Messages

1

Reviews / Re: Can we have a 16-35 2.8L II review next please?

« on: May 22, 2013, 10:00:00 PM »

I've got the 16-35L II and have had a few issues.

First, my 20/2.8, 28/1.8 are sharper, crisper in the center.  I've not really taken a good look at the edges.

My own 16-35L II is soft on detail at 16mm, but retains good contrast.  It looks sharper than it really is.

By 24mm it sharpens up considerably, and is not too bad (but not stellar) at 35mm.

The primes kick its poverbial butt.

Falloff... not an issue on my 5Dii or 7D which are correctable for that.

My own copy shows about -6 focus correction at 35mm, and maybe (hard to tell) +2 at 16mm.  My bodies will only correct for the entire spectrum of a zoom lens, so I set it at -5 as a compromise.

Its not an OMG THATS SHARP!!!! lens.  Its more than adequate though, and retains good contrast and color, and low flare through all its zoom range.  Flare is pretty well corrected too.

I shoot it, because its 16mm, and I find that I use that low low end of focal length quite a lot.  I can still zoom in for a 35mm focal length (my favorite).  It might as well be a 16 or 35 rather than a 16-35 zoom.  I rarely use the intermediate focal lengths.

And yah, I'd get it again in a heartbeat if it was lost stolen damaged etc etc etc

2

EOS Bodies / Re: Bogus Canon Rebate Prices at B&H

« on: April 14, 2013, 11:05:49 PM »

Consider the 7D which was available for $999 to $1099 with careful shopping... now $1299 "with the rebate".  Its all a game... just a game

Sometimes rebates are the prelude to actual price decreases, again, for marketing reasons.

Time will tell

3

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF 400 f/4 DO IS II

« on: April 14, 2013, 11:04:11 PM »

consider please, that sometimes patents are applied for, and granted, for designs that will never see the light of day, if only to thwart the competition rather than make actual products

4

EOS Bodies / Re: Is it too late to buy a Canon 7D?

« on: April 10, 2013, 07:07:17 AM »

We've seen 7D bodies as low as $999 NEW in recent times.  Its not hard to find one for not much more than that right now.

Fantastic deal in a camera for that sort of price.

Yes, a little noisy at higher ISOs.   But, on the other hand... its a bit of a sports car in its focusing and frame rate.  You have to be the judge.  Right now, for the money, nothing Canon has can touch it for wildlife or sports.

For real world prints, or realistic screen/eframe display, the noise limitations are really not too limiting.  For pixel peeping... thats another story.

5

EOS Bodies / Re: Impact of falling Yen on Prices

« on: April 10, 2013, 07:02:47 AM »

The exchange rate change might make grey imports cheaper.  To counter this, you might see more rebates and special offers rather than official price cuts.

+1

When you see B&H and Adorama start to offer significant pricing alternatives through grey channels, then you'll see some rebates from CUSA that "just coincidentally" almost perfectly offset those pricing advantages.  This has been the marketing scenario for a very long time.  CUSA also will configure those rebates on what is actually available, what is popular, what is actually selling, and... what they have in their own inventories.  There's nothing new to this at all.

6

EOS Bodies / Re: Favorite or Preferred Film body?

« on: March 30, 2013, 08:55:31 PM »

The real thing to consider is - do you go with FD or EOS film.

In the FD world, there are lots of good cameras for just a little money - but - you'll need the glass too.

In the EOS world... you're limited a bit.  I've had two EOS5's (A2e's), and still have one, just to have it.  They're ok, but compared to todays digital, are a very clunky and odd design.

The EOS3 is also very good... amazingly so.  If you can find one in good shape, its not a bad "film camera" to have.

These days, all my film work is with Leica.  I just love it.  Wish the M9 was more affordable, and had a bit better sensor (but I can live with the sensor).

Cheers

7

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announces the EOS T5i

« on: March 30, 2013, 08:50:48 PM »

I feel confident that they won't be manufacturing or releasing any sub $1000 Full Frame cameras... ever, why would they have too?

They'll do it when the competition forces them directly, or indirectly.   Its an inevitability.  Many makers fighting for market share makes for good competition, and also makes for good value in the product.

Its only a matter of when, not if.

8

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Advice needed: Possibility to improve IQby sending to Canon service department?

« on: March 25, 2013, 10:14:52 PM »

My 7D was all over the place with focus... just terrible depending on the lens used.  Making things worse, one lens, an old EF 28/2.8 was a "poison lens".  Once that lens was mounted, everything after that, regardless of the lens used, was out of focus by a whole lot.  From removal of batteries and complete reset, most lenses had focusing issues, but they were just a little soft.  After the 28/2.8 was attached, all the lenses would be out of calibration.  They seemed to do ok at about medium distance, but were way off at infinity and way off at say, four or five feet.   Things went to front focus to normal, to back focus --- from far to near.

Since the lenses worked fine on the 5Dii, I just sent the camera to Canon.  They changed a lot of stuff, new focusing sensor, new card slot, new release button... and one other item.  Whatever they did, it came back great.  Some lenses still need AFMA (camera seems to front focus a bit) but its correctable with only a few units of adjustment on any lens that requires it.  And, the 28/2.8 while not a super great lens, is no longer "poison" on this body.

9

Site Information / Re: Moderators: Accidental ban of whole subnet

« on: March 24, 2013, 12:06:38 AM »

Of course its simple to trace the IP's back to who owns them.

#1 offender - China
#2 offender - Eastern European countries - Serbia, Latvia, Ukraine, etc
#3 offender - United States universities.

In cases #1 and #2, I ban the IP, up to half a dozen from the subnet.  After that, I just ban the whole subnet.  It sucks to be them doesn't it. 

#3 offenders...I am so pleased our boys are holding up their end!

I would have never guessed it... but the logs don't fib.

Years ago, in the Napster days when I had Napster server here, we had Italy as #1, amazing how stuff changes.

10

EOS Bodies / Re: I did it, I took the plunge

« on: March 24, 2013, 12:01:44 AM »

Yesterday I received my 5D mkIII with 24-105 kit lens, a 70-200 f2.8 L II and a battery grip.

Congrats on the new acquisition.

Maybe there's an M9 in the future for me......

11

Site Information / Re: Moderators: Accidental ban of whole subnet

« on: March 23, 2013, 12:14:21 PM »

I'm not sure what has happened... but I'll tell you what I do.

I monitor the traffic coming into my network.  At least once a week, I get flooded for a few hours.  Its always from one or two IP's per occurrence.  I'll get hit maybe 500-700 times per minute, for hours at a time, methodically trying all ports.

Of course its simple to trace the IP's back to who owns them.

#1 offender - China
#2 offender - Eastern European countries - Serbia, Latvia, Ukraine, etc
#3 offender - United States universities.

In cases #1 and #2, I ban the IP, up to half a dozen from the subnet.  After that, I just ban the whole subnet.  It sucks to be them doesn't it. 

In the case of universities, I contact their admin, send them my logs, and they handle it. About 1/3 of the time they send me an apology response after the problem is corrected.

So there ya have it.  I don't provide bandwidth for buttheads.  Anyone on my network is my guest, and I expect them to behave as a guest.  Its like holding an open party at your house.  What?  You're just riding in the same car as the guest, but you got kicked out of my party because the folks you rode with decided to pee in my living room?  Guess it sucks to be you doesn't it.

12

Lenses / Re: Thoughts on Canon 20mm f/2.8?

« on: March 21, 2013, 05:03:13 PM »

I bought a used 20/2.8USM and used it for years.  It got stolen.  I immediately bought another.

It has a few limitations.  One is - it has considerable vignetting at f/2.8, and even f/4.0.  By f/5.6 or so, its a lot better.  If you have a camera that has peripheral illumination correction it will correct most, but not all of the situation at f/2.8.  By f/4.0 with correction, there is no problem at all.  Even at f/2.8 with correction... most shots are not going to be objectionable.

The other is its size.  Its a big lens for a 20mm - mostly on account of the rather medium large aperture of f/2.8.

Whoever said the 16-35ii L blows it away - no way.  This lens is at least as good, or better than the 16-35ii L, in terms of snap, color and corners - any all comparable apertures.  I've never noticed any field curvature that gave me any grief - but I tend to not shoot flat walls, dead straight on, at maximum aperture.

I still grab my 20/2.8 on the 7D and 5Dii both... there are times when I just don't want the 16-35ii L.... its bigger, heavier... no better optically for any purpose I use it for - candids, and events, and occasional walk about on the 7D (since I really love 35mm on full frame, the 20 comes close to that).

13

Street & City / Re: How to not get beat up when photographing public places?

« on: March 19, 2013, 07:18:54 AM »

One thing to keep in mind if the situation really goes to h*ll - your 5D3 with 70-300L weighs 2 kgs (4.4 pounds), and is on the end of a 3 foot tether.  In cave man days, that would have been all you needed to feed the family...or deter a saber tooth tiger.

Totally off topic... I apologize... but I thought I'd share what was until now a forgotten (repressed?) episode in my life.  When I was a young man, about 19 or 20, the girl I was dating got abducted.  I pretty much went nuts.  After about six weeks of me going insane - the police telling me she'd just left me... they quit looking, I got a message from her.  She was being held in a house - two blocks from the police station.  Both of her captors were gone, and wouldn't be back for an hour.   She could not get out - the windows were barred from the inside - totally normal looking from the street.  There was one un-barred window - very high, close to the ceiling in the rear bathroom.  I stood on a trash can outside and cleared that window with a Nikon F2 with MD-2 motor, and 80-200/4 lens.  Totally cleared as in "no glass left".  She got on the tub and was able to get an arm out, I was able to grab it, and she got out.   We didn't end up staying together long after that, but... over thirty five years later, she's still one of my closest friends, and we see each other several times a year.

Cameras can be handy.

14

Street & City / Re: How to not get beat up when photographing public places?

« on: March 17, 2013, 08:19:28 PM »

Don't take photos of people in public unless you get signed permission.  Many people are concerned about their photos showing up on the internet, and its a valid concern.   If there are children with them, you could end up in trouble.  In some countries, you will end up in jail by photographing people without permission.  Claiming that you were not actually photographing anyone, is not going to be believable, if a person sees a camera pointed their way or toward their children. As more and more so called street photographers take photos of people and children without their permission and post them on the internet, we will move closer and closer to totally restricting the use of cameras in public places.[\soapbox]

Totally untrue - except for the "in some countries" part.  I'm sure there are some countries that prohibit such activity.  Countries like North Korea and Iran for instance.  Here in the USA, if its seen from a public place, its ok to shoot.  There is no expectation of privacy, whatsoever, in public.  The only "caution" is what is, and what is not, public.  For instance, a public park, is public.  A theme park, is not public - its private, with paid admission.  I got ejected from the Palm Beach County Fair one year for taking pictures.  That is, the Fairgrounds is public, but the event is private, held by private company that rents the public Fairgrounds for their private event!  And so it said, on the back of my ticket stub, in fine print "... no commercial photography..." amid the rest of the clutter in about 2pt type.  The cops said because I was shooting with medium format equipment, I was considered a commercial photographer.  I didn't push the issue... left quietly, as I was pretty much done for the evening anyway.

15

Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?

« on: March 14, 2013, 11:02:53 PM »

Late in 1978, I was shooting with a pair of Nikkormats, a pair of FMs, and and F2 Photomic.  I had 18mm, 20mm, 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 105mm, 135mm, 200mm and 300mm.  Around that time, my F2 died.  Shutter is not opening.  Second curtain follows the first.  Sent in to Nikon.  Came back dead - with a bill.  Shutter still not opening. Not good.  Send back... saying... hey guys, don't mind the bill (about $135) but at least FIX the camera.  Another month passes... comes back again, dead.  Shutter works, but the meter, which used to work, is not working.  Send back again... meter is repaired for another $135.  I'm getting pissed, as the camera was out of warranty by a month when it died, and now its about five months later... and it comes back, meter fixed, shutter dead - same problem.  Send back, yet again, Nikon wants another $135 to fix it, even though I had not made image #1 with the "repaired" shutter, had all the documentation on the previous repairs.  Called Nikon many many times... not budging.   Send it back unrepaired - screw you, I told 'em.  Also gotta consider that Victor Borod was my Nikon Rep, and his father in law Bernie Deitchman was VP head of Nikon Sales in North America, and used to come into our shop all the time... no luck getting any strings pulled.

Well, I finally got the F2 back, meter worked shutter didn't open.  I whacked it soundly with my hand, it started working.  I promptly sold/traded for a Canon F1, and a pair of AE-1 Programs with 17, 20, 24, 35, 50, 85, 100, 135 and 200.

To tell the truth, I liked the Nikon lenses better.  Not in terms of sharpness, but in terms of snap and color rendition.   In their day, the Canon FD glass (compared to the Nikon of the same era) was not quite as snappy, a certain lack of pizazz that is hard to describe.  Not veiled, but just a miniscule amount lower in contrast I guess.  And, the Canon's were a good deal cooler than the Nikon glass... but what seemed like nearly 1.5dM (although it wasn't that much ... it seemed like it).

Never looked back.  Upped to EOS-5 film bodies, not as many lenses.  Was shooting a lot of medium format at that time... so the 35 was relegated to birds and candids.  I had bird and candid lenses - 28, 50, 300 and a 1.4x.   Much more than that now... but thats how I did Canon.