April 18, 2014, 02:05:57 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 - Krob78

Pages: 1 ... 36 37 [38] 39 40 ... 84
556
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Spec List
« on: June 27, 2013, 08:23:12 PM »
So the 70D is a good step ahead.... autofocus with 19 cross points and 5Xfaster live view.... a bump up in ISO and # of pixels... WiFi..... This makes the 7D a very lame duck... perhaps even a dead duck...

This can only mean only one of two things.... that the 7D line is to be discontinued, or that the 7D2 will be a SIGNIFICANT step up over the 7D... I'm hoping for the latter!
I'm with you Don, I think it will be a fairly significant bump.  It makes sense with what they're doing to this one.

557
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Spec List
« on: June 27, 2013, 08:21:53 PM »
Is it just me or does that look like 7D to me?

It's just you.  There's clearly a zero in the name.   :P
Indeed!  Quite clearly!

558
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Spec List
« on: June 27, 2013, 08:20:21 PM »
If only Canon would give you AFMA on the 70D  :'(

Canon wouldn't needlessly take away a feature like that, would they?  No, they won't.  They already did that to the 60D.  This time, they'll do nothing of the sort.





By which I mean, do nothing.  As in, not add it back in.   ::)  But maybe they'll surprise us - the did give the 5DIII the AF from the 1-series, after all.  So there's hope.  Faint hope, but hope nonetheless.
I"m not so sure about that.  I think they may very well add it back into the xxD line.  The 50d had it and I think they heard a lot of complaints when they dropped it from the 60D. 

I have a feeling they are going to try and bring a little bit of that xxd line back into the line... like the magnesium in the body, etc...  Hoping for those that want it anyway!

Gives some hope that with a fairly substantial upgrade for this from the 60D, the 7D MKII may be fairly substantial upgrade as well!

Hope springs eternal!  ;)

559
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: June 25, 2013, 01:40:32 AM »





Lemmy, I really like #1~  I like 2 as well but 1 is pretty cool shot just before he breaks water!  Awesome!

560
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: June 25, 2013, 01:39:34 AM »
1Dx
600mm  f/7.1  1/2000   iso 800 case 1
flat lighting but you take what you get !
Nice Gary!

561
Lenses / Re: 16-35 f/2.8II vs 17-40 f/4
« on: June 25, 2013, 01:35:52 AM »
@ Krkb78:
tested the 17-40 for a weekend, soft (= unsharp) + horrible CAs.
No.
Had the 16-35/2,8II for more then a year. Never sharp corners. Even at f8.
Didn't like it. Was usable on the 1d4, but FF: sigh....
Bad luck?

Bought my first non- Canon lens. Tokina 16-28/2,8.
Own it for 2 years.
Now I am happy. I have read a lot about varying quality, so it seems this time I had good luck.
Sharp from 2.8 on, corners good, corners excellent from 5.6 up.
Never saw this on the 16-35/II....

Be aware of that. It is heavier too. Has only 16-28mm.
I am also not sharing Neuroanatomists opinion, that a bulb- like front needs more loving care in developing.

I recommend to test a copy before you buy.
Thanks Alex, I checked it out and I like it.  Seems like a perfect option for my 5d MkIII.  I've ordered one and it's on the way, should have it by Thursday!

The one I tried was just like you said, quite impressive really.  I noticed less distortion at 16mm too.  As far as the bulbous front lens, I see that there are two filter systems out there that will work with this lens, should I need to use in that manner. 

I don't plan on doing a lot of landscape work with it, although I can see taking it along on some wedding and event work.  I'll likely use the 24-70mm f/2.8 for landscape work, I like the 24mm end for that...

Thank you again!

562
Lenses / Re: FD to EF lens adapters
« on: June 23, 2013, 01:23:53 PM »
Anyone use one seriously?  I've got a bag of FD lenses that have been unused since my beloved A1 died, and I'd
like to continue using them if possible.  I know about the infinity focus limitation and that the glass correction
piece will cost me a stop, but with prices varying from >$20 to <$200 on ebay, anyone have any recommendations?
Check out Ed Mika at www.edmika.com   he also has listings on ebay.  My understanding is that his are the best...
Good luck! ;)

563
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: June 22, 2013, 06:37:49 PM »
Storm clouds building up over the Sierra Nevada. 5D mk3, 24 - 70 f4 IS ( yes, that one  ;)

It looks surreal, but it is, in fact, real !
Fantastic image Sporgon!  How are you liking the new lens?  I've been debating it... not sure about the f/4 if I end up with more inside event work... Renders beautiful in this image though!

Thanks Krob. You guys in the States are so lucky to have your big landscapes and amazing skys.
The 24-70 f4 is a very good lens, with one big problem: the price of the 24-105. The 24-70 feels more substantial and better made than the 24-105, but also shorter and more 'handy'. It has superior resolution especially at the wider end and is much better in the corners. We haven't had any rsa issues.

It comes down to whether  you're prepared to pay a lot more money for improved wider end performance and much better corners.

With regard to low light events a 2.8 lens will give a brighter viewfinder and possibly better AF, but I've generally found that 2.8 doesn't give enough DoF for most applications anyway. Bring on the 6D and its amazing high ISO performance !
Thanks Sporgon!  I may have to try out the new Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 with VC... it's looking very good and very tempting at that price point...

Thanks for taking the time to answer my question, I appreciate it!
 :)

564
Lenses / Re: Tamron 24-70 f2.8 or Canon 24-105 f4 ??
« on: June 22, 2013, 06:33:59 PM »
I used the 24-105L for years, but after owning the 24-70VC for a few months I sold the 24-105L.  The Tamron is the better lens in almost every way.  The Tamron stays on my 6D a good percentage of the time.  For landscape, it has less distortion, is slightly wider (although listed the same), far less vignetting, better color rendering, and then it has a lot of advantages for wide aperture shots.  I find the bokeh rendering great on the Tamron:


Resurrection by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Stopped down it is a great landscape lens.  Nicely sharp!

As the Ice Forms by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Dustin, thanks for posting these images and your opinion on the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC.  I've been contemplating this lens since I picked up my 5D3 a few months back.  I've been going back and forth between this and of course the EF 24-70 f/2.8 L.

Your images here take a little of my concern away.  Can you tell me about the fit and finish on the lens and how it feels on your camera?  Is the zoom ring smooth like an L lens?  Stuff like that I'd be interested in knowing...

Thanks,
Ken


Ken,

I'm not sure which lens we are using as a comparison point, but having used quite a few lenses, I can throw out some general comments.

Fit and finish is actually very good. The lens feels very dense in your hands and in no way cheap feeling.  I have been using mine for 8 months for many purposes (including travel) in bags, holsters, and Cotton Carrier type harnesses, and I have had no issues with anything, including any kind of cosmetic marking.  One positive note - unlike many older L lens' hoods, this hood does not mark easily AT ALL.  The smooth finish on older hoods was notorious for easily marking.  I have used the lens in a lot of adverse weather (rain, sleet, snow)without any ill effects.  The lens has a zoom lock, but I have never had to use it because it exhibits no evidence of creep at all to this point.  The rubberized surfaces on the zoom and focus rings has held up perfectly.  I would say that my copy looks like new still without exaggeration.

The zoom ring is smooth but stiffer than some of the better zoom rings I have used on top Canon lenses.  It doesn't hang at all, but has more resistance than some other lenses.  The smoothest zoom lenses are the internally zooming ones, of course, but there is a bit more resistance than my 70-300L for example and slightly more than what I remember from the 24-105L also.  I don't notice it in the field, but when directly comparing it I do.  This may contribute to the complete lack of zoom creep.  This would probably most be a factor if you were wanting to smoothly zoom during video operation.  It can be done, but takes a bit of practice/adjustment to the resistance.

The VC is huge.  Period.  It is so beneficial.  If you do shoot video at all, it amazing how rock steady you can shoot.  I have actually handheld this .8 second shot:


Metro Arrival by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

I have a pretty decent kit (see my signature), but this lens is my most used tool.  It is just very flexible and produces consistently great images.

Thanks Dustin, that's exactly what I was looking for.  You've made up my mind!  I was going back and forth over this and the 24-70mm f/2.8L. 

I just sold my 24-105L and I liked it a lot but I never really loved it.  I love all my other lenses.  I wanted the 24-70mm 4/2.8L but never pulled the trigger, as I really like having IS.  Especially with low light situations even with the 5d3 and it's capabilities.  I'm 53 now and I do often see some oof from shaking a little bit on a few non IS lenses I've used or borrowed from friends, even on my 85mm... So I've wanted the IS. 

I'm glad Tamron came out with it, do to the price point, just had some trepidation where all I've owned mostly has been L glass, I just didn't know what to expect but wanted it to be a fantastic lens that I would not regret purchasing over the 24-70mm f/2.8L. 

I think you answered my questions, thanks again for your time!

All the best,
Ken

565
Lenses / Re: Tamron 24-70 f2.8 or Canon 24-105 f4 ??
« on: June 22, 2013, 04:20:40 PM »
I used the 24-105L for years, but after owning the 24-70VC for a few months I sold the 24-105L.  The Tamron is the better lens in almost every way.  The Tamron stays on my 6D a good percentage of the time.  For landscape, it has less distortion, is slightly wider (although listed the same), far less vignetting, better color rendering, and then it has a lot of advantages for wide aperture shots.  I find the bokeh rendering great on the Tamron:


Resurrection by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Stopped down it is a great landscape lens.  Nicely sharp!

As the Ice Forms by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Dustin, thanks for posting these images and your opinion on the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC.  I've been contemplating this lens since I picked up my 5D3 a few months back.  I've been going back and forth between this and of course the EF 24-70 f/2.8 L.

Your images here take a little of my concern away.  Can you tell me about the fit and finish on the lens and how it feels on your camera?  Is the zoom ring smooth like an L lens?  Stuff like that I'd be interested in knowing...

Thanks,
Ken

566
Lenses / Re: 16-35 f/2.8II vs 17-40 f/4
« on: June 22, 2013, 04:10:04 PM »
Does anyone have any experience with the Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 FX on Full Frame that they could share?  Looks to be quite capable and fairly on par with the 16-35mm but just not sure.  I do a lot of paid, indoor Real Estate photography and previously used a Tokina 11-16mm f/2.i with image stabilization on my 7D with outstanding results but didn't love the fit and finish of the lens compared with my L glass. 

I'm now shooting my interiors with my 5D3 and being FF it's a different beast altogether for UWA lenses.  So I'm not sure if I should just fork out the extra $$ for the 16-35mm II or get the Tokina 16-28m, which doesn't accept filters either, if I want to jump to some landscape work with it...

Thanks, I value your opinions and especially any experience you may have with this newer Tokina lens.

All the best!  :D

567
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: June 22, 2013, 01:46:55 PM »
A view from Pilatus/Luzern.
I particularly like this image!  I "feel" like I'm too close to the edge and could just fall over!  Outstanding! :)

568
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: June 22, 2013, 01:45:10 PM »
From near the top of Goat Fell, Arran, around sunset:


Sunset on Goat Fell, Arran [IMG_3019] by GammyKnee, on Flickr
Easy to take a good liking to this image Paul!  Very nice, where is Goat Fell?

569
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: June 22, 2013, 01:43:19 PM »
Storm clouds building up over the Sierra Nevada. 5D mk3, 24 - 70 f4 IS ( yes, that one  ;)

It looks surreal, but it is, in fact, real !
Fantastic image Sporgon!  How are you liking the new lens?  I've been debating it... not sure about the f/4 if I end up with more inside event work... Renders beautiful in this image though!

570
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: June 22, 2013, 01:41:21 PM »
I posted this one in a thread for the 10-22mm EF-S lens as well, but I felt it merited a showing in this thread too as I am very pleased with how f/3983 came out in the end. :) f/11 Camera setting + 17 stops of filters. :)


Landscape trickshot... by K3ntFIN, on Flickr
Sweet!

Pages: 1 ... 36 37 [38] 39 40 ... 84