Messages

1

Lenses / Re: I have a weight limit....what would you bring?

« on: May 18, 2013, 02:47:56 AM »

All interesting and thanks for everyone's thoughts.  Today I am leaning towards the 24-105 + 17-40 + "Shorty 40" (for low light situations) in my Retrospective bag.  I love my 70-200 but on past trips, based on EXIF on LR, rarely used it (this is my first trip with the 5D - my old kit was a crop with 15-85 + 10-22 + 70-200).  I did use the WA zoom for interiors.  I know that I'll miss whatever I leave home, but I've lugged a heavier kit in temps over 100F and it is no fun.

Since you're trying to keep weight down, it seems a bit odd to me to take two overlapping f/4 zooms.  How often did you use the 17-40 wider than 24?  If seldom, leave it behind.  If you hardly ever use the 70-200 because you hardly ever go beyond 70mm (as opposed to because you seldom go beyond 105mm), what about taking 17-40 + 50mm prime?

The advantage of the 17-40 is that it is weather sealed and does wide as wel as 'normal', a real asset if changing lenses is a no-no (ie dusty or wet environment). This is why I carry both the 17-40 and 24-105. Depending on the conditions I often pick a lens and stick with it during the rest of the day.

2

Lenses / Re: When is the New 100-400 Coming?

« on: May 18, 2013, 02:39:28 AM »

I'm really surprised by the 4 to 1 out selling of the 70-300.  The 70-300 is vastly superior to the 100-400 from 70-300mm.  While no, it's not a great birding lens, it's extra 2 stops of IS and extra IQ are above and beyond the 100-400.  As far as the method by which it zooms, is a complete non-issue.

I am surprised too.
The 300mm on crop 1.6 (for example 7D) is still 480mm. That is more than 300 or 400mm on FF.
Of course light conditions must be good - so there is a little limitation

I'm not so surprised considering most people probably use the 100-400 on a crop, that gives you 640 mm equivalent Add to this the fact the 100-400 is still the best way to get to 400 mm with IS on a budget, and that it 'collapses' to a very reasonable size as mentioned earlier, still make this lens a winner.

3

Lenses / Re: I have a weight limit....what would you bring?

« on: May 17, 2013, 05:59:46 AM »

OP, your list of lenses is quite sensible to me. For cultural travels my kit consists of:

5DMkII Gripless
24-105 f/4 L IS
17-40 f/4 L
Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 VC USD (contingency lens if I need longer focal lengths, optically capable but compact)
50 f/1.8 MkI or 35 f/2.0.

I don't bring a flash or tri-pod but do carry a 77mm polarising filter that I only occasionally use.

This fits in a Lowepro Fastpack 250 with room to spare for some stuff like a jacket, food or whatever in the top compartment: http://store.lowepro.com/backpacks/fastpack-250

This setup (or variations there of) has served me well on several travels in countries like Oman+UIE, Cyprus, India. Note that we travel a lot by car (I drive most of the time) and the pace is rather high so there is limited time between journey legs for extensive photography and things like lens changes let alone tri-pod use. The 24-105 is the workhorse here that I should have bought much earlier (I made due with a 28-135 IS for a long time).

Now if I were to revisit Costa Rica (Wildlife) I would definitely take the 7D and 100-400 and very likely another body for general photography, possibly the Sony Nex-6 with the 16-50mm kitlens and the 30 mm f/2.8 in E-mount.

4

Lenses / Re: When is the New 100-400 Coming?

« on: May 16, 2013, 05:50:10 PM »

<p>Canon may also be waiting to see how the EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x sells, would people really hold off buying it if a new 100-400 was available?</p>

HUH?? at a price of $12,000....compared to say...$3000 at the high end for a updated new 100-400...I dont think the 200-400 is even on anyones radar except for the high rollers who actually "use" the lens everyday for its intended use... I'll never buy a 200-400 at my level maybe rent a few times and thats it..

Agreed, there's really very little shared ground (market share) for these lenses. Now if Canon would release a 200-400 f/4 without the built-in TC, that would be something of a different story (I think Nikon has a great offering in this respect).

5

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Do you trust your camera?

« on: May 15, 2013, 10:36:31 AM »

A camera is only a tool. Better tools make life easier, but are no substitute for workmanship

For me, the histogram is the most important quality check in the field, mostly to correct for exposure. I shoot raw to correct white balance and fine-tune exposure in post.

6

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: M RAW or "full" RAW on a Canon 6d?

« on: May 14, 2013, 12:44:59 PM »

I use SRAW1 on de 5D2, and MRAW on the 7D. Just to reduce file size as 10 megapixels is enough for me. Quality-wise I am perfectly happy with the reduced raw size, also in comparison with the full raws. I use DPP.

7

EOS Bodies / Re: Recommendations for XTi replacement

« on: May 07, 2013, 03:17:14 PM »

You can extend the possibilities of your XTi for free, using this firmware add-on:

http://code.google.com/p/400plus/

I'm using this on my 400D and it works great. Give your camera an extended lease of life (and use it as a back-up)

8

Lenses / Re: EF 100-400 Replacement in 2013? [CR2]

« on: May 01, 2013, 01:32:26 AM »

When zooming in, you are literally pulling your camera away from you and when zooming out you are pushing your camera into your face. Plus, I had to change the way I hold my camera. I usually zoom using a finger on my left hand while cradling the lens in my palm...this wasn't possible with the 100-400. I shoot in manual mode and I'm constantly changing aperture and shutter speed along with continually moving my focus point around the viewfinder. This technique is second nature to me, but the push/pull zoom was very distracting and I know I missed shots that I wouldn't have missed. I just wasn't as fast with that lens.

In the end, I wasn't willing to change the way I shoot to accommodate one lens. I hope version II of the 100-400 will have the traditional zoom. I would buy it in a heartbeat.

You are aware that there is a tension/friction ring on the barrel that lets you adjust the amount of friction needed to move the zoom position, right? If I need to zoom fast I back it off a little so the zoom action is fast and easy

For MF I like the fact that your hand stays in the same position on the barrel (next to the focus ring!). Also, as the lens gets longer your left hand automatically stays on the long end of the barrel which helps to stabilise the lens.

Just another opinion. I love the 100-400 push/pull

9

Lenses / Re: EF 100-400 Replacement in 2013? [CR2]

« on: April 30, 2013, 05:27:03 AM »

I was personally surprised how good the image quality of the NEX-7 in combination with an 18-55mm is. Maybe this would be an lightweight alternative for mountain hiking. Half of the weight of my Canon gear. 24MP and an very ggod image quality. And I can use filters too

It gets even better when you consider the new 16-50, it's better and a lot more compact even I never thought I'd own a Sony camera but now I do. Mind, it's a different field of application - not a 1:1 substitute for my DSLR's of course. The NEX's performance and convenience is however very impressive and I'm considering expanding my NEX system a little further with a 55-210 (I currently have only the 16-50 and the Sigma 30 f/2.8 ).

I wonder where Sony will take things in the future - it's good competition for Canon who will need to push their R&D to become competitive in the mirrorless department. The reverse it also true however, I still don't see Sony being a serious threat to Canon in the 'DSLR' market, even with a FF mirrorless 'A-mount' - yet.

And now back on topic: I welcome the release of a new 100-400. It's always good to have another option on the market. I also expect the re-sale value of the 100-400 to go up when the new one comes out at a (much) higher price. That may be a (dis)advantage depending how you look at it.

In any case, if things go the way of the 24-70, I'll probably not be tempted to get the new model unless the performance increase is comparable to that of the 70-200 f/2.8 IS MkI -> Mk II. If the price is sky-high however, that'll surely put me off at least until it drops to a more reasonable level.

10

Sports / Re: Cycling

« on: April 29, 2013, 06:08:50 AM »

Good work, I like the composite shots

Any chance of posting the other two in color? I don't particularly like B+W for cycling - it's such a colorful sport!

B&W is great! Look at the first B&W pic. If it were in colour your eye would wander and not stay on the cyclist.

First of all Mick, thanks for posting these in color. I can see rpt's point but find myself exploring the color pictures longer - more details better bring out the story. Besides I like the contrast of the synthetically colored cyclists with the earth-tones and gray overcast of the surrounding landscape

11

Sports / Re: Cycling

« on: April 28, 2013, 03:47:23 PM »

Good work, I like the composite shots

Any chance of posting the other two in color? I don't particularly like B+W for cycling - it's such a colorful sport!

12

Lenses / Re: Do you still love 24-105L?

« on: April 26, 2013, 05:39:04 PM »

I've a brilliant copy, in overall IQ better than some primes I own. Love the sharpness, colors, contrast and versatility. Beats my 24-70 f/2.8 MkI hands down except for light gathering ability. My number-one vacation, and do-it-all-lens.

13

Lenses / Re: Speedy Manual Focusing?

« on: April 23, 2013, 01:45:53 PM »

I was checking-out for focus screens and I found this. It seems like a focus screen with split image, just like what was in film camera, like your AE-1 or my K-1000! 
Does anyone has any information on those? Are the any good? Is this a scam? Because, even though they are expensive, slip image focus was pretty much the best way for manual focus IMO. Thanks!

http://www.focusingscreen.com/product_info.php?cPath=21_135&products_id=1204

Or http://www.ebay.ca/itm/180-horizontal-Split-Image-Focus-Focusing-Screen-For-Canon-EOS-5D2-5D-Mark-II-/271183492503?pt=US_Viewfinders_Eyecups&hash=item3f23cbb597&_uhb=1#ht_1431wt_1144

I've no personal experience with these, but would be worried that a third part focusing screen would affect the metering in a negative way...

14

Lenses / Re: EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Available Mid 2014?

« on: April 23, 2013, 01:43:23 PM »

I fail to see the benefit of this marketing ploy, it destroys confidence rather than builds it, IMHO.

15

EOS Bodies / Re: Safe to leave lens on camera?

« on: April 21, 2013, 06:12:31 AM »

The dynamic forces on the lens mount when the camera/lens is being used or carried far exceed the static forces in storage.

I leave the 'last used' lens on when I store my camera, changing lenses unnecessarily does more 'damage' ie wear to the lens mount and potential of dust getting into the body. Next time I go out for a shoot is when I determine if I will use the lens that is already mounted or something else.