September 03, 2014, 01:02:08 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 - wtlloyd

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
1
Lenses / Re: Canon Price Drops on L Lenses
« on: August 31, 2014, 02:15:26 PM »
Yes, there'll be winners and losers.
When the ver2 superteles were announced, excellent ver1 copies immediately jumped up $1k in selling price.

Well, if you own a 400, 500, 600 supertele, your lens just lost up to $1K in resale value.

That would be a bummer if I intended to sell my 600 II.  But I don't.   ;)

Another way to look at it, for me, is that the next two lenses I plan to buy are the TS-E 17mm and the 300/2.8 II...a $950 'savings'.   :)

2
Lenses / Re: Canon Price Drops on L Lenses
« on: August 31, 2014, 11:16:13 AM »
Well, if you own a 400, 500, 600 supertele, your lens just lost up to $1K in resale value.
Same for all the other lenses to a lesser degree.
This will affect refurb and used prices in just a short while.

3
Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: August 30, 2014, 02:32:30 PM »
Wow, good catch.
Upvote for you!
For folks who don't know, in Windows a right click on image, and "Search Google for this image" is about as easy as can be.


One question, when did I ever say the 400 DO wasn't sharp or took TC's well? Because it reads to me like he is calling people that say those things idiots, and his images prove they are.

Nope, you said "horrible bokeh".  There are several pictures in that post (and elsewhere on the internet) showing the bokeh of the lens.  It is not, in any way, "horrible".

What he doesn't show you is stuff like this that demonstrates what DO do to bokeh and how they handle specular highlights, you might have noticed not one of Mr Morris' images has any specular highlights, did you wonder why? No, of course you didn't, you are too obtuse to do that.

No, its probably because it isn't actually a problem in real world shooting situations and you are blowing it way out of proportion.  Bryan from The Digital Picture had this to say about it:

"The Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM Lens has been criticized for its poor specular highlight bokeh (OOF blur quality), but I have seldom encountered this problem. Specular highlights can have a target-appearance at worst - concentric circles instead of a smooth blur. I can't say I like the bokeh of this lens more than Canon's other 400mm Lenses, but the 400mm focal length combined with a relatively wide aperture can very nicely separate a subject from its background."

If you are happy to pay $6,500 for a lens that does that then I suspect you are the idiot, after buying them for that much many owners are happy to sell them for $3,500 to get rid of them, maybe they are the idiots.

One thing I will agree with you on is that I think the lens is too expensive and a new version isn't likely to be cheaper.  It would be stellar if it was priced at about 2/3 or 1/2 of the 300 f2.8 IS II.  One of the promises of DO technology is that it is easier to eliminate chromatic aberration (a huge problem with traditional optical designs lens manufacturers have struggled with for decades that, curiously, doesn't completely invalidate the entire technology...) so fluorite lens elements aren't needed for high end telephotos which should make them cheaper to manufacture but, well, Canon. *shrug*

One last thing - that photo you posted is pretty disingenuous.  Were you just not going to mention that it was taken with the very different 70-300 f4-5.6 DO?  Just going to allow that to be inferred by people who didn't bother to do a reverse GIS? The 70-300 DO exhibits far more problems than the 400 f4 DO and is reviewed a lot more harshly for a number of reasons related to its IQ.  If you've got a sample that demonstrates the absolutely horrendous disaster that is the 400 f4  DO, I'm all eyes, but make sure its the 400 f4 DO and not that other lens.

4
Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: August 29, 2014, 10:55:55 AM »
It's been 10 years since Canon brought out a lens with DO technology.

The 400 DO II would be a intriguing surprise.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 No Longer in Production
« on: August 23, 2014, 01:05:00 PM »
Oh, brother! ::) ::) ::)



2) When red ship cameras on time that work reliably consistently I'll pay more attention to what they do. for now they are not on my radar.  sorry.


6
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 22, 2014, 06:42:27 PM »
I always see these shopping lists of all the desired features users are demanding in the next camera. "Gimme everything ya got, and don't charge over $2K.

Why would Canon sell you the last camera you'll ever need to buy?

Oh, and 4K video is gonna stay in the cinema series until they are forced to bring it in, as late as possible. Just like they're doing with high megapixel.

7
Lenses / Re: Development Announcement of a New 800mm f/5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: August 19, 2014, 07:17:32 PM »
On tripod, IS helps shutter slap, wind buffeting (that hood is like a big 'ol windsock) and if shooting at 1200 or 1600 mm 1/2 hour after sunset, you'll be glad to have it. For that matter, you'll be glad to have it at those focal lengths anytime.

8
Lenses / Re: Development Announcement of a New 800mm f/5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: August 19, 2014, 02:48:40 PM »
Great news, because in other threads, the argument was about to shift to exactly which type of green cheese the moon is made of.

9
Photography Technique / Re: APOLLO missions - image inconsistencies
« on: August 18, 2014, 09:51:41 AM »
I think you are mis-reading the intent of the original comment.



They can find evidence of the faked moon landing, but they can't dig up President Obama's Indonesian birth certificate?
Let's see ..we are talking about photos of the moon and somehow you fit in insulting our president,. Thanks for letting us know that you are stupid enough to be an avid watcher of Fox News Channel. :D

10
Photography Technique / Re: APOLLO missions - image inconsistencies
« on: August 18, 2014, 12:11:40 AM »
This website has truly jumped the shark.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 7D Replacement Info [CR2]
« on: August 11, 2014, 03:44:44 PM »
Awesome, 'cause I'm very happy with DSLRController.


I expect to try the TP Link TL-MR3040 soon to see how it compares. Only $40.
This is what I use on my 60D.  Works great.  The DSLR Controller app is better than Canon's app and the range on the TP Link is excellent.  I get 30 or so feet -- maybe a bit more -- depending on the environment.  For the money, it can't be beat.

I'm hoping the IQ will significantly increase over what APS-C has to offer now.  If not, I may save my money for a full-frame.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Suggestions of a Canon MF announcement at Photokina!
« on: August 11, 2014, 03:42:46 PM »
I see what you did there.

 ;)

It would be strange for a manufacturer renowned for their AF camera's...

13
EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 7D Replacement Info [CR2]
« on: August 11, 2014, 11:52:10 AM »
6D wifi is weak and slow. Drops out, range not much more than 10' before disconnect.

I expect to try the TP Link TL-MR3040 soon to see how it compares. Only $40.

14
Lenses / Re: lifespan of IS motor?
« on: August 11, 2014, 09:28:34 AM »
Maybe you should then be worried about wearing out the IS on/off switch.

 :o

15
Matte, non-glare screens for me. And a large, external monitor.
It might be that personal tolerance is affected by what you are used to.
As I've aged, my vision is less able to deal with glare.

I've been very satisfied, by the way, with my W520 and W530. I use the NEC PA271.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9