September 19, 2014, 08:20:10 PM

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 ... 330 331 [332] 333 334 ... 563
Canon General / Re: Canon USA shop direct and canon loyalty program help
« on: September 12, 2012, 12:07:16 PM »
Canon must charge State taxes by law.  Even if they did not, you must pay them by law.
The Canon CLP program is done by phone only.  Have the serial number of your old Broken film SLR or powershot.  I usually get free shipping.  Sign up for a account online first, and I think they give free shipping to account holders.  The way they show it on the receipt is confusing, since they charge for it but include it in the discount.
Google Canon CLP, there are many entries with the phone number, or call technical support and ask for it.

Lenses / Re: Anyone heard when BH, Adorama or Amazon will ship 24-70 II?
« on: September 12, 2012, 12:01:01 PM »
Amazon typically runs a couple of months behind on new high end photo items.  Adorama and B&H are among the first.  Small local shops also seem to be pretty fast.  They only order one at a time, and Canon seems to want to support them.

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 2.8 II quick review
« on: September 11, 2012, 08:22:10 PM »
product quality: for weight reduction body is made out of plastic (but seems to be solid), lens connection is made out of metal with a rubber lip, zoom is very good, focus ring is  excellent, the lens has a fixed filter holder, stray-light protection is only streaky, AF is a little bit faster than the AF in version one 

24 mm on FF/APS-C: -1,6% / -2,3 % (barrel-shaped) / Tamron -1,9 % / -3,1 % (barrel-shaped)
40 mm on FF/APS-C: 0,1 % / 0,4 % (pulvinated) / Tamron -0,1 % / 0,3 % (barrel-shaped/pulvinated)
70 mm on FF/APS-C: 0,4 % / 1,0 % (pulvinated) / Tamron 0,4 % / 1,1 % (pulvinated)

I don´t put the data from the Nikkor 24-70 made with the D800E on the net, because it´s an old lens and the optical quality is far away from the EF 24-70 II. For D800E and D4 users I hope, that Nikon put a new version on the market.

Why is the distortion less for FF than APS-C? That doesn't sound right.
I agree about the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G.  It was very disappointing on my Nikon D800.  Its not a very old lens either, nowhere as old as the Canon 24-70mm MK I.

Macro / Re: 7D+100mm L=Beautiful shot
« on: September 11, 2012, 08:10:37 PM »
The 7D seems to love a 100mm Macro, particularly my 100mm L.  I like the combo better than with my FF body.

Replace your 7D with a rumor?  Canon just did a major firmware update on the 7D.  This is a very strong hint that a 7D MK II is out a long ways.  The Rumored Nikon D400 has not appeared either.
For close to the price of a good wide angle lens, you can buy a refurb 5D MK II and your existing lenses may be wide enough.

Lenses / Re: Roger at LensRentals impression of 24-70 II
« on: September 11, 2012, 03:47:04 PM »
The Tamron breaking down so early in its life does not bode well for being able to count on it when needed.  using three dabs of glue to hold a large diameter element in place is really cutting corners.  I'd expect them to be failing in droves before they are a year old, and as the adhesive dries out a little more.

I would hope they make a production adjustment to address this.
I certainly hope so, but so far, they have been silent.  They don't have a good record of acting quickly to such issues.  Those who use the lens in temperature extremes where expansion / contraction is prevelant might be affected the most.

Here's the crop ...

Edit: Upon a bit more investigation, this black halo is NOT present when using DPP. Might this be related to Lightroom 4? Will have to go back and double check my LR4 settings and report back.
Your LR settings are indeed a issue.  Reset them to zero.  If you have LR set to apply a ton of sharpening on inport, reset it to apply just a little, or none at all depending on the ISO.

Lenses / Re: Roger at LensRentals impression of 24-70 II
« on: September 11, 2012, 03:32:10 PM »
Much better than I expected.  I guess I'll have to finally bite the bullet.  After five poor mark one lenses, there is finally one worth having. 
The Tamron breaking down so early in its life does not bode well for being able to count on it when needed.  using three dabs of glue to hold a large diameter element in place is really cutting corners.  I'd expect them to be failing in droves before they are a year old, and as the adhesive dries out a little more.

Lenses / Re: The 50mm f/1.4: Conclusion
« on: September 11, 2012, 11:28:46 AM »
So I had to send my 50mm f/1.4 up to the lens hospital in Spokane. It was a DIY fix that went awry. It's being discharged now and is on it's way back home to me. How much did all of this cost? Not as much as a new lens. Not quite, anyway. But it sure feels like it. But it's my own fault, and ended up costing me more because of the botched fix-it job.

If you own this lens: Store it in the middle of the focus range, like around the 3 foot mark, and NOT at the infinity point like a lot of people recommend on the internets. I got this advice from the guy who worked on it, a factory-authorized lens tech.

I had the 1.4, I used to store it with the focus barrel all the way in the lens. Was this correct?
There are theories, but realistically, if its stored on end, it will eventually be all the way in.  My lens was damaged when I bought it used, no more problems after repair about 3 years back. 

Lenses / Re: Which to buy: 16-35 f/2.8 vs. 17-40 f/4...
« on: September 11, 2012, 11:26:11 AM »
I had a 17-40mm L, and somehow never warmed up to it on my 5D MK II.  I sold it a year ago, after finding a old Tokina 17mm f/3.5 prime that was better.
I caught a new 16-35mmL at Newegg for $1350 around the end of July, but have not yet decided if I like it better than my old prime. 

Lenses / Re: The 50mm f/1.4: Conclusion
« on: September 11, 2012, 11:13:44 AM »
Alpine. He didn't actually do the work, but he sent it out to somebody he knew who was qualified as such. I'm taking him at his word because a) he's got a pretty decent reputation and b) I couldn't find anything negative about the service on the internets. Spokane is only about 3 hours north of me, but with these gas prices I figured I was better off just having him ship it.

Also, I'm paying for the original repair work, plus my botched repair job (stripped thread and one other electronic part that needed replacing).
Yes, I've had Alpine work on some of my older lenses, and have been happy.  The owner is a very pleasant guy.
Camera Corral in Cour d' Alene does a good job as well.  However, Canon's flat rate repair price for the 50 1.4 is hard to beat, and I get a discount thru CPS.

EOS Bodies / Re: Is a 46mp Canon EOS-1 on the Way? [CR1]
« on: September 11, 2012, 11:03:54 AM »
....In development announcements seem to be getting more popular with Canon and their high end products. ....

Do you think that this trend to 'in development' announcements is restricted to relatively new products? Ones that won't necessarily affect sales of existing Canon products?
Development of the new super teles was combined with stopping production of the existing ones such that they were not generally available for well over a year.  That certainly hit Canon sales as well as their bottom line.  Same with the announcement of the 24-70mm MK II.

I'll say it again, why would I want this when I have a 5D3 and a 40mm pancake?

Yes it's smaller but I'd be giving up my viewfinder and the ability to change lenses.

Overall, if you drew a line between each corner it isn't much smaller either.

Will I have to use Sony's proprietry hotshoe and memory card format too?

How much is it again?  ::)

This camera is clearly aimed at rich photo enthusiasts/pros who likely already have a DSLR and would like to have a high quality compact option. If go a few posts back, you can see it's much smaller than the MK3 body.

I am not a rich guy and not a PRO.  My wife like a compact and high quality camera and zoom is not important for her.  Unfortunately, her budget is no more than 1.5K.  If this one is really good and under 2K, I could buy it for her.
Just wait a year, and the used price may be 1.5K

Lenses / Re: Wide Angle for Crop and FF?
« on: September 10, 2012, 10:00:25 PM »
I'd recommend buying a 10-22 for now, and once you get a FF, get a FF lens. 
Trying to make a crop lens work on a FF body is wasting your time and your money.  It might be fun to play with, but after investing $$$ in a FF body, get a proper lens.
Besides, by the time you go FF, Canon may have a new wide lens that you will want for your FF body.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Which Camera & Lens - Aviation + Animals
« on: September 10, 2012, 09:55:56 PM »
A 100-400mm L on a 7D or 1D series is very popular for Aviation, and fine for most animals, but perhaps a bit slow focusing for BIF.  Its ok on a FF too, but might be focal length limited for distant wildlife photos.
I found that my 600mm f/4 was too much of a hassle to carry and setup, but you might do ok with one.

Pages: 1 ... 330 331 [332] 333 334 ... 563