October 21, 2014, 10:18:10 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 - Mt Spokane Photography

Pages: 1 ... 299 300 [301] 302 303 ... 575
4501
I've seen them discounted already.  They are in stock in most stores too.  They will likely become scarce before Christmas, since many will buy them come black Friday.
Call a dealer (Don't e-mail) and ask for a discount.  You might be suprised.
http://www.canonpricewatch.com/product/03850/Canon-EF-24-70mm-f2.8L-II-USM-price.html

The price in US for this lens is $2300. Where do you see the price drop? The price will remain as is even on black friday(same for 1D X).
It was a short term sale and is over now, I posted a link at the time.
At first, that is the type of sale we will see. 
On Black Friday (or the following Monday) last year, B&H had a blanket 10% discount for all their cameras and lenses.  It only ran for a few hours.  I cannot guarantee that it will happen again, but it is likely. They tweeted it to those who were signed up to receive their tweets.

4502
You are not protecting the LCD screen.  There is already a LCD Screen protector on your camera.
What you are doing is protecting the protector.  I've never seen a need to do that, but have replaced a couple of Canon protectors that had minor scratches after years of use.  I just called Canon and ordered them. 
 

4503
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II
« on: November 08, 2012, 12:50:22 PM »
Nice job of reviewing, Justin.  I've had five of the Mark I copies.  None really bad, but not good enough for me to keep them.
I've been watching and reading the reviews, and deliberating if f/2.8 is fast enough for my low light use.  Right now, I use fast primes, and usually find them at f/2 or faster even with extreme high ISO settings.
I did purchase a D800 with 24-70G lens, and found myself at ISO 12800 much of the time, and the D800 requires a ton of NR at 12800.  The images still look good, but I need a supercomputer to do that level of NR on a 150mb image.  I gave up pretty quickly on that idea.
 

4504
Lenses / Re: New 24-70 II, maybe AFMA will help?
« on: November 08, 2012, 12:33:23 PM »
Shawn - I'm not trying to spend your money - but you are shooting a 1DX with a 24-70II... If you like shooting wide open - I would seriously recommend FoCal - it made a huge difference with my 5DIII... If you buy it - after you AFMA - run the aperture sharpness test at both ends... I was really surprised by the results... Cheers!
Yes, first thing to do with a new lens (after you snap a few images just to see it work) is to run a AFMA and FoCal is the best tool, its reliable and accurate (if you read the instructions and follow them)
Then you will know that your lens is focusing accurately.
The other quick and dirty method is to put it on a tripod and use AF to snap a image of a flat target that is parallel to the sensor.  Then use liveview and live autofocus to do the same.  If the live AF image is sharper than the first image, AFMA is needed.
Be aware that its sometimes very difficult to visually detect tiny differences in sharpness, but Focal can detect them, which is why so many use it.
 

4505
Lenses / Re: do image stabilisers decrease image quality?
« on: November 07, 2012, 11:56:12 PM »
Hi,
    IMHO, every element added will decrease IQ by a bit, so a lens without IS will have slightly better IQ than lens with IS (when both lens are from the same generation and same grade) under perfect shooting condition.
So you believe a lens with one element is sharpest?  Maybe one with no elements is the ultimate?

That would be so. Looking through a hollow tube will always give you the clearest sharpest image. You can not improve the light when it is in it's near perfect unrestricted form.
If you believe that, then why buy a lens?  You can get a sharp image without one?  Why don'y you start selling them, you can sell sharper lenses for just the cost of a roll of toilet paper.
Multiple lens elements do, in fact correct the various abberations that come from just one element.  Thats why the lenses that are sharpest have multiple elements.
Your theory seems pretty badly flawed when compared with the real world.

Exactly what do you think lenses do?
They take the pure raw light and the bend it, skew it, rearrange it then focus it.
Multiple elements correct the aberrations that the first few elements create. Multiple elements are used to put the light back in the arrangement it started with. It doesn't improve what is natural.
Without one element the light isn't flawed, it isn't until light hits the glass that it changes and bends and compresses.

Weixing is partially right, in that when it touches the first element something is lost. Every element it touches after it looses something, but the following elements are putting it back in the right order for focus. Put enough elements in a lens the light will never make it through.

Yes, something is lost, and it is light. 
But ...  does IQ get worse with each additional element, as he said?  If so, why not a 1 or a 2 element lens?  IQ should be much better than those 22 element lenses - less CA, sharper, less distortion, etc - Really ??  Where are those one or two element lenses with superior IQ, or for that matter, 5 element lenses?
Its a nice theory, but the best lenses with the best IQ have many elements, and they do lose light, but not all that much.  The 9 element 85mm f/1.8 has a Tstop of 2, so it loses 0.2 stops in the glass.  The 20 element 70-200mm f/4L IS has a Tstop of 4.6, so it loses 0.6 stops.  20 elements, and it has suburb IQ and sharpness! 
So, how many elements until you lose a stop?  Maybe 30 some elements?  Your worry that light won't make it thru a lens due to the number of elements seems a bit far fetched.

4506
Lenses / Re: do image stabilisers decrease image quality?
« on: November 07, 2012, 09:37:27 PM »
Hi,
    IMHO, every element added will decrease IQ by a bit, so a lens without IS will have slightly better IQ than lens with IS (when both lens are from the same generation and same grade) under perfect shooting condition.
So you believe a lens with one element is sharpest?  Maybe one with no elements is the ultimate?

That would be so. Looking through a hollow tube will always give you the clearest sharpest image. You can not improve the light when it is in it's near perfect unrestricted form.
If you believe that, then why buy a lens?  You can get a sharp image without one?  Why don'y you start selling them, you can sell sharper lenses for just the cost of a roll of toilet paper.
Multiple lens elements do, in fact correct the various abberations that come from just one element.  Thats why the lenses that are sharpest have multiple elements.
Your theory seems pretty badly flawed when compared with the real world.

4507
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Would I benefit from going full frame?
« on: November 07, 2012, 09:29:53 PM »
Except for sports or bif, the 5D MK II is a great camera.  I stopped using my 7D except for product photography and macros in favor of the 5D MK II.
If you do low light photography, its a big step.  I am pretty unhappy with the 7D even at ISO 1600 its weak, while I get better images with the MK II at 3200 and even 6400.  I'm hoping to get 1/2 or better additional stops with my new 5D MK III, but I have yet to really give it a heavy duty test.

4508
Lenses / Re: do image stabilisers decrease image quality?
« on: November 07, 2012, 09:18:47 PM »
Hi,
    IMHO, every element added will decrease IQ by a bit, so a lens without IS will have slightly better IQ than lens with IS (when both lens are from the same generation and same grade) under perfect shooting condition.
So you believe a lens with one element is sharpest?  Maybe one with no elements is the ultimate?

4509
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon Sales Rising
« on: November 07, 2012, 06:21:35 PM »
We have a small local Camera store which is actually run by photographers.  They sell both Nikon and Canon.  The owner tells me that Canon is much better to deal with than Nikon.  As a result, he sells more Canon Cameras even though he is happy to sell you Nikon if he can get it.  He did get a D800 for me, its a nice camera.  Lenses and service are a different story.
I'm back to a 5D MK III, its just much more usable over a wide range of applications, and I use mine tethered to a pc for product photography a lot.  Nikon loses big time there.

4510
Lenses / Re: 24-70/4 MFT charts
« on: November 07, 2012, 06:12:24 PM »
http://eosdoc.com/manuals/?q=jlcalc

But, actually, I missed the point about the shorter MFD of 20 cm that I just read in the description, vs. 38 cm as stated in the Canon specifications.  Thanks for pointing that out!

Let's think about the practical implications.  An MFD of 20 cm, with the Canon flange-focal distance of 4.4 cm and a lens that when extended to 70 mm focal length is 12 cm long (DPR's spec is a little longer, I subtracted for the part of the mount that extends behind the flange).  So the working distance of the bare lens is ~3.6 cm, and if you put on a Canon EF 25 II extension tube (which is actually 27mm long), your working distance is 0.9 cm, i.e. to get that almost 1:1 magnification, your subject is less than a finger-width from the front element.  Yikes!  H-IS for longer exposure or not, with the apparent light loss at high reproduction ratios, it's going to be pretty hard to use this lens for macro.
A Kenko 1.4X TC might be better than tubes for a lens like this if you want macro.  I'm not recommending it, but putting the objective a fraction of a inch from the subject makes it very difficult to illuminate and easy to get squashed bug on your lens.

4511
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Refurbished 5D MK3s?
« on: November 07, 2012, 06:05:07 PM »
Canon has not been selling refurb 5D MK III's.  They usually let them pile up for a year or so.  The Used cameras that B&H sells are not Canon refurbished.  We may see Canon refurbished 5D MK III bodies at B&H, and Adorama before they appear on Canons site.

Exactly. The 70-300 L was released two years ago, yet it only showed up on Canon's refurbished site a few months ago. Some products, mysteriously, never show up on the refurbished site. For example, the 200 2.8 L prime (which is more than 16 years old) is never listed, even though there must be thousands of them out there that would be good candidates for refurbishing.

Although the 5DII was listed on the site for a couple of years, it has really only been consistently available within the last year.

Point being, there is no consistent or predictable pattern for what gets listed and when it gets listed.
I asked them about when and why a product is added to the site.  Basically, what they told me was that they need to have a very large number of refurbished items in stock to list it.

So, a very slow selling lens like the 200mm f/2.8 will likely never appear.  The refurb lenses are usually display models or new returns, and thats a lens you seldom see on display.  Any refurbs will likely go to stores like B&H.

4512
Lenses / Re: 35mm lenses vs 24-70
« on: November 07, 2012, 05:52:05 PM »
The 35mmL is fantastic. but, as with any wide aperture lens, the depth of field at f/1.4 is shallow, and a slight error in focusing can make for a fuzzy image. 
If your camera does not have AFMA to fine tune the autofocus, you might actually be happier with the new 35mm f/2.  The price is a little less than I expected.
However, I do not expect to sell my 35mmL, its fantastic, and very good even at f/1.4

4513
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: AA Battery Charger and Batteries
« on: November 07, 2012, 05:44:26 PM »
Check Thomas Distributing in the USA for batteries and chargers.  The charger is very important, the el cheapo ones can ruin expensive batteries in just a few recharges.  Battery makers love them.

4514
I've seen them discounted already.  They are in stock in most stores too.  They will likely become scarce before Christmas, since many will buy them come black Friday.
Call a dealer (Don't e-mail) and ask for a discount.  You might be suprised.
http://www.canonpricewatch.com/product/03850/Canon-EF-24-70mm-f2.8L-II-USM-price.html

4515
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 60D Microfocus Adjustment on FoCal
« on: November 07, 2012, 05:33:40 PM »
I've only done 2 lenses so far, my 85mm 1.8 (which comes up with a different number, near zero, each time) and my 50mm 1.4 that won't calibrate at all.

Lighting I think is an issue, but the mac beta says sorta weird things about iso, so who knows . . . not a lot of time on my hands :)
For lighting, I learned the hard way not to use CFL or Fluorescent Tubes :)
They drive FoCal nuts!
I use 98 CRI T8 tubes with a electronic ballast.  Works perfectly.  Just don't use the old non electronic ballasts.

Pages: 1 ... 299 300 [301] 302 303 ... 575