November 23, 2014, 03:27:23 PM

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 - hendrik-sg

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1
Lenses / Re: Really bad GAS
« on: November 20, 2014, 09:53:56 AM »
If you are attracted to the 300 2.8ii and plan to use it with converters most of the time, the 400 2.8 is to heavy and to expensive for you, then maybe you should try the 500 4.0. This one is not so much more expensive and will have better AF and better IQ at 500 than the 300 at 420 and 600. It will be a better 700mm with extender than the 300mm with 2x and a compromised 1000mm with no or poor AF

2
Lenses / Re: Critical View of 70-200 f/2.8 mkii+2xTC III
« on: November 17, 2014, 06:00:12 AM »
maybe for indoor sports, if 200mm is not enough, instead of buying a new 100-400 and a 135 you can stretch your Budget to get a 300 2.8 IS, for maybe 3000-3500 this should be available used.

Thats a fantastic lens, with great AF and better you crop a Little than have 2 stops more ISO and worse AF on a 5.6 zoom. The newer 300 2.8 ii would bave even better IQ and AF, and most important better IS, but for sports when you can use a tripod this is maybe not woth 2x the price

3
Lenses / Re: Did Canon Leak the EF 11-24mm f/4L?
« on: November 11, 2014, 11:47:32 AM »
For me this really unique lens seems to be quite real now. If somebody would have faked the cpn page, he would have inserted the pic as well.

I am just curious on when and maybe together with which body it will be released?

Of course this is a specialist lens, with unique range and still quite fast. It should not be expected that it would be the fastest, smallest and cheapest lens, with IS and 58mm filter thread at the same time.

4
Lenstip has reviewed the Sigma 150-600 S.

Be aware that they received the lens they tested from Sigma.  To me, receiving a test lens from the lens manufacturer means that:
 
1.  The lens has probably already been tested by the manufacturer, and selected as being one that is the best possible. 
 
2.  You will never be able to get one as good as the one tested thru a store.
...

This is an urban myth and I'm sure that I've read a response to this somewhere that goes along the lines of "We (manufacturer) don't have the time to test 100 different lenses and pick the best one to send to a reviewer."

I would say it is pure marketing that the lenses are not carefully selected. if you consider what developpement and marketing of such a device costs, the cost to select the best one out of 100 costs nothing, and a good review is  miles more worth than any Marketing campain....... because the reader believes the test is independant.

Despite of this lenstip does the best and most scientific tests available for free (and i donated them a nice sum for reading the tests). Lens Rentals is a good addition, as they can test the sample variation

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II
« on: October 29, 2014, 12:49:44 PM »
could it be that "the year of the lens" was just off by a year…that is they thought they would have all these lenses this year but just didn't get around to it…so instead 2015 will be the year of the lens?

every year so far was "the year of the lenses", and next year will be as well. Maybe we will see a new 18-55 EF-s, with updated design, and maybe cheaper to produce. The current one gives poor profit and is 2 years old now :)

6
Canon General / Re: More Canon Lens Mentions [CR2]
« on: October 10, 2014, 12:01:51 PM »
To get a FOW this wide, the use of 8-15 fisheye at about 11mm on FF (with black corners) and correct with the hemi correction tool gives quite nice resultes. Compromise is, ist not exactlly rectangular projection and sharpness suffers at 180° FOW.

But
- it's 180° and not 120°
- it's 1000$ not 3000$
- the look is more natural than strongle recangular in my opinion.

For 3000$ one gets both (8-15 and 17TS) lenses, which gives all Fisheye Options, give UWA TS, 11mm rectangular with stitching for static subjects, and 180° FOW with correction in compromised quality.

All this together is more for me, than a 11-24 zoom for the same money.

To get compositions acceptable with lenses this wide, needs (at least for me) lot of time and patience, then using the tripod and maybe a lens change to take home all options is no problem and may get better results than a single shot with the zoom

The 17 TS has soft Corners fully shifted and lots of vignetting, thats true, but stitching gives a 40MP 11mm pic, which downscaled is really fine, and any other 11-12mm option has to prove her benefit first.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera to Come in Two Variants? [CR1]
« on: October 10, 2014, 06:04:57 AM »
That would be nuts.

Imho this isn't the point, people buying all kinds of premium products can be called nuts.

But with the 5d3 release and the multiple delays for lenses and cameras, many Canon users have proven to be rather resistant against "jumping ship". Probably simply because they like their long-term brand, Canon service, Canon usability, Canon whatever and are as conservative as Canon themselves. If you have €25k lenses, another $1000 more or less for a camera that actually makes use of their potential resolution is a minor expense w/o running into compatibility issues with adapters.

That is not really the point. Existing users may be committed to a particular brand, but new users are not. By not competing effectively in the market Canon might think that their current user base will keep on buying their stuff, and that may be correct, but new users are going to buy the best tech available now, which is not Canon. And those users are going to show life long loyalty to whatever choices they make now as well. So, the damage done to Canon's market share might not show up tomorrow, but in a decade or so from now the effects of their short-sightedness is going to manifest itself.

My expierience is the oposite: i know 2 new Canon users, who bought a xxx Line with kit lens who told me, that Nikon would no be on a good Level to date, and a Canon cam would be better. New users often are uninformed and buy what their friend have or wat they see most frequent.

Therfore the market leader is in a Position which is quite comfortable and Canon uses this and is for sure the less innovative photo brand at the Moment, but the most profitable (wich means nothing else than that we pay to much)

To Friends who asked me for advice (for Safari/wildlife) with around 1000E Budget bought 24MP Nikon 5100 with 18-55 & 55-300 tele instead of of Canon xxx with 18MP and 18-55 & 55-250 tele, which gives much better Resolution on distant subjects

For them ist not a question if there is a 17mm TS, or a 8-15 fisheye zoom and which 600mm 4.0 is the better one

Means, this politics (of non inovation) is dangerous and the user opinion can Switch, like about Nokia, Long time they were told to have the most user friendly mobiles) even if there Situation is different in detail

8
ist really sure we will see 50MP FF cams, as we will see 50Mp APSC cams and as we will see 50MP phone cams

question is when and what is the benefit we get

Timing may be 6 month after Company leaders have decided, main benefit may be for the Producers of disk space

9
Business of Photography/Videography / Re: 4K, 5K, 6K and Up Video
« on: October 09, 2014, 06:30:22 AM »
One limit is the resolution of our eyes. If you look at a 42'' Screen from 4 meter, between 720p and 1080p there is no visible difference.

To fully enjoy a 4k Screen i have to be 1.5m in front of a 55'' screen. That's not the normal living room configuration.

4k Needs a 80'' Screen at 3m viewing distance, and it is a aestetical question if y want to have a TV in your living room, which is so domitating optically, otherwise its not giving much benefit.

What i would realy love is a 8k Computer Display for stills, as i am sure soon even we Canon shooters will have at least 32MB resolution, but from the limitaion of our eyes, that must be a huge screen where we are standing and mooving in front of to see the details, wo won't overview such a screen (or print) in full resulution.

10
Lenses / Re: Is This a Canon EF 11-24 f/4L?
« on: September 18, 2014, 02:06:58 AM »
Maybe this lens is at the limit of what is possible with reasonable IQ and for acceptable price.

Maybe the question is, "have this lens without IS" or "not have it at all", just because there is no room for the IS unit or because of other restrictions.

The same may be true about 2.8 opening, it may be impossible, or unconvienient in weight, size or price...

So lets hope it is real, and has good optical performance

11
Lenses / Re: When will we see a replacement for the 100-400?
« on: September 10, 2014, 05:03:06 AM »
a new 100-400 will not canibalize the 200-400, thats a completely different Price league and the handling is completly different. Nobody will carry a 200-400 exept for a exactlty planned shooting, or for a special photo tour.

Nikkon seems to have a really good 80-400 lens, and the tamron 150-600 seems to be not bad as well, then there will be a new Sigma.

Maybe 100-400 Looks Little boring compared to the other offers. maybe Canon can strech the range to 450 5.6 with 82mm filter thread, or maybe they have to go for 6.3 opening, without extender compatibility then

12
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye - Durability?
« on: September 09, 2014, 05:44:22 AM »
Lens cap and shade are 2 pieces, where the cap is cliped on the shade. As generalle known this Connection tends to release unwanted, in the bag for example.

I blocked this release by thooth sticks, which works perfecty. I keep the lens closed, exept when effectivly in use, and remove the shade with the cap on.

If one does not want to see the lens anytime later, i would bond the two parts together


13
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: SIGMA 150-600!!
« on: September 05, 2014, 09:48:12 AM »
Tha 300 2.8 ii is in a different Price league, nobody can expect the zoom to rival this one. Whats the good News is, that it will put some pressure on Canon..... and offer an alternative to the Tamron.

Interesting will be, which one has better autofocus, better IQ at the long end and what Canons response will be

14
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 12-24mm f/2.8 L - Constructing the Enigma
« on: September 05, 2014, 09:34:54 AM »
I think 12-24 2.8 may be impossible, at least with good IQ. Lenses tend to get bulbous and big when wider and when faster.

The 14 2.8 is bulbous and the 17tse which has a medium format coverage is bulbous and huge. The Nikon 14-24 is a monstrous lens, and bulbous. the Sigma 12-24 s bulbous, slow and has mediocre IQ which nobody dreams about. The 17tse with a hypothetical 1.4x speed Booster may be a 12mm 2.8, but it's huge, expensive, bulbous and a fix focal lengh.

My unscientific guess is, that the patented 11-24 f4 is the maximum strech which is possible, and we know nothing about it's IQ. I am sure, if it would be producable for acceptable kost, and if IQ would be good, Canon would release this killer lens. If they don't, i think it's because of poor IQ or other unknown reasons.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: F8 AUTOFOCUS
« on: August 27, 2014, 07:33:18 AM »

Will a 60D do?

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=113&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=8&API=0&LensComp=0&CameraComp=0&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

If there is sufficient of light then then 60D might do that, just as the 7D or the 70D could do it over there. there is however no guarantee that you can do it from Canon, as it is not build in in the design of the camera. I am not aware which firmware this even might block, but I think Canon could have done this. Did you look at the quality of your link to digital picture? even in the center the sharpness is gone when you compare the 560mm with the 400mm.


It may be interesting from a technical Point of view if it works or not. But:

(My expierience is based on a 50d, with 300 2.8 IS (original one) and Ext 2x iii)

with extender one needs 3 stops more light, 2 stops get lost by the extender and with 2x maginifcation one needs 2x faster shutter Speed.

in a situation where ISO 400 works ISO 3200 would be necessary. this ISO value is already quite bad for a crop camera. Next the quality reduction by the extender and poor AF performance comes to the equation.

With all of this, in my expierience, the lighting situation must be really great that the extender gives a really better result than cropping, but the risk to completely loose the shot (by to finding the subject in the viewfinder until ist gone, by motion blur, by trying to low ISO, by poor AF, by bad framing, etc) is much higher.

means, for my use, i would ot nmeed a long reach tele combination with F8 opening on a crop camera, F5.6 is bad enough. Maybe with lots of practise, there may be a benefit in a 840mm F8 combination, but this needs lots of skill, ond if one has These skills, one knows how to handle the difficulties, and taping the extender may be the smallest difficulty

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5