April 19, 2014, 07:26:02 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 - R1-7D

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 13
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 24-70 VC and 5d3
« on: September 11, 2013, 12:32:48 PM »
All of this is exactly why I went with the Canon Ef 24-70 f/2.8 II.

The Tamron is a nice lens, but there is a lot of issues that I have read about. Even with their great warranty I don't necessarily trust their service centers.

Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM
« on: August 30, 2013, 02:09:34 AM »
ISO 100, 1/4000, f/2.8 at 24mm on my 5D3.

Loving this lens!!

E88A7381 by HadrianRobinson, on Flickr

ISO 800, 1/800, f/9

E88A7567 by HadrianRobinson, on Flickr

Lenses / Re: 24-70 II slight clicking sound when zooming
« on: August 30, 2013, 01:55:39 AM »
Just checked mine out and it seems to be fine with no abnormal sounds coming from it. It's a 2013 model.

Lenses / Re: 24-70 II slight clicking sound when zooming
« on: August 29, 2013, 07:13:17 PM »
This is all very interesting. I bought my new 24-70 II past Sunday and it's the 2013 model with center pinch cap. I'll check tonight and see what I find. I haven't noticed any noise...but I haven't really be looking/listening.

Lenses / Re: Canon 24-105mm f/4 IS : Seller's remorse?
« on: August 27, 2013, 02:36:00 PM »
I had a relatively good copy of the 24-105 that I just sold a week ago Monday. I replaced it with the 24-70 f/2.8 II on Sunday. So far I am not missing the 24-105 at all, despite it having more reach and IS. it was a great lens, but the 24-70 is something else. The colours it produces and the sharpness are amazing.

Maybe when I see Getitdigitial sell the 24-105 for $649 again I'll pick up another copy in the future.

Lenses / Re: Need Help with a 24-70 lens
« on: August 26, 2013, 08:25:43 PM »
Unless you can go with the Mark II version of Canon's 24-70, I would suggest you stay away from their Mark I.

If you really want f/2.8 look at the Tamron. It is an exception lens! Superior IS to the 24-105 and sharper. Also comes with a 6 year warranty!!!!

I don't suppose that Canon USA ships to canada. :(

My understanding is that if you have a RAW file and the sharpening is set to ZERO you get the best image quality because you have not changed the original raw data and that should be exactly the same sharpness that the sensor reads through the lens.

Then if you add any sharpening at all you change the original sharpness by sharpening it more than was originally captured and thus you lose image quality.

Whenever i edit photos i immediately notice it even if the sharpness setting is set to 1 and quickly change it to zero. I do shoot with a 1DX and mostly with 85mm 1.2L II & TS-E24mm 3.5 L II That are both very sharp lenses and don't need to be sharper.

So why do most people sharpen their photos??? Most editing software has the default settings at a whole lot of sharpening and the image quality just looks awful to me if sharpening is used.

Then there is software made specifically for sharpening.. Who needs it so much?? Does it only exist to make bad lenses look sharp?

first of all there are different purpose to sharpen the pictures , is it for the web, print in a glossy magazinet or news paper etc
what you can do is a basic sharpening, the rest depends of how big are the picture, what do you want use  it for. web? news paper, glossy magazine etc. printing?
There are many simple roles to sharpen a image, there are also many  difficult roles to sharpen a image and to what media  with strengthening in some parts of the scene as one example or after levels etc etc etc
as this example with a wide open lens at 1,4 , with emphasis  so is the insect sharpened with USM and not the whole picture

you can by sharpening give the motive a new meaning

That is a gorgeous shot!

Lenses / Re: canon 50mm 1.4 vs 1.2
« on: August 09, 2013, 06:26:37 PM »
I have the 1.4 and rented the 1.2 from Vistek last weekend. As far as sharpness goes, in my opinion, it was a toss up between the two.

The 1.2, however, like others have said, has much better contrast and the bokeh is just incredible. If you think the 1.4's bokeh is something to brag about, the 1.2 will rock your world.

The downside is the price. I don't think I can justify the price difference for something that only myself and fellow camera enthusiasts would ever notice, and even then the difference isn't THAT big.

The extra durability and weather sealing is definitely a plus. If you think you need the durability and sealing with your work in the future, then perhaps the 1.2 is the best choice for you.

Hello, I'm new here to this forum.

Several times a year I will do a review of Canon cameras. I am an advanced amatuer, I mostly just share things that I have found with the cameras I test. In my last review I compared the Canon 6D vs. 5D Mark III.

At minute 12:13 in the video I compare the center focus point on the 6D to the 5D3, after reading the wikipedia page on the -EV rating I gave up on trying to do the test accurately (as I talk about in the video) so I just set them up under the same low light conditions to see which one would work better. The 6D beat the 5D3 in my tests.

I am always trying to make my reviews better, so I was wondering if someone could help give me with pointers on how to do this more accurately in the future. I am more of a video guy than a stills guy.


Hey Dave!

Big fan of your videos and online tutorials. Keep up the good work and welcome to the Forum!

I'm sure you'll get some good pointers from the members here with regards to your question.


Third Party Lenses (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) / Re: Tokina 16-28mm F2.8
« on: May 22, 2013, 03:45:29 PM »
Great idea! I'll post some of my shots later this afternoon.

Great pictures BTW!

From what I have been reading elsewhere on the Internet is that it looks like us previous Pro users will get grand-fathered into Yahoo/Flickr's new system, meaning that we can continue to use our current Pro accounts and upload well pasted 1 TB of photos (if that's possible), as well as continue to renew our annual subscription for as long as we want.

Yes, if you are signed up for auto-renew.  But that was made mandatory last year, so some people (such as, for example, me), who bought a 2-year Pro subscription two years ago, aren't 'recurring Pro' users.  My Pro subscription will expire.

According to one staff member post, they're 'working on a plan' to allow non-recurring Pro users convert to recurring Pro accounts, and thus keep the Pro features (stats, ability to replace photos, ad-free).

Yeah, and they 'won't screw up' Tumblr, too....something else I'll believe when I see.

I am not impressed either, but at least it's something for us. Hopefully they do get something arranged for non recurring Pro members.

From what I have been reading elsewhere on the Internet is that it looks like us previous Pro users will get grand-fathered into Yahoo/Flickr's new system, meaning that we can continue to use our current Pro accounts and upload well pasted 1 TB of photos (if that's possible), as well as continue to renew our annual subscription for as long as we want. We can also just give up the Pro account entirely and go to Flickr's new model and live with the ads.

The New Flickr: What it Means for Flickr Pro Users

Doesn't apply to you, but I use Aperture, and a little app called Aperture Inspector to pull all sorts of stats from my libraries.

Is Aperture Inspector a plug in for Aperture? Would you mind telling me how to get it?

As always, your knowledge and insight to all of this makes this forum great. Thanks!

EDIT: link was already provided in the thread! :)

Lenses / Re: +18 AFMA out of the box....return?
« on: May 17, 2013, 05:09:36 AM »
Well I just ran my 50mm f/1.4 through Focal Pro about eight times tonight. EV was 11. When Focal worked (it kept erroring out saying it could no longer find the target and then it prevented me from closing any of the app's windows) I got results from +10 to +15. When I got the +15 it said the fitment quality was poor. I got +10 with a "good" fitment quality, +12 with excellent, and twice +13 with excellent fitment quality and confidence rating. I set the lens to +13.

I don't know whether it is the new version of Focal or just this particular lens, but every other lens I have was much easier to calibrate...with no errors when using the program. Of course, f/2.8 is the fastest aperture of all my other lens, so perhaps having a two-stop aperture difference makes a difference to focus reliability on the target?

Anyways, I have tomorrow to return the lens before the long weekend here. I'm wondering if I should and get a different copy of it, or just keep playing with this current one. When I first brought it home it front-focused something fierce before I calibrated it. Now it is pretty good with focusing. I'm just getting a little anxious with all this camera and lens micro adjustment talk.

Advice? :-\

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 13