October 21, 2014, 11:47:35 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 - mrsfotografie

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 95
241
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 16, 2014, 01:54:45 AM »
If one compared the Mark II version of the 400/2.8 IS to the 400/5.6 the corners are too close to tell apart at 5.6.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=278&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=741&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

At the moment my thinking is that if Canon comes out with a 400mm f/5.8 IS, I would happily trade in my 100-400 for it; I use 400 mm almost exclusively for motorsports, usually at f/8 and upwards to get enough DOF.

I need a lens which works well in back lit situations because at the track where I take my pictures, the light is often from behind and bouncing off the cars and motorcycles. My 100-400 gives a lot of glare at 400 mm in these conditions, causing the image quality to deteriorate.

242
Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: July 15, 2014, 06:20:18 PM »
Willem is always my favorite subject when I want to try out some gear. These were shot with a Canon FD 200mm f4 S.S.C adapted to a Sony NEX-6. It takes effort to get sharp photo's with a subject as dynamic as my 1 yr old cat  ;D
My aunt's cat, Olive, is 7 months old and hyperactive doesn't even come close to describing her... look at her trying to paw my camera.

Cool!!! Big eyes, claws ready ;)

243
Canon General / Re: What's Would You Keep? [The anti-G.A.S. thread]
« on: July 15, 2014, 06:17:33 PM »

(sorry everyone for going so far off-topic ;) )


Thanks for doing so!
+1 - no big deal - it wasn't a very serious thread to begin with and the Speed Booster is something I find pretty interesting.  Even though the benefits wouldn't be as extreme, It would be cool if they could make one for the EOS-M :)

You're right, Metabones doesn't make one, yet. The poor little EOS-M gets little love from many manufacturers  :(

244
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 15, 2014, 05:37:25 PM »
And yes, there is no technical reason why canon could not ewuip the 400/5.6 with IQ as is with a current day 4 stop IS with 3 modes (full, panning, tripod sensing) and sell it at USD 1999,-

Its only freaking "marketing differentiation".

I might jump at this if it's fully usable wide open. Note that it must completely blow away my 100-400 @ 400mm.

Wow, I was a bit surprised for a minute to see that quote attributed to me.
I don't think a 400/5.6 IS will cost $ 1999, unfortunately :(

Sorry that was a messy quote truncation I did there. It should have been:

And yes, there is no technical reason why canon could not ewuip the 400/5.6 with IQ as is with a current day 4 stop IS with 3 modes (full, panning, tripod sensing) and sell it at USD 1999,-

Its only freaking "marketing differentiation".

My apologies  :-[

245
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 15, 2014, 11:52:50 AM »
And yes, there is no technical reason why canon could not ewuip the 400/5.6 with IQ as is with a current day 4 stop IS with 3 modes (full, panning, tripod sensing) and sell it at USD 1999,-

Its only freaking "marketing differentiation".

I might jump at this if it's fully usable wide open. Note that it must completely blow away my 100-400 @ 400mm.

246
Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm Art 1.4 Focusing problems
« on: July 15, 2014, 11:48:58 AM »
YuengLinger: I have a swedish friend who also got the 35 Art and 50 Art the other day, his 35 works flawless and is everything it should be, whilst the 50 is all over. I had the opposite experience and I had two 35's and two 50's, only one out of those 4 worked at all, and I have the docking.

Conclusion is, Sigma just can't do proper QC, it's just to many that doesn't work.... Lucikly I got a peeerfect 50 Art the second time.

Ok I'm sticking to my 35A and 50 EX, both are truly excellent copies (yes my 50 is spot on most of the time too).

247
I'm suddenly charmed by the 400mm DO. Is the contrast really that bad?

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-400mm-f-4.0-DO-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
Supposedly the newer lenses are much better than these earlier ones that were tested, and I've seen some great work done with the lens, but I haven't tried it myself.  I was a bit torn between this and the 300 f/2.8 IS II, but decided to go for the 300 in the end.

Yes if you look at size and converter compatibility, the 300 f/2.8 II IS is the better choice. Not sure when and if I will go that route.

248
Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: July 14, 2014, 06:06:07 PM »
Phew!!! I think I've satisfied my GAS for the moment... cheaply! Enjoying my little 24mm f/2.8 (scroll down):

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=3453.0  ;D

249
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24mm f/2.8
« on: July 14, 2014, 05:55:49 PM »
And this one was cropped from 3:2 to 5:2.

250
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24mm f/2.8
« on: July 14, 2014, 05:52:38 PM »
A few more samples. I like this tiny little prime! Again these were taken with a 5D Mk II. My 24mm carries a B+W 010 UV filter.

252
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX dust behind superimposed screen
« on: July 14, 2014, 05:38:48 PM »
So I just got the camera back.

The new pentaprism has some tiny black specks in the pentaprism too. Oh well...much better than before and I can live with this.

It's come back with a slight problem, however. When I try dropping the focusing screen down it sticks. It drops down about 2-4 millimetres and stops. I have the use the screen removal tool to pull it down and then it releases dropping the focusing screen.


Think this is an issue worth sending it back over?


EDIT:

The camera keeps getting dust on the bottom of the focusing screen now. Not a big deal as I just remove the battery, remove the focusing screen and blow it off. While the focusing screen not dropping down freely is a bit annoying, it doesn't particularly bother me. Probably the technician tightened something a bit more than normal. Either way it's not really interfering with the removal of the screen other than just having to use the tool to slightly move the bracket down a bit more before it drops down on its own.

Be careful not to get into a type of vicious circle now - your experience is a learning point for me too, sometimes we just have to let stuff be before we make it any worse. ;)

253
Software & Accessories / Re: To filter or not to filter
« on: July 14, 2014, 05:35:38 PM »
I don't use UV (protection) filters on my 40/2.8 pancake or on my EF-M lenses, but I do on the all the others that take them.

Crap, that technically should change my vote.  I am answer #1 above, but the pancake is an exception. 

- A

Should change mine as well (I voted as close to the actual as I could).  I have the same exceptions as Neuro, plus my TSE 24 (version 1) and my Rokinon 14mm.  Haven't yet figured out filters for those.  And sometimes it's too much work to replace the clear if I am swapping my CPL on and off lenses doing landscape shots.

Ah that's right, I forgot about my Samyang 14mm. No filter possible  :P

254
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 14, 2014, 02:18:44 PM »
I am sticking with my non-stabilized 400mm f/5.6L until I can afford an f/4 supertelephoto.. I would not advise beginning birders to start with a non-stablized lens. unless they have lots of patience.
I keep hoping to see an updated version of that lens..

Yes, IS would make all the difference.
not only that, but the improvements in IQ from the series 1 to series 2 big whites are truly astounding. As someone who has been into photography for more than 40 years, I find the quality of the recent lenses astounding. A lot of people fixate on sensors, but the glass is whats makes it all possible.....

To be honest I was checking out prices for the 400 f/5.6 yesterday because I find that now that I shoot full frame only, my 100-400 is fixed at 400mm almost all of the time - so I might as well use a prime. Still the lack of IS is THE show-stopper as war as the 400mm f/5.6 is concerned.

255
Software & Accessories / Re: To filter or not to filter
« on: July 14, 2014, 02:16:02 PM »
I will also remove the filter when shooting sunrise/sunset shots directly into the sun.

What's the advantage of doing that?
It reduces flare quite a bit and generally halves the number of sunspots in the photo.  When the sun is low in the sky (to save your eyes & sensor!) give it a try and you'll see that you get better contrast (i.e. less flare) and fewer sunspots with the filter off of the lens vs. on it.

Thanks mackguyver, I'll keep this in mind, next time I shoot in those conditions ;)

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 95