March 04, 2015, 08:15:30 AM

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 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 101
76
Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 08, 2014, 04:16:41 PM »
Slightly bigger and 15% heavier than the older 100-400.  I guess this was required for the upgraded IS.

I suspected it would be heavier, those helicoils add weight; I think the linear extension of the Mk I allows for the lowest possible mechanical complexity, and hence weight for a telezoom.

It's a sleak design - very nice. I feel some excitement but not overly so. The season for short primes has begun and most/all my tele work using slow zooms will be suspended till spring so I can wait.

I'm torn between this, or a 400DO II. The 100-400 would require a 7DMkII to get the reach I've been missing - de 400DO II will take my 1.4TC. All in all it's a lot of money and like I said, I can wait at least till the prices of these lenses come down a little.

77
Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: November 08, 2014, 11:24:51 AM »
Hi Jat.
What is his name, does he come when you call him?
Nice shot.

Cheers, Graham.

Hope you like it friends  :)

Does he play 'fetch'?  ;D

78
Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 07, 2014, 01:16:33 PM »
I quickly did a superimpose of the 70-300L over the 100-400LII. Size comparison is based on the size of the sealing gasket on the lens mount.

Looks like it won't fit 'standing up' in most lens bags, so the 70-300L still holds its value as a travel lens for that purpose.

I've attached the psd too if you'd like to play around some more with the image.

The current 100-400L is only 1.8" longer and 0.1" wider than the 70-300 L.  This comparison makes me think the II is about the same size. Maybe a bit wider. 

And I agree, I think the new photo showing it extended takes away the idea it is push pull.  Remove the lens hood and that looks very similar to the current 70-300L.

The 70-200/4L IS is ~1" longer than the 70-300L, but that 1" precludes it fitting vertically in my lens bags (preferable as horizontal takes two 'slots'), while the 70-300L does fit vertically.  I suspect the new 100-400 won't be more than an inch shorter than the current one, probably closer to 0.5" shorter.  I'd worry that if they designed it much shorter, close to 70-300L size, that design would have the rear element too close to the mount at the short end of the zoom range to allow Canon TC compatibility.  I hope they wouldn't make the 100-400 II not take TCs, particularly with f/8 AF now in the 7DII (but I wouldn't rule out the possibility, Canon being Canon and all...).

Yes, I was 'worried' for a minute that my use of the 70-300L as a travel tele-lens would be short lived, but alas it will stay in my collection.

Not that I truly believed the 100-400 could achieve the same level of compactness - the 70-300L is a bit of a squeeze in my Lowepro Fastpack 250.

Now I have to make up my mind if I want to go for  the new 100-400 + 7DMKII or the 400DO II for my days at the racetrack. Quite possibly the latter (and retain the 100-400 MkI for its evil push-pull fast zoom capability). In that case I hope the 400DO II performs well with the 1.4TC II.

79
Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 07, 2014, 01:09:18 PM »

Focal length markings: If the first photo we saw is right, then the ring between the zoom and focus rings may be a zoom lock in the manner of the current 100-400. Since that ring rotates against the focus ring, has no fixed position, so you could not put markings on that ring. My thought is the markings are on the top of the extending barrel, just like the current 100-400.


Good point about the rotating locking ring, and the markings may well end up on the top in production models, but the angle of the second picture is such that it should be just slightly visible.  Maybe down the other side of the barrel as that would work with the right hand operation of DSLRs?

I noticed that, too. Interesting that they retained the lock ring. That will allow us to keep shooting with it at a fixed focal length position  like could be done with the MkI if we'd want to.

80
Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 07, 2014, 04:50:03 AM »
I quickly did a superimpose of the 70-300L over the 100-400LII. Size comparison is based on the size of the sealing gasket on the lens mount.

Looks like it won't fit 'standing up' in most lens bags, so the 70-300L still holds its value as a travel lens for that purpose.

I've attached the psd too if you'd like to play around some more with the image.


..unlike the 70-300 no focal length markings on the "new" 100-400 photo...rather odd.

That's not so strange. The 70-300 is top view, the 100-400 is side view.

81
Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 07, 2014, 02:20:38 AM »
I quickly did a superimpose of the 70-300L over the 100-400LII. Size comparison is based on the size of the sealing gasket on the lens mount.

Looks like it won't fit 'standing up' in most lens bags, so the 70-300L still holds its value as a travel lens for that purpose.

I've attached the psd too if you'd like to play around some more with the image.

82
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1dc = Free beer
« on: November 05, 2014, 02:47:08 PM »
Sanj, how come someone who operates a 1DC... a camera that nears perfection... doesn't take the small effort needed to put a simple snapshot upright?  :o

You are so right. I got lazy.

Lol, good for you  8) ;D

In the mean time you may enjoy this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bt9zSfinwFA

83
Lenses / Re: Another EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Mention
« on: November 05, 2014, 11:02:18 AM »
70-300L killer? I'll happily trade that in if the 100-400L II will fit in my travel bag!

Wishfull thinking...

84
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1dc = Free beer
« on: November 05, 2014, 11:00:17 AM »
Sanj, how come someone who operates a 1DC... a camera that nears perfection... doesn't take the small effort needed to put a simple snapshot upright?  :o

85
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1dc = Free beer
« on: November 04, 2014, 01:25:13 PM »
Just think of the amount of beer you can buy for the relative price difference if you're happy with a 5DIII instead of a 1DC. I know I am!  ;D

86
EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit About the Modular DSLR Rumor
« on: November 02, 2014, 03:53:38 AM »
My 5D II and III are already pretty modular... they take a battery grip and you can decide if you want to mount a flash or not :) The best thing is the possibility to change lenses  8) ;D

87
Lenses / Re: More EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Talk [CR2]
« on: October 30, 2014, 02:36:14 AM »
If it is based on the 70-300L design, let us not forget that lens does NOT take 1.4x or 2x extenders. Any chance this new 100-400 would not take extenders?
Because it starts at 100 there's a good chance there will be enough room for a Canon extender ;)

88
Lenses / Re: More EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Talk [CR2]
« on: October 29, 2014, 01:08:43 PM »
As it is supposed to be very similar to the 70-300 I wouldn't be the least surprised that it was also designed at the same time by the same team!!
So if they've missed the boat on this one tough titty but humble pie if it turns out as sharp as the Sony @400.

Yes, even the conservative Canon will have to step in soon.

89
Lenses / Re: More EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Talk [CR2]
« on: October 29, 2014, 07:42:49 AM »
Why even bother with the Tamron 150-600 and the Sigma on the way. I think they would be better off making something longer than 400mm.

Because a lot of people, myself included, would value something shorter in length and smaller in diameter than either the Tamron or the Sigma.  The bag I would use for this lens won't take anything bigger than a 70-200/2.8 or the existing 100-400L in the retracted position.  Further, the Tamron is a little heavy (not too bad) and the Sigma C is unknown.  The Sigma S is way too heavy for me to handhold all day long.  Finally, it's likely that this lens will out-focus the Tamron and SigmaC for moving subjects.

That's why.

If its about bag space and weight just get a teleconverter for the 70-200. Honestly for wildlife I would rather just use the 70-200 and crop than use the 100-400. The Tammy does well focusing in my experience.

Actually the 100-400 by itself is already lighter and smaller than the 70-200. If you're carrying both a 70-200 and a 100-400 in your bag, that's not a smart thing to do. Consider what you need and leave the rest at home is my motto (everything has to fit in my Lowepro Mini Trekker AW or it stays).

90
Lenses / Re: More EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Talk [CR2]
« on: October 28, 2014, 01:12:35 PM »
I am trying to understand what the impact of this design will be for the sales of the 70-300L.
Because if it is light and the IQ plus AF same (or better) as the 70-300L, I will sell my 70-300L and purchase the 100-400MKII

If the 100-400L II manages to be the same length and diameter as the 70-300L (which I doubt is even physically possible without resorting to DO, and then there's the required diameter of the front element) then I would consider the same, however as it stands the 70-300L will remain my travel tele (I don't use it for anything else, really)...

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 101