March 03, 2015, 01:59:29 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 - killswitch

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 15
46
There goes one more flower.
5D3 100L. Crazy windy day, fortunately I had a flash to freeze them all.

Beautiful color!

47
Lenses / Re: +18 AFMA out of the box....return?
« on: May 17, 2013, 01:05:02 AM »
I'm not really an AFMA expert, but the problem is as such.

lens is -15 and the body is +4 making the total adjustment 19 notches till AF is perfect.

Then you get a new body and the same lens.  The lens is still at -15, but the new body is at +9, so now you are at 24 notches till perfect. 

And if I'm wrong, please feel free to correct me out there.

So it is really about the lens, because let's say your body is +15 and your lens is +13, then you only have 2 in total difference.  So when you sell it to someone without AFMA, their body is -10 and the lens is +13 for a total difference of 23... which could be a real problem. 

So my presumption is that you want to make sure that you are identifying whether it is a combination of body + lens which is getting the high number or whether it is the lens itself.

Thanks jdramirez. Yeah, that made sense.

48
Lenses / Re: +18 AFMA out of the box....return?
« on: May 16, 2013, 07:09:43 PM »
I recently bought a used 16-3L II and it seemed soft at first. After a quick AFMA, Focal suggested +12/13 on both ends. It was tested under very good lighting conditions(+15EV) and on a stable tripod. That AFMA made it a lot better though. But do these extreme values imply something is seriously wrong with the lens and need to be checked/calibrated?

49
Landscape / Re: Sunset landscape
« on: May 15, 2013, 04:20:05 AM »
This was a handheld shot, using the Canon 60D and one of my all time favorite lens the Tokina 11-16 f2.8. I forgot the name of the vista point, but its from the Lake Tahoe trip last year.


As We Go Down by Dhanad Islam, on Flickr

51
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
« on: May 08, 2013, 03:46:00 PM »
One of the first shots from the 16-35 f2.8L II (used) I recently bought. At first I was disappointed in it's mid frame resolution. The focus was a bit off, and after a quick AFMA (+-12 on both ends =O), it started to perform a lot better. This was handheld, probably would have been a lot sharper had I used liveview and my tripod.


Spring Fever by Dhanad Islam, on Flickr

52
Lenses / Re: Poll: Most Wanted New Lenses of 2013.
« on: May 06, 2013, 07:52:28 PM »
Most of these lenses already exist, a 14-24mm 2.8 would fill a hole in the Canon lineup for those who want an UWA similar to Nikon's stellar 14-24. If it ever comes out and is as sharp as the current 24-70 II then I think we'd have a winner.

+1

14-24 f2.8L

53
Lenses / Re: Anyone upgraded from their 24-70L to 24-70L MKII?
« on: April 30, 2013, 01:43:04 AM »
Thanks for the insight folks.

I tried 3 copies of mrk I (2 new + 1 used), none of them could gave me the results I'm looking for.

YES...mrk II has better contrast and much sharper at f2.8. This is my most use lens. Follow by 70-200 f2.8 IS II and of course 50L when there almost no light.

Many posters ended up buying this lens after they posted similar questions ;)

Dylan, after getting the 24-70 MKII do you feel you have been using the 16-35 less and less for landscapes and wide shots? Or, the 16-35 still gets used quite often? I am asking because I have the 16-35 II, and wondering if I will end up using the 24-70 MKII more for landscapes than the 16-35 II and may end up giving up the wider focal length for better resolution.

54
Lenses / Anyone upgraded from their 24-70L to 24-70L MKII?
« on: April 29, 2013, 09:41:33 AM »
I was looking at my photo library and wanted to get an idea what focal length I mostly shoot at. Having various lenses at different point in time, the library indicates over 50% of my photos are taken using the original 24-70L alone. I have used it at weddings, family events, and for walk around. It has been a workhorse of a lens for me, and while one had to be lucky to get a good copy of it, I feel mine was not bad and am mostly happy with the images it gave me.

I am not looking to buy the MKII just yet, but if the contrast and sharpness (I dont care about corner sharpness but center to mid/outer frame should be sharp) is significantly improved over the original 24-70L at f2.8 then I might consider upgrading to the MKII (somewhere down the line).

I was wondering if others out there made the jump from the original 24-70L to the MKII, and noticed the improvements in real world situations, especially in terms of sharpness wide open at both ends.

55
Software & Accessories / Re: Screw-on ND filter for 16-35 II
« on: April 27, 2013, 12:02:00 AM »
You shouldn't see additional vignetting with the F-Pro mount on the 16-35L II.




Thanks a lot for that chart neuro. That helped! ^_^

56
EOS Bodies / Re: Download Firmware 1.2.1 link for 5DIII
« on: April 26, 2013, 03:13:52 PM »
Did they fix the black AF points issue in this update?

57
Lenses / Re: Tokina 16-28 PRO FX or Canon 16-35 L II or....
« on: April 26, 2013, 03:37:33 AM »
I was in the same spot a week ago. Tokina is sharper, and it's a great piece of glass. You can check out flickr galleries to get an idea of what to expect in terms of flares. If ND, GND filter is your thing, then your best bet are the filter holder systems from Lucroit, and Fotodiox for the Tokina 16-28. Also, I cant remember clearly, but the sunstars from Tokina looked nicer to me at least.

I ended up getting a used Canon 16-35 II today, so will give it a try and if I dont like it then I will sell it off for something else. Another lens that you can look into is the Samyang 14mm. It's sharp, and a great piece of glass and costs only $350. It's only downside is the complex mustache distortion but can be fixed in pp. If you are doing long exposures at night to capture milky ways, and stars then you might want to look into which of the lenses handle coma better.

58
Software & Accessories / Re: Screw-on ND filter for 16-35 II
« on: April 25, 2013, 12:03:37 PM »
Wow! Lovely images from Barrfly and Dustin! I am very very interested in the Haida's ND now, and for $80 only? That sounds like a real steal! I know ND tends to produce some form of color cast, but as long as they are very minimal it should be ok and can be handled in pp. So Dustin, have you noticed any significant color cast from the Haida's?

59
Software & Accessories / Screw-on ND filter for 16-35 II
« on: April 25, 2013, 10:10:28 AM »
Anyone used this B+W 10-Stop ND filter on their 16-35 II? I am wondering how bad the vignetting will be if this filter is used (could not find a slim version from B+W) on the lens at 16mm focal length, stopped down to f8, f11, etc. The lens will be paired with a 5D3.

I would get the Lee's Big Stopper but the wait time is ridiculous. Saw some on eBay, and people there are selling the Big Stopper for $250 (2filter, BnH sells them for around $140).

60
That photo is taken by Rarindra Prakarsa. Love his work. You can find more info about his style in Facebook and photo.net I believe. I think there are tutorials and articles explaining his workflow, I can't remember where i saw it but google can help you there.


Has Andre Arment got two names then ?  ;)

Undoubtably a Rarinda Prakarsa inspired photo  :)

Lol. Must be Andre Wayne during the day, and Batrarindra by night =O

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 15