Messages

46

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark III Live View v Viewfinder Sharpness

« on: May 15, 2013, 02:13:24 PM »

Only had my Mark III a few weeks so still have a lot to learn.and repeatedly find a significant difference in sharpness between Live View and using the Viewfinder, Live view being the sharper of the two.The Viewfinder is too soft for my liking. Any advice much appreciated.

A Question:  Did you adjust the Diopter of your camera?  Its not clear if you are seeing a soft image when looking thru the viewfinder, or if you are referring to images captured using autofocus, or if you are manual focusing using the viewfinder.
To adjust your viewfinder Diopter, see the instructions are on page 43 of your manual.
 
If Images captured using autofocus are not as sharp as images captured using live focus, you need to fine Tune the autofocus for each of your lenses using the AFMA adjustment in your camera.
 
Many of us use a software tool called Reikan Focal to do this.  You can do it manually, but the results might be difficult to get right.

47

EOS-M / Re: Metabones speed booster for the M

« on: May 15, 2013, 01:18:08 PM »

A link to something might help.  As it is, not much is useful.

48

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon SL1 sensor a step back?

« on: May 15, 2013, 01:16:08 PM »

The OP has titled the thread "SL1 sensor a step back?" ... clearly he is comparing the sensors here.

He is only comparing them in the title, as others mentioned, a RAW comparison properly done would compare sensors, but jpegs done with in camera processing, poor exposure, and different processors and algorithms is not a valid sensor comparison. Even if it was, a one off test might be sample variation.
 
The sensor is going to be very close to previous models.

49

Reviews / Re: The Digital Picture Reviews the Tamron 24-70

« on: May 15, 2013, 01:08:33 PM »

babiesphotos' response is a useful reminder of why it's hard to figure out via the internet what a consensus might be (even though it may be easier there than anywhere else).  People like to complain and warn and seem less likely to report a favorable or neutral experience.  Similarly, the problem they reported at lensrentals was announced via a special blog entry, but it took a rather obscure response to a specific comment to report that subsequent copies of the lens are just fine and have no new problems.  I would add that since the folk at lensrentals see more copies of lenses than just about anyone else, and seem reliable/unbiased/accurate in their reporting, their comments on the mechanical reliability of any particular lens are more valuable than most.

The problem you are referring to was with initial production copies at lens rentals.  It was hardly obscure, having been posted all over the internet.   It was a result of a poor design.  Tamron did not admit to fixing it or recall any, they just mysteriously stopped sending out problem copies. 
 
This topic is covering recently purchased lenses that have IQ issues.  They are not falling apart any longer, that part is fixed.

50

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70mm F2.8 L ver 2 or 3 Prime Lens

« on: May 14, 2013, 07:39:19 PM »

I have been using primes, but I just bought a 24-70L MK II.  After I have used it a while, I'll decide on my 35mmL, but I've sold four 50mm's and my 85mm f/1.8 in favor of zooms.
 
 I still have several prime lenses, 15, 17, 35, 100, and 135 I'm not really expecting to sell them. I've kept my 24-105 as well.

51

Lenses / Re: +18 AFMA out of the box....return?

« on: May 14, 2013, 07:33:15 PM »

My 35mmL was +2 on my 5D MK II and +14 on my 1D MK III.  I sent it to CPS and they calibrated the lens to their reference 1D MK III and its been nearly right on for every camera since then, including another 5D MK II, two 5D MK III's, and a 1D MK IV.
 
I think having CPS calibrate it is your best bet.

52

Technical Support / Re: Urgent Help Please on Eos Utility for canon

« on: May 14, 2013, 05:45:31 PM »

Take a look at Breeze DSLR Remote Pro Multi Camera.   There is a 15 Day free trial that controls up to 4 cameras. The cost of a licensed version is $129/camera controlled.
 
http://breezesys.com/MultiCamera/index.htm
 

53

Lenses / Re: I've got a screw loose (telephoto hood)

« on: May 14, 2013, 12:26:07 PM »

Call Canon, they have lists of part numbers for things like that.  If they don't, Roger Cicala of Lens Rentals goes thru items like that and can probably help you with a part number.  ( you can rent a 200-400mmL from him to repay him )

54

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Preorder the EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x TC

« on: May 14, 2013, 11:46:01 AM »

12k for this?

Stop with the smaller DSLRs with the 18mp sensors and make a FF that can match the D800 at a price point the 7D crowd can get into. You will not regret it.

For profissionals the 12k isn't a problem. but me... i won't get it ever.

 
Just wait!
 
I bought a good working used Kodak DCS 460 for $100.  Its original price was $35,500 in 1995.  Prices do come down, so in 50 years or so, you might be able to afford one.

55

Lenses / Re: Andy Rouse Reviews the EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x

« on: May 14, 2013, 10:52:38 AM »

It seems like a very nice lens. I have to ask myself though, if his only other choice were using the 100-400 how much different would these shots look? Sure the ISO8000 shots wouldn't have been possible at f/5.6. I guess what I'm saying is that it seems like a lot of money to gain one stop and IQ. This lens is 10x the cost of the 100-400, but is it 10x a better lens? It will be very interesting to see what an updated 100-400 will bring.

There is little doubt that each time you move to increased lens performance that the law of diminishing returns comes into play.  Making larger diameter lenses with much smaller tolerances, hand assembly and extensive calibration make for a crazy price.  They can't actually grind the elements accurately enough to just put them into a lens, the elements must be individually matched to each other by testing them.  Its a very fine point, but its the only way to get the extra performance.
 
I'm sure I could tell the difference between one and my 100-400mmL, but it won't be night and day.  I had a Tokina 400mm f/5.6 that I bought used for $125.  It was only a slight downgrade IQ wise from my L, but the price was 10X less.

56

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Preorder the EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x TC

« on: May 14, 2013, 10:41:58 AM »

Interesting that the case isn't included.  Granted, the case for my 600 II just sits unused, and I store the lens in a Storm im2720. But still, c'mon Canon...nearly $12K for the lens and you don't include the case?!?

I'd be surprised if a lens cap, case, and drop in gelatin filter were not included. Certainly, a Dealer will include them.
 
They are available for separate purchase.   BTE, the MSRP of the lens Case is only $920     http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_200_400mm_f_4l_is_usm_extender_1_4x#SuppliesAndAccessories
 
CR Guy is ordering one or more for his Rental business, so he will find out for sure.

57

Reviews / Re: The Digital Picture Reviews the Tamron 24-70

« on: May 13, 2013, 08:04:13 PM »

After seeing this:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/09/tamron-24-70-f2-8-vc-issue
How could anyone consider one of these lenses? The company blatantly showed us who they are by bringing these lenses to market.  I spent the money (which was dear), for the Canon and never looked back. Great lens that most likely will last for years. If I see the name Tamron I just turn the page...I would not consider any of their products....I also own non-Canon lenses (Sigma & Zeiss) so my outlook is not just Canon fanboy ism....

 
Sometimes assembly problems are batch related, and every manufacturer has them.  Klaus at Photozone did not have issues, and he is very tough on rating lenses.
 
Unless there is a general consensus that the lenses have problems, it might be just a bad batch.  It is something to be aware of, and to watch for if you buy one, but not yet a reason to avoid them.  The only company where I've had consistent issues with lenses is Sigma, so I no longer buy them. 

58

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: panorama on canon6d?

« on: May 13, 2013, 07:02:17 PM »

The photo stich tool has been packaged with Canon DSLR's for years.  It allows you to stitch images together to create a panorama.  In its simplest form, you can place your camera on a tripod, rotate it and take overlapping images.  Then use the software to join them.  This is not ideal, but it works.
 
There are lots of tools, special heads, etc online, try it out in its simple form to see if you like it before buying the expensive tools.

59

Reviews / Re: The Digital Picture Reviews the Tamron 24-70

« on: May 13, 2013, 06:06:20 PM »

This is worrisome, if the only way they could get one that met specs was to get it from Tamron.  My dealer told me to avoid it, apparently his customers had similar issues.

Thanks for the link - I recently saw even Amazon Germany temporarily stopped delivering this lens since "the product didn't meet the specs" (whatever this means...).

I'm still planing to get this lens since I don't use servo af a lot, but only from a brick and mortar store where I can replace it until I end up with a good copy... as did the reviewer, maybe a "golden sample"?

In the mid focal lengths at f/2.8, the Canon 24-70 L II has the image quality edge over the Tamron 24-70 VC, but the differences are not dramatic. At f/4, those differences become harder to see. The Canon has less barrel distortion at 24mm and has better bokeh. The Tamron has slightly less flare at the long end of the focal length range. The Tamron has more CA at 24mm, but less at 70mm.

I also disagree with the reviewer predicting "You are probably buying an f/2.8 lens to use at f/2.8 a considerable percentage of the time." - it's for use when you need it, for other shots more dof is a good thing.

I would not buy it to use at f/8,  I bought my 24-70mmL MK II to use at f/2.8, and if it could f/1.4, I'd use it there as well.  Obviously, not every shot would be f/2.8, but 70% or more will be (for me).

60

Lenses / Re: EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Announcement Tonight

« on: May 13, 2013, 06:01:55 PM »

Does that now mean that we can see some of the other anticipated announcements like the 100-400mmL MK II over the next few months, or will we get those eagerly awaited "M" lenses