October 20, 2014, 04:12:19 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 - CharlieB

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 21
181
Lenses / Re: "Affordable" telephoto lens for wildlife
« on: October 31, 2012, 09:43:22 PM »
300/4.0L  USM, non IS.  original 1.4 extender

I dunno... works for me.  IS would be nice, but I'm not lacking keepers with the non-IS

182
Lenses / Re: leica 1600mm
« on: October 31, 2012, 07:18:43 AM »
You're right.   No way to spend money like that and only get 1600mm.

It shoulda be a nice cool 2500mm lens for that kinda dough. ;)

183
Lenses / Re: focusing accuracy/repeatability on 50mm
« on: October 31, 2012, 12:27:50 AM »
Oh yah, I've AFMA'd the 50/1.4 on the 5DmarkII, and the new 7D. 

One is -6 the other -5.  Thats ok, they're linear... full moon to close up at f/2.0 both bodies track well with the lens.

The problem - is - three shots, from a tripod, from infinity backward to focus, give three different points of focus.  The repeatability of both of the 50/1.4's I've owned was not good.  They do ok at about f/2.8 or so.. but wider.... and wide open... its maybe 1/3 to 1/2 the shots are not where they ought to be.  They run in front, and behind,  so its not AFMA.... it simple inconsistency. 

AFMA on over two hundred shots in each body.... in real world conditions at various distances from "full moon in the sky" to about 1 meter.   Thinks get very weird in that 25 foot range... do better at longer and closer distances, but still... its 1/3 to 1/2 that are not in focus.

184
Lenses / focusing accuracy/repeatability on 50mm
« on: October 30, 2012, 07:54:38 PM »
I'm not all that thrilled with the focusing accuracy or  of the 50mm f/1.4 USM.
I tend to shoot that lens at about f/2.0 most of time.  Closed just enough to control the creaminess at f/1.4.
And its a tough thing to get it to focus where I like. 

So the question is - does the 50mm f/1.2L do any better with focus?  I'd probably be shooting it wide open, or just a hair closed as well.

Thanks for the input!~

185
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Pricing
« on: October 29, 2012, 06:37:00 AM »
Then again, it's close to a $500 lens and it only has 8 elements vs the 85's 11 and the Canon 35's 11 (I'd assume the Sigma will have similar)

Keep in mind, its not the number of elements, but how they're used.... precision.  Put another way, lens designs can be had, with few elements, that give outstanding performance, but the designs, not only of the glass, but of the mechanical parts, precision of element spacing, centering, how one group moves versus another, is paramount.

Example:  Look at what Leica is doing with few elements. 

Lens optical designs are compromised to the degree that makes them build-able in a production environment.

186
EOS Bodies - For Stills / 7D "driving me nuts" -- more to it!!!!
« on: October 28, 2012, 09:52:56 PM »
So, the 7D is fine.

This is what I have found out, and I'd have not guessed this in a million years.

IF I pull the CF card, or IF I power down, and I DON'T use the 28mm/1.8, the 50/1.4 and 100/2.8USM are fine, as also are the slower zooms.

BUT

IF I mount the 28/1.8 it works like crap, and if I mount the 50/1.4 or 100/2.8USM after that without powering down or pulling the card (which powers down), the 28/1.8 sours the focus system for the other lenses, throwing their "linearity" from close to far, all to hell.

So.. .how in the heck am I gonna explain, and convince Canon about THAT problem....   

I tested this on my 5DmkII, and the same thing happens.  Its a poison lens.... that 28/1.8.

Funny it worked GREAT on my 400D

I gotta think on this a bit... may be better to just get a new lens.

187
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D - I'm goin' nuts with focus
« on: October 26, 2012, 10:10:50 PM »
Might have gotten it fixed.

The 28/1.8 was goin' bonkers, and my other lenses were not immediately available.....

Well, the 28/1.8 finally quit completely.  Refused to focus.  Remounted the lens.  Nada.  Cleaned contacts on lens and body, and... it started focusing, AND focusing pretty well too.

Tonite, it seems to like a -2.  All the lenses seem to like -2, except the 100/2.8USM which I haven't tested yet, and the 24-105 which likes a +2. 

But... IMPORTANTLY, it seems like the linearity of things has settled down considerably.  I had some issues with the 5DmkII as well... contacts not right, causing problems in operation.  That cleared up with a little use.  I guess the 7D needed some help.

I'm still testing.  I need some daylight to really give it a proper test.... more tomorrow.

188
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D - I'm goin' nuts with focus
« on: October 25, 2012, 02:31:53 PM »
One more test... tonight.

I don't want Canon to touch the lenses, they've never had an issue on other bodies, including my 5DmkII.

Just the 7D body - is nutz.  Or I'm nutz

189
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D - I'm goin' nuts with focus
« on: October 24, 2012, 10:47:24 PM »
were they able to correct?

190
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D - I'm goin' nuts with focus
« on: October 24, 2012, 10:19:13 PM »
Just tested live view... focus perfect, of course.

I better call Canon tomorrow

191
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D - I'm goin' nuts with focus
« on: October 24, 2012, 09:52:09 PM »
Should also say, the 5DmkII is not having a problem with those lenses.  I have - 3 set on the 50, 0 on the 28, and 0 on the 100, and they track linearly close to far.

This has got to be a body issue.

192
EOS Bodies - For Stills / 7D - I'm goin' nuts with focus
« on: October 24, 2012, 09:50:43 PM »
Got a 7D.  New.

It came with 2.0.3 - but I'm not going to blame the firmware.

I like to shoot fast lenses, and shoot them close to, or at wide open.

28/1.8 at f/2 - close distance - five feet or so... backfocus.  At 30 feet - front focus.
50/1.4 at f/2 - same thing
100/2.8 macro - same thing

I'm talking a shift of "-7" at close distance, to +4 at further distances, and +9 at close to infinity distances (300 feet or so).

I'm basically... going nuts here.

193
Lenses / Re: IQ of 24-105 and 700-300 lenses
« on: October 23, 2012, 07:01:54 AM »
Here's my comparison -

24-105L

The 28/1.8 is hands down sharper with less CA at f/4
The 50/1.4 is the same at f/4
the 100/2.8USM (non-L) is the same and then some... at f/4

But I still find the 24-105L a good lens.... mostly because of its utility and the IS (even the older IS)

So there ya go.
What kind of comparison is that?

At f/4 the 24-105 is fully open. The 28/1.8 sucks fully open and so does the 50/1.4 ....

Well... its valid since I cannot shoot the 24-105 any wider than f/4.0.
You just get the option of wider stops with the three lenses I mentioned.

The point is, at f/4 the three non-L primes will out perform the 24-105.

And, that being said - I'll stick to my guns and say the 24-105 is a good lens, one I'm glad to have, and one that resides on a body... maybe 50 percent of the time.   When I don't know what to grab, I grab the 24-105 and I know I'll be ok.

Bias that with most of my shooting being lower light levels, "people pictures" of motorcycling events, no flash.  Even with f/4 the IS gets me keepers.

194
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: upgrading from rebel xsi: T4i or used 7D
« on: October 22, 2012, 10:40:47 PM »
Just bought a new 7D for $1230 shipped.  Got in 3 days

195
Lenses / Re: Lens suggestions for 3 weeks trip to Egypt and Jordan
« on: October 22, 2012, 09:17:46 PM »
Personally....

If I couldn't do it all with the 24-105L with its IS... and a small flash, it probably not worth doing.
Sometimes... just sometimes, you might be in a place that requires a long lens.  But it doesn't sound like that sort of trip.  American West, Africa... wildlife, birds, etc.... sure.  Mideast... unless you're going specifically for the aforementioned.

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 21