October 25, 2014, 03:47:11 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 - Waterloo

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8
76
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Lens Aberration Correction
« on: September 16, 2012, 09:21:55 PM »
I was just going through my cameras and checking settings using EOS Utility. I noticed that there are no selections for the III series Extenders in the Lens Aberration Correction settings for the 7D. But, there are listings for the III series Extenders for the 1D X and 5D Mark III. Curious.....

77
Isn't it the price you pay for being a "first adopter"?

What ticks me off is seeing Bluray discs that I payed near full price for in the $7 bargain bin at Walmart.

78
Animal Kingdom / Re: DragonFly Series
« on: September 14, 2012, 11:15:53 PM »
Found another one from today I like:

79
Animal Kingdom / Re: DragonFly Series
« on: September 14, 2012, 10:55:28 PM »
I was out today and got these:

80
Animal Kingdom / Re: DragonFly Series
« on: September 11, 2012, 08:21:18 PM »
One from Saturday:

81
Lenses / Re: 400 2.8L, 500 4L or 600 4L for wildlife
« on: September 11, 2012, 06:41:52 PM »
So the primes alone still seem to take the cake.  How about F4 to F2.8?  One would not think it's much of a difference.  Does anyone think twice about it?  or just make it up with a higher ISO?

Also pondering the use of a 1.4x with both.  With the 2.8 it would yield an F4 at 560mm. Any resolution tradeoff between that combo and the 500mm f/4 outright?  One would think but who knows.(Someone who has tried it and made the comparison).

Check the TDP ISO12233 charts. My sense is that the 400 II takes a bigger IQ hit with the 1.4xIII than the 500 II or 600 II.  The new 500/600 + 1.4x seem equivalent to the MkI 600 and the 800, respectively, while the 400 II + 1.4x seems to fall short on IQ vs. the 500 MkI (and the bare 500 II is even sharper).

I think twice about it all the time. Not because of the light loss, but the loss of image quality. I know adding the 1.4 Extender will give me more reach and I know I'll have to pay for it when I pull the images up on the computer screen. Plus living here in Nevada with the dust, I dread each time I remove the camera from the lens/extender. And, the fumbling in the field changing the extender and the resultant lost shots.

82
Lenses / Re: 400 2.8L, 500 4L or 600 4L for wildlife
« on: September 11, 2012, 05:07:49 PM »
I really appreciate this discussion.  I've been pondering the 500mm for bif but maybe I'll continue to use my 400mm.  Any others with experience with the 500mm with birds in flight?

Check this post:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=8876.0

83
Lenses / Re: 400 2.8L, 500 4L or 600 4L for wildlife
« on: September 11, 2012, 02:47:05 PM »
You know the old saying "horses for courses". Well, my favorite subject is wild horses. With the 500 I've missed a lot of shots because I had too much lens on and couldn't back off. I'm waiting patiently for the new 200-400.....

(5D Mark III and 500mm f4 L IS)

84
Lenses / Re: 400 2.8L, 500 4L or 600 4L for wildlife
« on: September 11, 2012, 02:39:42 PM »
Nice shot.  But I think I would rather have the 500 than the 300 for this kind of shot!  LOL!  CPS loaned me their 500 for a couple of weeks and I found it a challenge trying to find the subject when it was in flight.  for stationary objects it was great, especially on the wimberly.  As you state the MTF on the new models offer theoretical advantages but I'm curious to how they relate to real world usefulness.  Reach is obviously an advantage shooting most any wildlife...you often dont have the opportunity to get closer...even with bears.  ;) 

How important to you is f2.8 vs F4 or F5.6 in the scheme of things?

All depends on how close you expect to get to your subject. Here's a Black Bear sow shot with the 5D Mark II and the old non IS 300mm f2.8. Saying that I would go for the 500. I've had my 500 since November of 2001 and it is my most used lens. The new 500 Mark II should be here next week and I can't wait. The new 500 to me looks like the sweet spot, especially if you can believe the MTF curves that Canon publishes.

If I had the 500 on I would have had to put the 25mm extension tube on too to get her in focus.  :)

85
Lenses / Re: 400 2.8L, 500 4L or 600 4L for wildlife
« on: September 11, 2012, 12:44:08 PM »
All depends on how close you expect to get to your subject. Here's a Black Bear sow shot with the 5D Mark II and the old non IS 300mm f2.8. Saying that I would go for the 500. I've had my 500 since November of 2001 and it is my most used lens. The new 500 Mark II should be here next week and I can't wait. The new 500 to me looks like the sweet spot, especially if you can believe the MTF curves that Canon publishes.

86
Apple Mac Pro 3.33 GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon with 32 GB Ram (Lightroom 4.1 and Photoshop CS6)
NEC PA271W 27 inch monitor
Epson 3880 17 inch printer
Epson 7890 24 inch printer

87
Lenses / Re: Canon 500 availability ?
« on: September 10, 2012, 10:35:19 PM »
I just got an E-mail from Adorama. Mine should be here next Monday (Sep 17th). Ordered on July 14th. I think I have a buyer already for my "old 500". It's been my most used lens and one I couldn't do without. Hopping for good things with the new one!!!!

88
EOS Bodies / Re: 1dx firmware released
« on: August 27, 2012, 10:47:43 PM »
Got it and installed it already. It didn't fix my sleep issue with the 180 Macro and 1.4x III Extender. Maybe in the next round of updates. May go out shooting tomorrow.....

89
Animal Kingdom / Re: Ribit!
« on: August 27, 2012, 04:32:10 PM »
Froggywog or is it a Pollyfrog? Or maybe a Frogpole? What do you call them when they are half way to being a Frog?

90
Animal Kingdom / Re: Birds with attitude
« on: August 26, 2012, 11:28:36 PM »
Red-tailed Hawk

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8