November 28, 2014, 02:47:09 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 - Act444

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 23
256
EOS Bodies / Re: A New 100-400 & Coming Announcements [CR2]
« on: July 26, 2012, 12:09:41 AM »
Might be alone here, but curious to see what other EF-M lenses may be coming...

257
Focus seemed to be faster when using the center point(s). The corners of the frame rely on the (much) slower contrast-detect focus, and that's what this user was using so it makes sense. How does it do with a regular EF lens when focusing with those center points?

Also, I wonder how tough it would be to get a sharp image particularly since you are forced to hold the camera away from your body, which removes one aid in stabilization. Particularly with longer non-IS lenses (say, 85 1.8 ), probably would need pretty fast shutter speeds, I would take it? Hopefully an EF-M lens in the 60-80 mm range with IS materializes to fill this gap.

Perhaps a EF-M telephoto option (even the EF-S 55-250 looks pretty ridiculous on that tiny camera, haha) might be in the works too, but that wouldn't really matter to me personally anyway.

258
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS M System Announced
« on: July 23, 2012, 10:32:49 PM »
You know...at first I wrote this off- saw the pics, saw it had no viewfinder or control dials...but thing is, I've always had an eye out for a capable compact camera to be a good P&S companion to my primary DSLR kit. I currently have a Canon SD950IS for that, and while it is a great convenience as a second-shooter, I've always been disappointed with its IQ in less-than-ideal lighting. I've looked at the G1X (was disappointed with IQ, size and slowness)....but if it turns out that this new EOS M offers DSLR-type quality and AF responsiveness in its package, I might actually take a closer look at it...as a potential replacement for the 950IS.

The big negative is price, though...if it were, say, $599 it would be a LOT more tempting. It's quite a high price point so it'd better deliver on the IQ and the AF to be worthy.

259
Wow, great shots!

260
Lenses / Re: 28-300 L lens- thoughts?
« on: July 21, 2012, 10:13:36 PM »
Interesting comparison here with the 24-105 lens...

http://www.juzaphoto.com/article.php?l=en&article=46

Hmm. Not bad.

261
Lenses / Re: 28-300 L lens- thoughts?
« on: July 21, 2012, 01:25:15 PM »
I love the 28-300L lens. If you are doing professional shoots, maybe it's not the best (slower lens), but under nearly all conditions i have had an awesome time with it. I travel and hike a lot, and it's great to have a mostly all-around lens. On the 7D the wide end is not so wide, but the long end is really long (I take a 10-22 with me to get wider). It's a little heavy, but that can be accommodated for with the right strap (black rapid is great for me), and people will notice it - i've had several people come up to me and comment on the lens or ask how much i spent on it, so i am disguising it a little by putting some bike handlebar cork tape on it in different colors, and that also helps with the locking ring which is metal, but with the tape it's really easy to lock/unlock with one hand. Over two years of mountains, beaches, sand dunes, rain, desert, etc, never had any dust problems inside the camera. Some sand got in between the barrels and made some grinding noise, but a rocket blower got it out. The IQ is good enough for me, and I have blown pictures up to 60" and looked great. I'm not a professional and don't pixel peep much, but for myself, as gifts to other people and putting up at art shows, you can make some really nice, large images with this lens. Bokeh can be achieved with your subject well in front of a background, and the 2.3 ft focus distance does make it close to macro-like (though IQ is much better with dedicated macro). And if you're worried about changing lenses in the field, this is a great one to have. I rented one before buying (and a 100-400 to compare) from some strange place called lensrentals, and sealed my decision almost immediately.

Cool, thanks for the feedback! I assume the pop-up flash on 60D/7D would be blocked or cast a huge shadow due to the size of the lens, right? I know this is an issue with the 17-55 lens, but I'm almost always using an external flash head with it anyway. Of course the 28-300 is a much bigger beast though.

Quote
Hmmmm...and did you do this 'research' by placing various bodies with a 28-300L mounted inside a two-chamber isolator, with colored indicator smoke, to trace the air flow?  Or read a document describing such testing?   

Haha, no. But one guy DID mention experiencing more sensor dust when he used push-pull zooms as opposed to regular ones. HOWEVER, these were on old bodies- 10D, D60, etc...not sure if current models are much better sealed than those were. (plus I know the older bodies didn't have the auto-clean feature, not sure how big a difference that makes)

Quote
The 5DII and 60D have the same level of dust resistance, and I didn't notice and dust issues with the 28-300L.

Great.

Quote
It's certainly not a cheap lens, but consider - the IQ is equal to the 24-105L, and it's an 11x superzoom.  That's very good IQ in an absolute sense, and unmatched in a lens with that range.

Still, I don't think it would make a good one-lens solution, for me, on APS-C.  On FF, though, it's great.

The 24-105 is a great compromise/walkaround lens for me and delivers decent, if not outstanding, quality. However, I find 105 to be not long enough for a shot MUCH more frequently than I find 24 to be not wide enough for one. But I also know that there is a noticeable difference between 24 and 28...just like there is between 17 and 24- on crop, 17 (for me) is a must for any tight indoor shooting. For outdoor events or travel, 24 is usually sufficient.




For the type of shooting I enjoy, I like the extra reach I get from the APS-C sensor. I could never give that up for FF, personally. Eventually, I might look into trying one out, or I may just go ahead and take the plunge.

262
Lenses / Re: New 17-55 coming soon?
« on: July 21, 2012, 12:06:35 AM »
I was in the same boat...I was relatively new to CR when I saw the article a year ago about a possible 15-60mm 2.8 coming out and I was totally sucked in...time came by and no announcement- decided I couldn't wait and just bought the current model. Glad I did. A clear step up from the Tamron I was using before.

263
Lenses / Re: 28-300 L lens- thoughts?
« on: July 21, 2012, 12:01:57 AM »
If the 28-300 is a better "dust-sucker" than the other lenses, probably negates the dust reduction purpose somewhat, I think? Disappointing...even for travel use where only one lens would be desirable.

The 28-300L is a dust- and weather-sealed lens.  Even the 100-400L has a sealed zoom ring and sealed switches, and lacks only the mount gasket (which the 28-300mm has) to be a sealed lens. Neither of them is a 'dust pump' any more than any extending zoom (the 24-105, for example, produces enough eye-blow to trigger a reflexive blink).

I'm on a weekend family excursion right now, brought only the gripped 5DII and 28-300mm, in a Lowepro Toploader Pro 75 AW - and it's delivering the convenience and versatility I need and the IQ I want.

I did some more research on this issue. It seems that what happens when you put one of the "push-pull" design lenses (either the 100-400 or 28-300) on a NON-sealed body (a Rebel or perhaps an XXD model), it sucks in air through the cracks in the camera body- I've heard through the battery compartment, or the viewfinder, or other areas. So this might potentially stir more dust up than a regular zoom, particularly if you zoom in and out quickly...from what I understand, the 60D (the camera I have) is non-sealed.

Man, I'm still on the fence here. The lens seems a bit overpriced for what it does and the quality it delivers. 28 is not necessarily WIDE on crop, but it's still a great range. There have been times when I'm out shooting events with the 70-300, I'm asked to take someone's pic, then their whole group comes in and I can no longer get everyone in the shot, lol. Primarily, though, it would be a good lens to take on a trip. Just one lens, stick it on and forget it. I avoid changing lenses outside my home at all costs to minimize dust and risk of accidents. (and yet, that money might be useful for other things, too)

264
Lenses / Re: Keep 70-200 f4 IS or go for f2.8 IS II?
« on: July 20, 2012, 11:33:13 PM »
Having had both lenses (well, used to have the 4, traded up to the 2.8 which I have now), I find both equally sharp/impressive. As to which one you should go for, well, it depends on your use. I upgraded mine since I found myself using it more indoors than out, shooting special events and the like. With the 60D, I found I was really reaching the limits of the F4 model indoors (I hate using flash) so once I had the $$, I decided to trade it in for the 2.8 version. Don't regret the move one bit. Pros: same high level of performance, extra stop, quieter IS operation; Cons: extra weight & bulk (arm hurts after shooting continuously for an hour), price

Ultimately for outdoor tele shooting I got myself the 70-300L, which effectively replaced what I used to use the 70-200 f4 for. Much lighter than the 2.8 and has 100mm extra reach so it's great for outdoor daytime shooting when I don't want (or need) to carry around the extra weight.

265
Lenses / Re: Which to keep? EF 70-300 IS USM or 70-200 4L IS USM
« on: July 20, 2012, 11:43:13 AM »
Why not sell both and get the 70-300L?

That's also my advice! Best of both worlds.

The 70-300mm L is at least as sharp, and almost as fast as the 70-200mm f/4 L as same focal lengths, plus you get an additional 100mm on the tele end.

The 70-300mm L is still a portable lens, I love mine!

Paul

The 70-300L is a great lens. But having had both lenses, there are a couple of notable compromises you make with the above trade. First, of course, is the variable aperture (but I made that a non-issue given what I use the lens for, and other lenses in my collection)- by 200mm you're at f/5 so it's 2/3 of a stop slower at the long end...also, I find it a weaker performer than the 70-200 at 70mm f/4.

But the benefits- extra 100mm on long end, and great at 300mm f/5.6!

266
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Pancake Gallery
« on: July 07, 2012, 02:16:42 AM »
I don't think their uses overlap too much though. The 35 still is two stops faster and is sharper at 2.8 (less purple fringing too). For shooting in dark places (especially without flash), there really is no other option in my lens kit. Whereas the 40's biggest strength is its small size, meaning my 60D suddenly becomes a lot lighter and more portable (not pocket-size by any means, though), and this would enable me to bring a DSLR to places I wouldn't normally do so. Nice to still get high quality pictures out of such a lightweight package.

Actually, on that note I had to go through 2 copies of the 40 to find a good one- the first one I had backfocused HORRIBLY and is now being sent back. The second one is better, but seems the STM is not as reliable as USM when it comes to accuracy and speed.

267
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Pancake Gallery
« on: July 06, 2012, 06:39:35 PM »
Quote
would you bother with this if you were going to get a 35 f1.4L anyway?
or does anyone have both?

I now have both lenses. Obviously the 35L is the better of the two in every aspect except for one, and this can matter sometimes: size. I've even had one person mistake the 35 + hood for a telephoto lens until I told her to come and look through the viewfinder.

Obviously no one would be mistaking the 40 for a telephoto  ;D I can also see it being a nice second lens to bring on a vacation, or a lens to use at venues where bigger lenses may be restricted or banned. Of course, "bigger" being relative as most people just look at the size of the lens, not the focal length

268
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: 40 Shorty Test Shots
« on: July 04, 2012, 01:32:47 PM »
I wasn't really crazy about this lens at first....until I tried one at the store about a week ago. Took some test shots and scrutinized them upon arriving back home. I especially loved its small size. I had to pick one up immediately (well, ordered it so I can avoid paying tax  ;) ) Should be here later this week.

A great little lens that allows you to be inconspicuous and avoid attracting the attention that a bigger lens often gets....without sacrificing quality. Obviously it doesn't quite hold up to my 35L in terms of performance, speed or sharpness but can't expect it to for only $200. But you get maybe 75-80% of its performance from 2.8 onward in a package 1/3 of the size.

269
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 35 f/1.4L II
« on: July 04, 2012, 01:24:14 PM »
As for improvements, two I can think of- weather sealing and better performance "wide open".

But from 1.8 onward, the current one is amazing. Probably the sharpest lens I have- well, that and the 100L I guess!

If they do come out with version II soon, it likely won't be an easy decision whether to spring for the upgrade or not. I suppose it ultimately depends on how much the inevitable price increase will be.

270
I, too, moved up to the 60D from a T2i a year ago. My T2i's AF was all over the place; the 60D's, while not perfect, is better.

Unless you're a heavy-duty sports shooter (in which case a 7D or 5D3 may be better) it will do what you want it to do and more. The lens you put on it can make all the difference in the world, however.

I have used the 60D for some action photography- I'm really not a sports shooter but I've gotten a decent hit rate. I do find myself sometimes wanting something a bit more than the 9 focus points but it's MUCH better than what I was using before (P&S).

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 23