I have 52mm-to-58mm filter adapter which looks very much like the ES-52 lens hood . Perhaps it could act like one as well.
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.
Not only is it arbitrary, but it also changes over time. For example, when I was growing up, 28mm lenses were far more common than 24mm lenses. But these days, I doubt many people are buying 28mm lenses - all the interest is in 24mm lenses or wider.
The same could be said for 85mm. While appreciating that many people buy 85mm lenses, I suspect that the "standard" longer prime would be in the 90-135mm range (especially when you consider all of the macro lenses in that range that are sold).
I agree with the 24mm vs 28
But 85mm is still by far the most popular short telephoto.
B&H has almost 1400 reviews of the 85 1.8, and only 90 reviews of the 100 f/2, even though these two lenses are about the same price, same size, and deliver the same IQ
I'm getting an M. Mostly this will be my Parks (WDW) travel setup where the 5D3 is too bulky/heavy.The "M" is APS C, so you will see a angle of view 1.6 X that of a 200mm lens, or 320mm.
I'm thinking for Animal Kingdom in bringing the M with the Tamron 70-200 + 1.4 TC. I get 448mm @ f/4. Is that right?
Have you tried one with the Tamron? I would not expect it to work well with a Tamron lens, it may be extremely slow to focus. Most third party lenses do not play well with Canon's live view. There is no phase detect with a EOS M, so try first or make sure you can return it.
With a huge lens, the body size makes only a slight difference, and balance may be poor. You might be far better off with a SL1 and the ability to use phase detect AF if you want a small body. Tamron Af will work reasonably well with phase detect.
Canonwatch has what is purported to be a leaked image, would seem this beast is getting a bit less mythical.
Copy images, never move. Make sure your copy is good, and then make sure you have a backup of that location. Only then, format the card to make it squeaky clean.
I load many cards as copy and paste after a trip and keep the originals until I am done with all the PP and copy / backup the final images. Only then will I delete or reformat the card.
"Whether or not regions outside the focal plane appear sharp...that's DoF" - That applies to your eyes, not the original image.
Yes, it still applies to the original image. Tell me...how do you calculate your (incorrect) concept of the "DoF" of 'the original image'. I'd like to see the math behind that, if you could share it. Also, what do you even call THAT THING - because it's not the DoF, by definition.
Regardless, while a tree falling in the forest with no one around to hear it does, in fact, make a sound, a photograph without someone to look at it is a completely meaningless collection of 0's and 1's or an equally meaningless collection of developed silver halide grains in an emulsion. The moment someone views it, all of my points about CoC apply...and that, for all purposes relevant to photographs, is the real end of the discussion.
I suggest you to read all my posts in this thread, it might help to understand my position (if you didn't already).
Z-axis resolution? Where did that come from? The only thing that sensor gathers is the light to determine a color for each pixel. Everything else is just information manipulation. If you really don't understand how to define "the sharpest area", then you should study the principles of CDAF, it's all there.
I did read them, and it appears that you don't really understand what DoF is, or at least such understanding isn't coming across in your posts. For example, "...CoC is about perception. DoF is not, it is about information..., and several iterations thereof. That seems to sum up your argument, but that statement is fundamentally wrong. You cannot determine DoF without a CoC value, either arbitrarily chosen or empirically determined. DoF is based on CoC and other factors, so if you believe that you can determine DoF without CoC, you don't understand what DoF means.
As for 'the sharpest area', that's the focal plane, the plane in space at which the lens is focused. It's a plane, with effectively no depth (although practically, it has some - just as real lenses aren't the infinitely thin lenses we pretend they are for optical calculations). Everything in front and behind that plane is less sharp, progressively more so at increasing distance along the optical axis. Whether or not regions outside the focal plane appear sharp...that's DoF, and it is affected by several factors, including CoC.