October 23, 2014, 09:17:24 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 ... 329 330 [331] 332 333 ... 575
Software & Accessories / Re: who uses Focal or similar?
« on: September 29, 2012, 08:23:57 PM »
I wish there were a macro setting for the 100mm L, I'm certain that the AFMA value will be a lot different at near macro distances.

It wasn't for me. For the 100L Macro on my 1D X, it was +4 at 50x FL, +2 at 25x FL, and +3 close up (filled the frame with FoCal's tiny target).  On the 7D, it's +2, +3, and +2, respectively, and the 5DII was -2, -1, and 0.
My 5D Mark II seemed to have a big difference, but I did not use FoCal at the time.  I'll check my new 5D Mark III with the lens. 

All EOS bodies do this, its a tolerance buildup thing.  Its been known since they came out in 1987..
There is a slightly oval shaped hole on the lens portion of the mount, and a round pin on the body that drops into the hole when the lens is locked in place.  Depending on the tolerances of the body and lens, it might be snug or move a bit.
Another thing that happens, particularly with the larger lenses is that that oval hole becomes worn or elongated, and then there is more movement.
In any event, it does not affect operation or accuracy of the lens.
Someone seems to be "Discovering" this over and over for 25 years now.

EOS Bodies / Re: Shutter count request to Canon.
« on: September 29, 2012, 08:13:18 PM »
Most of the free apps to check shutter count just plain works of fiction and do not work. 
EOS Info is free and does work, but only on certain camera bodies.  eos count, the one costing $1.49 has been around for a while now, and is deemed safe.  You use paypal to pay, so none of your credit card information is exposed.
I also discovered that Reikan FoCal is returning a correct shutter count for my 5D Mark III, so if you are doing AFMA, its a extra bonus to be able to get the shutter count.  I don't know exactly which bodies are supported.

Lenses / Re: Rumors about general porpouses lenses for APS-C
« on: September 29, 2012, 11:25:52 AM »
Dear all of you,
I am a 7D owner and I am waiting to deal for a new lens, a stadard one like 15-85 ("f/ is not good" bla bla bla) but I need one compact for trips.

Do you think that Canon will develop any new lenses for new APS-C rumored bodies in the near future?
If not I'll make a Christmas present with ol'15-85.

Thanks in advice !

17-55mm 2.8 Is worth the extra $$$.
I loved my 17-55, but sold my crops and the lens.  When I repurchased, I bought the 15-85 because it matched the zoom range and MFD I needed. 
Both of them are well worth their price.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Big Canon EOS 5D Mark II Price Drop Coming
« on: September 29, 2012, 11:23:20 AM »
I just sold my refurb 5D Mark II for $1750 a week ago.  It only had 735 actuations, over 300 of them put on it the weekend before.  I needed money for my 5D Mark III, and keep enough cash on hand to grab a deal on craigslist for a "L" lens if a bargain pops up.
$1699 seems like a deal.  The original 5D was blown out for about that price in a few days, then those who held back new ones were able to get more.  With the 600D coming out, that might not be the case.

Software & Accessories / Re: who uses Focal or similar?
« on: September 29, 2012, 11:18:17 AM »
purchased the Focal software and just did it on my kit 24-105 @105 and my 50 1.4.

50mm 1.4 needed +9 adjust
24-105 needed +5 adjust at 105mm

is that usual?
I have now done most of my lenses (I've a ton of old EF film lenses that I may consider some day).
Here is the results so far, and a typical report that FoCal Pro produces.
This is my table made to keep track of my settings in case I happen to lose them.  Zoom lenses have two settings, while primes have one.  I wish there were a macro setting for the 100mm L, I'm certain that the AFMA value will be a lot different at near macro distances.
Most of my lenses are close enough to be set to zero, but my most used lens, the 135mm L, along with my 85mm f/1.8 need AFMA.  I have yet to test the 35mmL, I overlooked it or would have done it when I had the 16-35mmL setup for 35mm.  Same for my 50mm f/1.4.  Doing a AFMA for my 15mm FE would not likely make a difference, but I'll do it anyway.

Table produced by FoCal.  As you can see, the lens had a AF issue one time.  I was outdoors, and the wind was blowing gently, so a gust might have moved the target, or just the lens misfired.  It happens more than you might think, and FoCal shows it.

Lenses / Re: Rumors about general porpouses lenses for APS-C
« on: September 29, 2012, 11:03:10 AM »
There are three excellent lenses for crop, the 10-22mm, the 15-85mm, and the 17-55mm.  They pretty well cover the wide to short telephoto range.  There is also the 18-200mm which is not spectacular, but does cover a wide range.  We keep hearing rumors of a newer version.
The 40mm EF is also excellent on crop bodies and low cost. 

Canon General / Re: Dream Package for Soccer (Football for those elsewhere)
« on: September 28, 2012, 07:12:57 PM »
Maybe just better to call it soccer.  Most know what it is. 
Football refers to many different games depending on where you are.
Football refers to a number of sports that involve, to varying degrees, kicking a ball with the foot to score a goal. The most popular of these sports worldwide is association football, more commonly known as just "football" or "soccer". Unqualified, the word football applies to whichever form of football is the most popular in the regional context in which the word appears, including association football, as well as American football, Australian rules football, Canadian football, Gaelic football, rugby league, rugby union[1] and other related games. These variations of football are known as football codes.

Lenses / Re: Wide or ultra-wide angle with excellent corner performance
« on: September 28, 2012, 07:04:20 PM »
Zooms are a compromise, the Zeiss 21mm is pretty much the reference standard, as is the TS-E 17mm.  For ordinary mortals, those are the best.  You can undoubtedly get a cinema lens that is better, but the price is out of sight, and they will likely only cover APS-C.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: FoCal likes the mk3 AF
« on: September 28, 2012, 06:05:40 PM »
Here is part of a test report.  each AFMA setting has the data and the image of the target which shows the sharpness.
The summary:

A typical AFMA test sheet:


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: FoCal likes the mk3 AF
« on: September 28, 2012, 05:49:03 PM »
I have now managed to get most of my main lenses calibrated, but ran out of time today.  I was very pleased in general with the AF consistency.
I've tried to past in a chart of the results.  I did not have the inclination to test the 100-400mm L at 50X on the 400mm focal length setting, so 30 ft or so was it.
I also like the comprehensive pdf format test report that can be saved for each lens (Focal Pro).  It also records the camera shutter count, which I was not aware of.  I had exchanged some info about the possiibility with Reikan a few months back, but haven't had a reason to use the software until now.
I'll try to post a typical report, if I can get it into a format that can be viewed.

Lenses / Re: what filter for my first "L" Lens
« on: September 28, 2012, 04:39:56 PM »
And that juicy tidbit is the only good thing to come out of selling my 10-22 when I went FF. (I plan on getting a 17-40 and have an extra B+W filter lying around for it.)
You should lose very little when selling your 10-22, used, they are about the same price as a 17-40. I am not a big fan of the 17-40 on FF, but if stopped down, its fine.  Perhaps mine was just a poor copy, it happens.  It wasn't bad, just did not seem to inspire me.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Upgrade from 40D to 5d mkii
« on: September 28, 2012, 04:36:19 PM »
Is the 5d mkii focusing better or worse than the 40d for birds in flight?  I understand that the center point is more accurate, but is it faster than the 40d?  I only shoot birds about 25% of the time, I use for BIF a canon ef 400mm L f5.6 and for stationary birds an old Heinz Kilfitt 400mm f4.0 manual focus lens as well.  The other 75% of the time I know the 5d mkii would fit me perfectly. 

 I am happy with my focusing on the 40d with the smaller aperture (f8.0-f11.0) required for birding.  As long as it is at par I will be happy. 

I understand that the 1dx 1dmkiv and 5d mkiii are better cameras.  I have just installed a new furnace new air conditioning and have completed a basement reno(aka I have no cash flow),  I am finding the cheap price of the 5d mkii very tempting, And I would like to know if anyone else has made the switch from the 40d?
The lens is the major factor for speed of autofocus, while the body controls the ability to track and accuracy.
I would not recommend the 5D Mark II for tracking moving objects as they moved to the different AF points.  It is certainly quite accurate in the center point and will focus quickly.
Why not move to a 7D?  Much more usable AF for BIF, and for $1087.20 in the Canon refurb store (sale ends today), its a good value.

Lenses / Re: what filter for my first "L" Lens
« on: September 28, 2012, 04:30:30 PM »
I tend to only use filters in situations where the protection is needed.  When I do, I have several B&W / Heliopan filters that I use.  I also have several of various brands that came with used lenses or I bought years ago when I did not know much about the varying quality.
I have so many that I have a 3 drawer storage cabinet that has overflowed.  Probably 100 or so.  What suprises me is the owners who have a B&W filter on a old low value canon lens like a 35-70.  The filter is likely worth more than the lens.

Nikon tends to stockpile a camera body before announcing it.  This is part of the reason for so many leaks, since printers are printing manuals and other documents to stuff in the boxes, and someone always leaks information.
Actually, I think it works to Nikon's benefit, since they get free advance advertising, and interest builds up.  If only they had good lenses for FF at reasonable prices.  They had optimized many of their older FF lenses for crop as well as continuing to spend resources turning out new crop lenses such that they find themselves with fine FF cameras, but a limited selection of high quality FF lenses.
Its becoming pretty obvious that FF cameras are rapidly moving to mainstream for photo enthusiasts and they find themselves in a hole.

Pages: 1 ... 329 330 [331] 332 333 ... 575