Now there are other lenses, but these are the most crucial IMO: (I have / or have had, all these lenses)

Canon EF 14 2.8 L II (2007) has bad IQ, lot's of CA/coma in the corners, beaten well by the Zoom lens 14-24 2.8 Nikon, as well as the Samyang 14mm.
Canon EF 16-35 2.8 L II (2007) has bad IQ,, lot's of CA/coma and soft in the corners. It has it's strengths in weight and portability but need an IQ upgrade.
Canon EF 24 1.4 L II (2008) has REALLY BAD IQ!! CA and so much coma in the corners that it basically useless in low lit sutations wide open. Beaten well by Samyang 24 1.4! Wake up Canon!!
Canon EF 35 1.4 L II (1998) has bad IQ, lot's of CA/coma/soft in the corners. An old lens well beaten by Samyang 35 1.4 and Sigma 35 1.4, needs an upgrade, but IMO 24 1.4 is more important to prioritize!
Canon EF 50 1.8 II, (1990), the oldest 50mm is the best 50mm Canon has. Corner sharpness is bad, but still beets all other 50mm from Canon, still this lens suffers from CA and is beaten well by the Nikon 50 1.8 and Sigma 50 1.4.
Canon EF 50 1.4 (1993) is suffering from severe CA wide open, well beaten by the Nikon 50 1.8 / Sigma 50 1.4.

Canon need to pull their finger out of wherever they are currently (the Cinema division) and respect and prioritize the DSLR customers which have put Canon where they are.


Have you even tried these lenses or are you chart watching? Your comments are extream and very irritating to those of us who actually use these items in a professional guise....which the L lenses were created. They weren't designed for web trolls who claim knowledge, but their experiance seems to come from looking at web reviews. I use a 35mm f1.4 L, 24mm f1.4 II L and 16-35IIL day in day out professionally and have for many years. If you think those lenses are junk because of a few minor aberations...then you really need to get a grip. No lens is perfect, end of subject. All of the lenses above, I use wide open and I have produced great photos which sell and sell. A fast prime shot a f1.2 or f1.4 is a remarkable thing and a lens which is delivered to the customer with pro build, AF and great optics for around £1200 is quite remarkable. These lenses are astonishing and can produce amazing photographs in the right hands. If you pass over these gems because of some crazy elitest attitude...it really is your loss....but please don't come on here and spout your views as verbatim...as you will be challenged!
Consider this, most of the best photographs ever taken were taken on quite lowly kit...Steve McCurry, Cartier Bresson...to name a few. Perhapse we should be more critical of our photographs than our lenses? I suspaect that 99% of modern lenses and cameras out perform their users.

373
Lenses / Re: The 100-400 or the 70-200 f2.8 II+2x Mark III for wildlife
« on: November 11, 2013, 05:01:01 AM »
I sold my 100-400L and 400mm f5.6L after testing my 70-200II LIS and 2x TC together.
Optically, the 70-200 combo is very strong. The IS is better and the AF is a little slower but more accurate.
Generally it's better to use a native lens instead of converters....but with such a sharp lens like the 70-200, it's not a problem. The 70-200 combo is heavier and more bulky.

374
Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 11, 2013, 04:50:00 AM »

You know what I want to see them do?  I want to see them bring back the 50/1.0L.  Remind the world why the EF mount was made to be what it is.  I want to see them push the envelope and see what could be done with today's manufacturing techniques and materials.  You know your stuff is outdated when even a company like Sigma can beat your 35/1.4L for bokeh quality, corner sharpness, and secondary spectrum control.  Then design an affordable series of lenses with emphasis on durability, like a 50/1.4 II, or a simple 50/1.8 that isn't plastic.

Canon used to be the undisputed leader of designing novel AF lenses.  This is the company that gave us the TS-E 17/4L, 50/1.0L, 85/1.2L, MP-E 65/2.8, 135/2L, 200/1.8L, and 400/4L DO IS, among other amazing technologies.  But all we see these days are uninspiring, conservative, incremental designs.  Nothing that pushes the envelope, nothing that makes us feel like we just *have* to try this lens because it will let us get the shot that no other lens can.

While I agree with most of your sentiments, but many of those "golden years" lenses has some serious issues. The 50mm f1.0 L is horrendously soft wide open, The 200mm f1.8 was closer to f2 in reality...and was heavily front heavy...it easily nose dived on a pod becuase the tripod ring was put in completely the wrong place. The 400 DO is widely regarded as softer than the 400mm f2.8 or 400mm f5.6..or even a 300mm f2.8 with a 1.4 TC (which really questions the need for that particuar lens).

While Sigma have a fine 35mm f1.4, my Canon 35mm f1.4 has performed faultlessly over the last 6 years...I have the Canon version and the Sigma version wasn't available and it produces fantasticly sellable pictures. To me, a lens is a lot more than chart results and sharp corners.

A new 100-400 L would be a game changer. The mkI version is one of the most versatile long lenses available and it's very old and certainly needs a re-work. An IS system which didn't come of the ark (it was one of the very first IS systems ever put into a lens)...an AF system which faster than pedestrian....and a sharpness to equal or better the 400mm f5.6 would be very nice. I'd buy one in an instant....I could lose several lenses in my bag to combine into this one lens.

At a guess, I'd say these are coming:
a new ultra wide, say a 14-24L (although a 12-24 would be sweeter)
100-400L replacement
A TS-e 45L and TS-e (longer than) 90L with improved macro capability
A 180mm L Macro replacement
A 300mm f4 L IS replacement
That's six, I'm sure there's more!

I'd like to see a 24-105L update and a 16-35IIL replacement.

375
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Nikon Digital FM2 - Retro look
« on: November 06, 2013, 03:37:16 AM »
I think that amoung the trendy pro / semi pro wedding photography shooters...this new Nikon will go down a storm. It looks great...it seperates a cosmetic "arty real shooter" from the masses (guests with pop up flash cameras and f5.6 lenses). It looks cool and I have to say Quodos to Nikon for that...yes I'd love a retro DSLR like that from Canon. It's lower MP and higher native ISO ability is a serious consideration for that large niche too.
Canon have made the best Wedding camera ever, the 5DIII (developed by one fo the world's leading Wedding photograpehrs - Jeff Ascough). Its features are honed for that market and it's a fantastically versatile camera as a result.
Nikon's approach is quite cleaver....same market (and one which they pretty much abandoned after the D7000) but appeal to the look and feel of a trad user. Priced directly against the 5DIII and a complete contrast to Canon's offerings. I think it'll sell really well.

On a personal note, I have always prefered the look and feel of dedicated dials over a menu driven UI. That said, I've made the latter work for me over the last 15 years or so....

Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 50