Messages

286

1D X Sample Images / Re: NYC a day after Sandy-

« on: November 06, 2012, 02:38:09 AM »

This picture reminded me....you DO NOT need super camera to have great picture. You just need to be there at the right moment.

Sometimes you need a super camera too.  Not many cameras can produce a dramatic cover photo in such darkness at ISO 25,000.

287

Lenses / Re: Canon Makes the EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS Official

« on: November 06, 2012, 02:33:19 AM »

I'm excited that Canon is making better lenses than ever.  Of course, better lenses cost more.  We can have cheap or good, but not both.

Also, people seem to forget that these are introductory prices — these lenses will likely be 10-15% cheaper within a year. 

288

Lenses / Re: Opinion: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS

« on: November 05, 2012, 01:25:40 PM »

Canon has no problem with maintaining 4 versions of the 70-200 in the lineup, and 3 versions of the 50mm.  Similar lenses that have differences & different price points can all co-exist.

I agree, I don't think they will discontinue the 24-105/4L, especially if the new 24-70/4L is more expensive.  They actually offer 4 versions of the 50mm if you count the 50/2.5 compact macro.

289

Lenses / Re: Opinion: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS

« on: November 05, 2012, 12:21:46 PM »

Amen, finally a replacement to the embarrassing prehistoric EF 35mm.

I'm very glad Canon is updating the 35/2!  This update is long overdue.  It will be wonderful to have a small, quiet, high-quality 35 — I'm assuming it will be high quality.  I hope the 50/1.4 is next on the list of updates.

290

EOS Bodies / Re: Best low-light AF body

« on: October 23, 2012, 01:19:09 AM »

Honestly, while the 24-105L is a great walking around general purpose lens, it's slow f/4 aperture really hinders it in low light, not just for the AF speed, but for needing to crank the ISO up another stop just to keep up to the f/2.8 lenses.

I agree.  The 24-105L is more of an outdoor lens.  Indoors, the f/4 aperture does not give the autofocus a chance to work quickly.  It works ok for stationary subjects, but not fast enough for moving subjects indoors.  For moving subjects indoors, autofocus works better with f/2.8 or faster lenses.

As for the black AF points on the 5DIII, remember that you can always touch the AF point selector button (the one to the right of the * button) and it will light up the active point.  It's not as convenient as the red points on the 5DII, but it is a quick workaround.

291

Lenses / Re: Is it acceptable that 1 out of 5 copies of the 24-70mm II are really great?

« on: October 17, 2012, 02:06:59 PM »

I bought one copy and it is really great.

292

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Firmware Update Addresses f/8 & Red AF Points in AI Servo

« on: October 17, 2012, 11:20:26 AM »

Hopefully they will get this out for the 5DIII as well.

+1 for the 5DIII.  Urgently needed.  This has been a feature on every EOS body up to the 5DIII and 1DX, so I don't think they will make it a "premium" feature exclusive to the 1DX.  I hope there is no technical problem with implementing it on the 5DIII.

293

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 F/2.8L II USM Zoom Ring Smoothness

« on: October 17, 2012, 11:15:04 AM »

Does anyone experience this?
I mean, how smooth is your zoom ring on mk2 24-70?
Mine is stiffer than on my 24-70 mk1 (I've already sold it, so can't compare anymore).
When I hold the lens attached to a body horizontally, the rotation of the zoom ring not quite as smooth-zooming as the 24-70 L I.
When I hold the lens downwards and zoom in (to 70 mm) it's smooth-zooming as mkI. But zooming out (to 24 mm) in the same (down) position makes zooming stiffer.
And when I hold the lens upwards, zooming in (to 70mm) is stiff and zooming out (to 24mm) is smooth again.

That is the effect of gravity, no?  Lifting something (against gravity) is harder than lowering something (with the help of gravity).

The new 24-70 II has a stiffness in the zoom ring — I think it is ideal because I can set it at the focal length I want and expect it to stay there until I want to change it.  So my 24-70 can be a 28, 35, 50, etc.  I think this encourages the use of the zoom as you would a set of primes.  This is unlike the 70-200, for example, which is more likely to be used to frame fast moving sports action; for such a lens you want smooth-fast zoom action.

This stiffness in the 24-70 II will probably not be welcomed by photographers who want to use it for video and want to zoom during video.  There is no way to make it zoom smoothly.  So my impression is that this lens is made primarily for stills photographers.  However, it may be excellent for video photographers who don't want to zoom during video.

294

EOS Bodies / Re: Help me, 5D Mark iii order now or wait for a "possible deal"

« on: October 12, 2012, 12:25:08 PM »

Would you sell the f4l 70-200 to get the 2.8 ii or keep both for times you want to grap a lighter kit?  I am leaning toward keeping it.  I used my buddies 2.8 ii and that sucker felt like it wanted to tear the front of my old t4i clean off...LOL. 

I would keep both, the f/4 for times when I want a lighter kit.  The weight difference is pretty big.  The 5D3 is so good in low light that you may not even need the f/2.8 version of the 70-200.

295

Lenses / Re: Which Prime: 50L or 35L?

« on: October 12, 2012, 12:19:30 PM »

Question is which prime?  I’m leaning toward to 50L or 35L – my feeling right now is 55% on 50L and 45% on 35L.

So, which prime will deliver best sharpness at wide open for portrait general shooting & portrait? Your thoughts are greatly appreciated.

Choose your preferred focal length, not based on sharpness. 

296

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Renting 5DIII for a wedding, would like advice

« on: October 03, 2012, 11:07:14 PM »

Questions:
1. Will I need 60mb/s cards to shoot RAW with the 5Diii, or will 30mb/s suffice?
2. In your experience/opinion, how much speed/capacity do you need? (I'll have (3) 4GB 30mb/s cards, (1)8GB 30mb/s, and hopefully (3) shiny new 16GB 60mb/s cards (all SanDisk Extreme, Ultra, or Extreme III)  Good?  Should I pick up some more? 
3. I have 2 chargers and should have at least (2) batteries per camera.

There is no clear way to advise you on these things because no one knows how much you will shoot (how many hours, how many guests, how many portraits, how fast you shoot, etc.).  Some photographers shoot a lot; others not so much.  For a wedding, it's best to have plenty of everything (batteries, memory cards, etc.).  What you're describing may be more than enough, or it may be just enough, or it may be not enough, depending on the circumstances.

Also, one tip on the 5D3:  it can shoot to two cards at once, one CF and one SD.  It's a good idea to shoot Raw to one card and hi-res jpeg (or Raw again) to the other.  This way you have an instant backup.

297

Software & Accessories / Re: Lightroom 4.2 update

« on: October 03, 2012, 02:09:52 PM »

Once I import photos from my harddrive into LR, before I go into the Develop module, I wait for all the photos to "load", by waiting for the 3 tiny dots to disappear from each photo, indicating the photo is loaded.  The problem is, only the photos that are displayed on the screen actually "load", so I then have to scroll down to have the next line(s) of photos to show on the screen before they actually load.

You don't have to do this.  It sounds like you have LR set to build "minimal" previews on import.  Then it has to work hard to load them later.  Instead, set LR to build "1:1" or "standard" previews on import.  This way the import process takes longer, but the previews are all built when it's done.  This setting (called "Render Previews") is in the top right of the Import screen. 

Also, I've heard it's good to give LR a big cache for Camera Raw Settings.  This is done in LR Preferences, under File Handling.

298

Canon General / Re: Dream Package for Soccer???

« on: October 01, 2012, 05:52:34 PM »

I think you are all set with exactly the lenses you need.  The only upgrade I would consider is a second 5D3 for its magnificent image quality, autofocus and high ISO performance. 

299

Lenses / Re: About to buy the 135L, and then saw this....

« on: October 01, 2012, 04:05:08 PM »

I think this is only a part of the problem. If you check the measurement data sheet, the 300L maxes out at ~50lp/mm, whereas e.g. the 28-135 reaches or exceeds 70lp/mm across the focal length range. The 70-300 non-L also shows higher lp/mm at 300mm. Utter rubbish, even more so than their sensor shenanigans.

Their results are absolutely screwed up.  They run counter to the experience of many photographers.  A few have testified to that very clearly in this thread. 

Is there even a single Canon photographer who would rank the 85/1.8 at the top of all Canon lenses?  I doubt that there is even one.  If the DxO lens ratings were at all meaningful, then we could all SEE that the 85/1.8 offered the best resolution.

The 85/1.8 is an excellent lens and a great bargain, but there is simply no way that it is the king of the Canon lenses.  No way.  This result, like so many measurements at DxO, simply doesn't accord with everyday experience. 

I find the 85 focal length much more useful than 135, but the 135L is without doubt the better resolving lens.  Here is evidence:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=106&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=1&LensComp=108&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

300

Lenses / Re: Using the 24-70 II for documentary wedding photography - my review

« on: September 29, 2012, 08:59:59 AM »

Great!  Thank you for the review!  Very interesting to read your review of this lens as I have much the same needs from it.  Very good point about "appropriate" depth of field too.