61
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D L Announced, Shipping in May
« on: April 01, 2013, 04:26:55 PM »
Good joke. Funny how asymmetrical this flipped camera looks, while the dimensions are the same (although reverse) of a 'normal' 7D.
May 20, 2013, 10:22:46 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.
62
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Digital Film (for use in old camera's)
« on: April 01, 2013, 01:00:24 PM »Okay, it is April 1st ;-)
BUT: There really WAS a company that wanted to produce some kind of digital film, allthough they never released it:
http://m.dpreview.com/news/1999/9/4/siliconfilm
That's really cool actually - interestingly anything you can think of already seems to have been invented by someone.
When I dreamed up the digital film (yes this is obviously an April 1st hoax), I later came to thinking that it wouldn't be necessary to advance the film itself - a fixed cartridge triggered by exposure to light would do the job just as nicely and do away with the need for moving parts.
Hence a good quality eFilm for a competitive price would still be marketable imho. Thanks for the link, mb!!!
63
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35mm f/2.0
« on: April 01, 2013, 04:29:09 AM »
I've made up my mind about this one now - you're probably right about the 40 being the new classic short prime. It is a stop slower but fully sharp wide open and helped by good high iso performance, it makes a very good case for itself.
Still if it was for use on APS-C only I would say the 35 has a fighting chance, but I need to prioritize on full frame use (My 7D is mostly used with long lenses for its fast AF and 1.6x TC equivalent w/o loss of a stop of light).
Choice made, I'll see if there's a chance to pick up a '40' with a rebate of some sort. After all, it's a nice to have, not a must have.
Still if it was for use on APS-C only I would say the 35 has a fighting chance, but I need to prioritize on full frame use (My 7D is mostly used with long lenses for its fast AF and 1.6x TC equivalent w/o loss of a stop of light).
Choice made, I'll see if there's a chance to pick up a '40' with a rebate of some sort. After all, it's a nice to have, not a must have.
64
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4... DOH!!!
« on: April 01, 2013, 04:17:40 AM »Ugh, I just bought Lightroom 4 and to my horror, it is not comptatible with XP!!!
After the release of Vista, I swore to myself that I would stick with XP (which I really like) for as long as I can. Well after 12 years of faithful XP use, it looks like my travels have come to an end.
Now, mind you I am running a new system (AMD Phenom II X4 965, OC'ed to 3.8Ghz) DDR 3 memory, etc... but I have just resisted upgrading to Windows Vista (Gag! Yuck!), 7 or now even 8 for YEARS.(Call me a rebel...)
Well, that has come to a quick end with the purchase of Lightroom 4. Now, my question is, which is better? Windows 7 or 8? Any thoughts?
D
I've moved from XP Pro x64 to 7 Pro x64 just 2 weeks ago for the same reason (actually, I had been using workarounds to get a lot of different types of software to install on XP x 64), I have the same AMD Phenom II X4 965 processor and Windows 7 really flies with it (not even overclocked but the PC does have 8 gigs of memory).
So go for it! Windows 7 x64 professional
FWIW don't even think about Vista.
65
Lenses / Re: New Canon L-lens: EF 16-600mm f2,8 L USM
« on: April 01, 2013, 04:11:29 AM »Had me going until I saw the box reads "lens hood included". Canon would sell that separately.
With 'L' lenses they're usually included
66
Lenses / Re: New Canon L-lens: EF 16-600mm f2,8 L USM
« on: April 01, 2013, 04:10:21 AM »
Ah, we've been waiting for this particular lens for ages! 
67
Third Party Manufacturers / Digital Film (for use in old camera's)
« on: April 01, 2013, 04:08:40 AM »
I received some information that a large Japanese camera manufacturer is working on a digital film (that's right, film) that can be used in traditional analogue camera equipment.
The film uses a new type of binary image sensor technology that allows images to be captured and stored on the film without the need for electrical power to retain the data. Until now, imaging sensor technology has been limited to the use of volatile memory, necessitating the use of traditional CMOS or CCD imaging sensors and storage of the captured data on internal flash drives.
Binary image sensor technology is reminiscent of traditional photographic film. Each pixel in the sensor has a binary response, giving only a one-bit quantized measurement of the local light intensity. The response function of the image sensor is non-linear and similar to a logarithmic function, which makes the sensor suitable for high dynamic range imaging.
After exposure, the film is advanced in the same way as traditional analogue film.
When the digital film has been fully exposed, the roll is removed from the camera and connected to a computer or smartphone using a USB interface. Each stored image is read out successively and sent to the computer. The film can then be 'formatted' for re-use.
One roll can hold up to 24 images, but with advances in digital film technology it is expected that higher storage capacities will become available when the film can be made thinner and wrapped more tightly.
The film uses a new type of binary image sensor technology that allows images to be captured and stored on the film without the need for electrical power to retain the data. Until now, imaging sensor technology has been limited to the use of volatile memory, necessitating the use of traditional CMOS or CCD imaging sensors and storage of the captured data on internal flash drives.
Binary image sensor technology is reminiscent of traditional photographic film. Each pixel in the sensor has a binary response, giving only a one-bit quantized measurement of the local light intensity. The response function of the image sensor is non-linear and similar to a logarithmic function, which makes the sensor suitable for high dynamic range imaging.
After exposure, the film is advanced in the same way as traditional analogue film.
When the digital film has been fully exposed, the roll is removed from the camera and connected to a computer or smartphone using a USB interface. Each stored image is read out successively and sent to the computer. The film can then be 'formatted' for re-use.
One roll can hold up to 24 images, but with advances in digital film technology it is expected that higher storage capacities will become available when the film can be made thinner and wrapped more tightly.
68
Canon General / Re: Think I need a 12 step program
« on: March 31, 2013, 04:03:01 PM »3 bodies, 6 lenses, 2 leather rolling camera bags in just over 12 months- is there any help out there? Already plotting my next body and lens purchases....
I have been a member of bag of the month club and nearly joined lens of the month club. Now I am downsizing my closest - general rule is that I sell 2 items for every item I buy. At least that is the plan.
That strategy works - but only in the beginning
69
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35mm f/2.0
« on: March 31, 2013, 04:01:40 PM »
Looks like the 40 mm is the obvious choice, especially for travel convenience - after all this lens is so diminutive there is no reason not to throw it in the bag. Now I just need to get over my 35 mm nostalgia 
70
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35mm f/2.0
« on: March 31, 2013, 06:58:44 AM »
FTb-n, wow thank you for sharing your findings in such an extensive way!
It is obvious from these results that the AF system of the 5D3 generally improves AF consistency as would be expected.
It is somewhat surprising to me that your 35mm outperforms the 50 mm MkII, because the 35 is an older design. I can confirm that my 50 mm Mk I also hunts in low light. However given a little extra time to lock on, it does deliver with consistently sharp results.
It does seem to me now that my 35 mm may have had had too much 'play' in the AF mechanism because the 50mm does focus consistently, whereas my 35 mm had a low keeper rate even in good light.
From a technical point of view, it is apparent the 40mm is the better optic. More contrasty and more 'zing' as Mr Bean put it.
At least the AF performance itself need not be the big differentiator. Positives for these lenses are:
40 mm:
+Optical excellence
+Silent focusing
+Tiny and lightweight
35 mm:
+F/2
+A little wider
+Small and lightweight
More subjectively, how do you find the handling of the camera with the pancake? Obviously it's no longer possible to hold the camera by the lens!
For that matter, I would be careful with the 50mm Mk II, that plastic lens mount seems a little less secure when it has to support a 5D#.
It is obvious from these results that the AF system of the 5D3 generally improves AF consistency as would be expected.
It is somewhat surprising to me that your 35mm outperforms the 50 mm MkII, because the 35 is an older design. I can confirm that my 50 mm Mk I also hunts in low light. However given a little extra time to lock on, it does deliver with consistently sharp results.
It does seem to me now that my 35 mm may have had had too much 'play' in the AF mechanism because the 50mm does focus consistently, whereas my 35 mm had a low keeper rate even in good light.
From a technical point of view, it is apparent the 40mm is the better optic. More contrasty and more 'zing' as Mr Bean put it.
At least the AF performance itself need not be the big differentiator. Positives for these lenses are:
40 mm:
+Optical excellence
+Silent focusing
+Tiny and lightweight
35 mm:
+F/2
+A little wider
+Small and lightweight
More subjectively, how do you find the handling of the camera with the pancake? Obviously it's no longer possible to hold the camera by the lens!
For that matter, I would be careful with the 50mm Mk II, that plastic lens mount seems a little less secure when it has to support a 5D#.
71
Lenses / Re: Is the upcoming 50mm F/2 IS USM for me?
« on: March 30, 2013, 05:44:14 PM »Personally, I think the IS refreshes for 24, 28 and 35 are so roundly better in non-traditional critique areas (weight, small size, much more solid build, internal focusing, far better AF, etc.) that the 50 F/2 IS will be a massive upgrade in useability above and beyond any traditional IQ metrics.
I suddenly realized that Canon has not changed the original aperture size in the refreshes of the 24, 28 and 35 mm lenses, so why would they change it for the 50 mm? A lens in this class will need a wider aperture to differentiate it from the 50 mm 1.8 II, and narrower than the 1.2L (both of which I'm sure Canon will keep in the line-up). So I suggest the new lens will be a 50 F/1.4 IS. And the price will be around €1000.
72
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35mm f/2.0
« on: March 30, 2013, 04:56:42 PM »
Congratulations with your new 5DIII, I'm sure you'll find it (full frame) a real eye opener!
I wonder how the 35 will fare...
I wonder how the 35 will fare...
73
Lenses / Re: Is the upcoming 50mm F/2 IS USM for me?
« on: March 30, 2013, 04:48:03 PM »
This is a cool thread, being an engineer myself I can appreciate all the effort that went into the lens comparisons.
The 50mm F/2 IS looks like an interesting lens. I wonder if Canon will live up to expectations on this one, and if/when it comes to market, I'll be tempted to get one.
In the mean time I've found my home with the Canon 50 mm f/1.8 mk I for compactness and better build quality over the MkII. And for performance, dare I say: my superb Siggy 50 1.4
The 50mm F/2 IS looks like an interesting lens. I wonder if Canon will live up to expectations on this one, and if/when it comes to market, I'll be tempted to get one.
In the mean time I've found my home with the Canon 50 mm f/1.8 mk I for compactness and better build quality over the MkII. And for performance, dare I say: my superb Siggy 50 1.4
74
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35mm f/2.0
« on: March 30, 2013, 03:36:04 PM »My conclusion is that the 35 on crop when shooting ISO 6400, f2.0, and shutter speed slower than 1/100 is a hit-or-miss thing. I'm better off with the 17-55. But, if there's enough light to shoot at 1/200 of faster, the 35 may give you an edge in stopping action.
My solution to the low light backstage challenge was to add the 5D3 to my kit. There's another ice show in a few weeks and I plan on using the 35 on the 5D3 for that extra stop and comparing this to the 40 (and likely the 50 1..
I found my 'old' 35 mm to be hit and miss as well, but that was even with reasonable light on my 5D MkII. It truly had a remarkably low keeper-rate
Have you had a chance to use the 35 on your 5D MkIII yet, ie how is its AF performance on that body? What I'm trying to figure out is if my old copy was 'worn out' and if a new one will give more consistent results.
FWIW I know this lens is totally outclassed by the new IS version (the ISO-12233-Sample-Crops confirm that), but the new model is a lot more up-market and a lot bigger as well. I don't see myself using this prime enough to justify the added cost. I often use my primes as 'fun' lenses so IQ isn't always everything.
75
Canon General / Re: 24-70Mk2 fell off my 5DMk3 and smashed
« on: March 30, 2013, 01:40:22 PM »"The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?" - as found on the Internet
Not sure about that. Maybe greed. See, right here in this thread we have someone who suffered an unfortunate accident and cries out, "Design flaw," not my fault, someone else should take responsibility. The next step is litigation - sue Canon for bad design or lack of proper warning, of course with the expectation of a financial award.
You're quite right of course, that seems to be the direction in which the world is moving
