Messages

1

Lenses / Re: TS-E 17mm or 24mm

« on: April 24, 2013, 07:27:51 AM »

thanks everybody, this helped...

2

Lenses / Re: TS-E 17mm or 24mm

« on: April 23, 2013, 04:09:27 AM »

so i understand from reviews the in-focus indicator will be working with this lens. is this also true when shifted or do you better work with liveview? i am currently using a 5dIII.

3

Lenses / Re: TS-E 17mm or 24mm

« on: April 22, 2013, 05:32:51 PM »

For example:

This is the textbook example of what the TS-E 17 is designed for: close-up photos of tall buildings.

Of course, that's not all it can do, and it's not all it can do really, really, well. But it's basically its primary purpose.

If you're thinking of doing this sort of thing -- or of similar sorts of close-up shots of very big things (including mountains and trees) where you don't want any geometric distortion -- then this is the lens for you. If you have other types of photography in mind, this probably isn't the lens for you.

Cheers,

b&

I've checked my metadata and 50% of my pictures shot with the 16-35 are at the very wide end. I've added a few examples which I believe work nicely. I have not added examples which do not work because of falling lines. What I obviously try to do is frame at 16mm thus that the falling lines are as limited as possible. With the 16-35 this can lead to mediocre results due to corner unsharpness (see picture 8814 showing the limits of this 'technique'). Not all of these picutres are potential TS-E candidates, of course. Picture 3938 for example surely isnt... Again, all pictures at 16mm

4

Lenses / Re: TS-E 17mm or 24mm

« on: April 22, 2013, 04:37:28 PM »

I had both and took both last August to Tuscany - including the places you mention.  The primary purpose of a TS lens is keeping your verticals straight.  In architecture for most shots if your verticals are not straight, then others will not bother looking at your work.  They're really a basic necessity type of thing.  Some may argue that you can do this in PP, but that is not true - the perspective will be different.

IMHO it's not really a one or the other proposition.  I found both necessary but if I had to take only one I would take the 24 because 17 is often too wide and it has more problems with flare.

I posted a thread here recently with examples from Tuscany with these lenses - http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=13128.0;topicseen

Very helpful pictures - thank you!

5

Lenses / TS-E 17mm or 24mm

« on: April 22, 2013, 01:17:24 PM »

I have been dreaming of a TS-E lens ever since I discovered they exist. I guess I am going to get one for my travel next month to Venice, Florence, Siena. I would probably opt for the 17mm version. So far I have been using my 16-35mm II when inside towns to do 'architecture' photography. What do you guys think 17mm or 24mm - both would be a bit cheeky...

6

Lenses / Re: Just got the canon 16-35 ii and having a hard time seeing the value in this uwa

« on: April 19, 2013, 02:34:29 AM »

use it a lot when travelling cities and love it...

7

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Buying from Switzerland

« on: September 20, 2012, 07:08:28 AM »

I can happen to you that you pay customs and import VAT when YOU cannot proove it belonged to you already when you crossed the border the other way. THEY will not need to proove the opposite.

8

Lenses / Re: Post your 24-70 II Experiences Here

« on: September 14, 2012, 01:25:01 PM »

it does do onion rings, a bit...

9

Lenses / Re: The Raw Data: The EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is the Sharpest Zoom Canon Has Ever Made

« on: September 12, 2012, 07:30:04 AM »

What Canon lists their price and and what actually gets charged is completely different.

I don't know about the US, but in Germany the street retail price of current Canon products unfortunately is near the list price, maybe a couple of €100 or so off depending on how shady the dealer is - but certainly not "completely different" :-o

In Switzerland official list price and effective street price are very different, in this specific case > 25%

10

Lenses / Re: The Raw Data: The EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is the Sharpest Zoom Canon Has Ever Made

« on: September 12, 2012, 05:27:33 AM »

can't wait to receive my copy. pre-ordered back in march. based on the MTF data and my experience with the really really nice 70-200 f/2.8 II (the MTF data of the 24-70 f/2.8 II is even more impressive) this should be a wonderful lens. i am perfectly aware of the fact that MTF charts don't tell the whole story, but roger's test data seems to be perfectly in line with what the MTF data suggests.

11

Lenses / Re: Post your 24-70 II Experiences Here

« on: September 08, 2012, 03:58:33 AM »

so what is the material of the tubus? engineering plastic like the Macro EF 100mm f/2.8 IS or metal like the 24-70 MK1?

12

EOS Bodies / Re: Art Morris speaks to sharp IQ and f/8 AF with 1D X, 800mm f/5.6 L and Kenko 1.4x

« on: September 05, 2012, 10:10:43 AM »

is it the vignetting correction doing something it should not do, because the camera doesn't know there is a tc attached to the lens?

13

EOS Bodies / Re: Art Morris speaks to sharp IQ and f/8 AF with 1D X, 800mm f/5.6 L and Kenko 1.4x

« on: September 05, 2012, 05:29:31 AM »

Is it only me who sees a large clear(er) circle in all of these picutres? Is this the TC-Lens-Combination not working properly?

14

Lighting / Re: Batteries for Canon EX 600 RT...

« on: September 03, 2012, 07:07:04 AM »

What are the relevant parameters with Batteries? What's most important for good performance and fast recovery? I did some shooting on the weekend with my 600 RT, in programmed 5 second interwals: it first fired every second one, sometimes only every third. Is this what can be expected or do batteries make a relevant difference here?

15

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Has Made its Way To Retailers

« on: September 02, 2012, 09:04:18 AM »

oh joy!!!!