November 24, 2014, 10:18:16 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 - bdunbar79

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 174
31
Please don't take my post the wrong way.  You obviously are in no way obligated to answer the question as it is not your responsibility nor is the burden of proof on you.  I understand that completely.  Thank you for posting the links, however, and taking the time to answer.   

32
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: September 14, 2014, 11:07:42 AM »
I shot both the version 1 and version 2 on a 1Dx and the version 2, at least in my case, is faster.

33
Canon THEMSELVES actually never said the 1Ds and 1D lines were merged into the 1Dx.  Read Bryan Carnathan's site.  He doesn't even know.

" the Canon EOS-1D X Digital SLR camera.* As the new leader in Canon's arsenal of professional DSLRs, the EOS-1D X will be a high-speed multimedia juggernaut replacing both the EOS-1Ds Mark III and EOS-1D Mark IV models in Canon's lineup. "

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about_canon/newsroom?pageKeyCode=pressreldetail&docId=0901e024803b812e

I'm sorry, where does it say the two lines are merged?

You still won't answer my question.  Where does it say THE 1Dx MERGES THE 1Ds AND 1D LINES TOGETHER?  I'm not assuming anything, and all I'm asking is where does Canon state the 1Dx merges the 1Ds and 1D lines together and so far, in the last 2 years, nobody has been able to produce a statement where they say that.

34
Canon THEMSELVES actually never said the 1Ds and 1D lines were merged into the 1Dx.  Read Bryan Carnathan's site.  He doesn't even know.

" the Canon EOS-1D X Digital SLR camera.* As the new leader in Canon's arsenal of professional DSLRs, the EOS-1D X will be a high-speed multimedia juggernaut replacing both the EOS-1Ds Mark III and EOS-1D Mark IV models in Canon's lineup. "

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about_canon/newsroom?pageKeyCode=pressreldetail&docId=0901e024803b812e

I'm sorry, where does it say the two lines are merged?

35
Canon THEMSELVES actually never said the 1Ds and 1D lines were merged into the 1Dx.  Read Bryan Carnathan's site.  He doesn't even know.

36
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: September 12, 2014, 11:43:50 PM »
I will say now, after having shot a soccer match tonight, that the 400 f/2.8L II IS auto focuses MUCH faster than my version 1 I had.  I had 615 razor sharp photos, which is way too many but that was not even possible with my version 1.  Well worth the cost in my opinion.  Great shots to all who have posted here and I plan to keep contributing.  Thanks.

37
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: September 10, 2014, 10:23:30 PM »
Ashland University hosting Lake Erie College Saturday night with a 1Dx and 400 f/2.8L II IS. 

38
Lenses / Re: 400 f/2.8L II IS: Took the plunge...
« on: September 04, 2014, 07:00:19 PM »
Thanks everyone.  Turns out I will have a football game Saturday night and a 36-hole golf tournament Sunday, all college sports.  I will post some photos just for fun in the 1Dx photo section.  Again, thanks for this wonderful discussion!

39
Lenses / Re: 400 f/2.8L II IS: Took the plunge...
« on: August 29, 2014, 03:14:34 PM »
I note you use a 1DX, given it's iso capabilities, I would suggest turning off the IS as auto-focus and tracking will be even faster - if that's possible! Since January I have used IS on one of my lenses only once and then it was only to stabilize the image in the viewfinder, even with my Canon 800 F5.6 I find IS to be more of a hazard than a help most of the time with the 1DX.
Mode 3 on the new lenses accomplishes essentially the same thing.

bdunbar79, congrats on the new lens.  I'm sure your back & arms will thank you for the upgrade.  Also, I'd upgrade your extenders to Mk III if you haven't already.  They are faster to focus and use AFMA with the Mk II lenses.  The IQ improvement in the 1.4x is nice in terms of CA, but bigger in the 2x in terms of sharpness and contrast.

Ok, the 2x III?  Thanks.

40
Lenses / Re: 400 f/2.8L II IS: Took the plunge...
« on: August 29, 2014, 12:55:53 PM »
Very Cool. I have the 400mm f2.8 IS and love it.  But I have been bidding like crazy on the few VII lenses that have popped up on eBay.  I even won an auction at $8900, but the seller refused to ship claiming the auction had a reserve of $10500,  but it did not. 

Anyway good luck with it.  Post a lot of photos for us.

Thanks for the information.  I had trouble on amazon believe it or not.  They kept clearing the order because it was over $10k and making me reset my password.  So I went to B&H Photo and it went through seamlessly.  I have had trouble in the past on ebay and PayPal with large $$ purchases as well.

Not that you should ever do this, but if you needed to, B&H allows big purchases to be spread across multiple cards/accounts.  Something to keep in mind!


41
Lenses / Re: 400 f/2.8L II IS: Took the plunge...
« on: August 27, 2014, 10:36:51 AM »
I sold my 300 f/2.8L I IS and 400 f/2.8L I IS lenses (because I don't really need the 300 anymore) and bought a 400 f/2.8L II IS for sports all next year.

May I ask what was your rationale? I would never have gone from the 400 f/2.8L mrk I to II myself.

I did this with the 300mm f/2.8 L and while its nice in many ways - weight, handling, faster IS etc - it was really a luxury upgrade as IQ differences are so negligible that I doubt anyone who has not owned both would be able to spot the difference.

I don't regret my upgrade as I can easily afford it and splash a little extra on my hobby. But for a working tool I would not even have considered it.

That's just it.  It's going to be a working tool for me, and I could not handle the excess weight running around at football games and track meets anymore.  The was my first consideration.  The second was that I don't need my 300 anymore.  I want to use the 400 and 70-200 combo.  I had to crop too many times with a 300 lens on FF.  Those two things coupled together made the price worth it to me.

As for Northstar's question, I absolutely considered the 200-400 lens.  However, many of my venues require f/2.8 to keep the ISO down low enough (some places just to get to 5000) so I didn't purchase that.  I do agree, however, for daytime/sufficient light, it could potentially eliminate even using a 2nd camera and shorter lens if you can get back away from the end zone and can shoot at 200.  That would be an excellent point.  But there are just too many night games/events for me right now.

Again, thanks everyone for the comments/contributions.  I will be able to produce photos the weekend of 9/6-9/7.
 

42
Lenses / Re: 400 f/2.8L II IS: Took the plunge...
« on: August 26, 2014, 09:43:13 PM »
Thanks so much for all of the input guys, I really appreciate it.

My back and abs couldn't take running the sidelines with the version 1 anymore and I noticed it AF'd slower than my 300.  I did also notice the IS making the AF jumpy at times.  I'm glad I made the right decision.  Thanks guys, great forum.

43
Lenses / 400 f/2.8L II IS: Took the plunge...
« on: August 26, 2014, 07:12:45 PM »
Well, it's time to upgrade again.  I sold my 300 f/2.8L I IS and 400 f/2.8L I IS lenses (because I don't really need the 300 anymore) and bought a 400 f/2.8L II IS for sports all next year. 

Anyone using this lens currently?  I was really amazed how much lighter it felt vs. the version I and I'm also expecting slightly faster AF with the 1Dx.  It'll arrive about September 2, just in time for my first weekend of sports this fall, 9/6-9/7. 

Thanks for any input.

44
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 27, 2014, 07:48:03 PM »
<She wrote that as tongue 'n cheek, and it actually represents a sign of humility and willingness to be open to contrary points of view, signs of a good engineer/scientist. As for her credentials, if you follow her posts on dpreview you'll see she one of the most informed technical minds for camera sensor info. To cite a specific example, she reverse-engineered Nikon's long-exposure noise algorithm, identified serious problems with it, devised a much improved alternate algorithm which was relayed to Nikon by Thom Hogan and then later adopted by Nikon in subsequent camera designs.>

Right.  Scientific GARBAGE.  There are many scientists on this forum, myself included.  This doesn't count, sorry.  In science you don't get to "tongue 'n cheek" or get it right the majority of the time.  Either you do good science that's meaningful or you don't.  DxO mark does NOT.  We've all read that link and they do NOT disclose how scores are done/derived from the measurements. 

Besides, DxO mark isn't relevant.  Despite them scoring Nikon/Sony higher and higher against Canon product head to head, Canon still went from a 4% market share lead 4 years ago to a now 20% market share lead.  Nobody cares or nobody believes because of just that:  The garbage "science" they are doing.

45
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 25, 2014, 10:25:03 PM »
I'm going to use this example again:

When the 70-200 f/2.8L II IS lens came to the market and was tested, it got a lower score than the version I lens.  Later, DxO mark used a different CAMERA to test them, then the v2 finally scored higher.

 

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 174