August 31, 2014, 02:41:36 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 - sagittariansrock

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 84
1
Photography Technique / Re: Website launched!
« on: August 30, 2014, 11:26:41 PM »
Great news! Already bookmarked the site.
Now I don't have to remember which CR thread your great technical articles are hidden in (and here's hoping you'll keep writing more)!
Congrats, the site looks nice :)

2
Photography Technique / Re: Back-button focus?
« on: August 30, 2014, 11:24:28 PM »
If I need to decouple focus from the shutter button for any reason, I'm much more likely these days to switch to manual focus.

Inspired by a post in this forum, I recently changed my cameras to use "af off" on the "AF-ON" button. It needs holding down while focusing, but is quicker than to reach for the af/mf lens switch. Pity there is no "af off (hold)" option.

Not sure I understand...
If you use BBF, your system is essentially on manual focus (AF off- hold) unless and until you press the back button...

I think you will find Marsu has AF on the shutter button and the AF-On button set to AF Off, that means if he wants to manual focus he just pushes the AF-On button (that turns AF off).

Oh, I understand his set up :)
What I could not understand is why he can't set AF-On on the back button, and no AF function on the shutter button, essentially making it AF off-hold until and unless he presses the back button (since he was wishing for an AF off- hold scenario).

Because many people find needing to use their finger and thumb to AF and expose inefficient, especially if you regularly move AF point with the joystick or work EC with the back dial, or if you are in M mode adjust aperture with the back dial. I tend to use my thumb for other stuff and found I got thumb fatigue with BBF, I really like the AF-On button set to AF off, I find it works well for me and the other stuff I want to do with my thumb.

Ah, got it. Thanks!

3
Lenses / Re: Permanent price drops
« on: August 30, 2014, 11:19:59 PM »
Neuro, interested to hear why you're looking at the TS-E 17mm.  I've been researching the differences between the two lenses lately and in some other threads it sounded like you were pretty happy with the TS-E 24mm.

I'm very happy with my TS-E 24mm...except when I need a wider focal length.  I would be using them both, depending on the focal length needed.

Other than focal length, the 24 is slightly sharper (the 17 is among the very sharpest ultrawide lenses, though).  The 24 can tilt a little more than the 17.  One of the biggest differences is the 24 can take front filters and the 17 cannot.  Since my main TS use is architecture, I rely on a 10-stop ND to 'blur out' people from the scene, so that's one factor that kept me from getting the 17.  Now, there's the Wonderpana system as a 10-stop solution for the 17...not cheap, but I need that option.

One other thing to keep in mind is that the TS-E lenses take the Canon extenders, the 1.4xIII behind the 17 gets you to 24mm with very good IQ.

Interesting, I had not heard of the Wonderpana system before.  With that being said (and apologies for hijacking this thread - happy to move to a new thread if need be), I've already bought into the Lee system (foundation kit, .9 soft/hard and Big Stopper) that I have been using with the 16-35 2.8.  I've wanted to do more architectural with landscapes as a secondary use so was planning on selling the 16-35.  It looks like Lee has an adaptor for the 17 but hadn't yet found any threads testing the 100mm filters with it.  Most of my landscapes have been at 16mm so far but if 24 gets the job done for architecture I'd be willing to compromise on that.

Based on that setup and with the option of only choosing one of the TS-E lenses, would you recommend the 17 or the 24? 

Thanks as always for the insights, they're much appreciated.

I have the Lee setup as well. The Lee TS-E 17mm adapter for 100mm filters restricts the movements to a bit over 6° shift before you get mechanical vignetting (both lenses shift 12°).  Not sure how it would be on the 17, but with my 24 I often need 8-10° of shift for tall buildings, sometimes the max shift.  The Wonderpana uses 145mm filters, and doesn't restrict movements.

As for focal length, I'd say you're best able to answer that.  Set your 16-35 to ~17 and ~24mm, and see which framing would work better for your needs.  From a conservative standpoint, if the 17 is too wide you can add a TC or crop, but if the 24 is too narrow..... (Yes, you can do a shift pano, but not if you need shift to correct verticals).


FYI, Lee makes an adapter for the 17mm TS-E (which restricts some of the movements, of course, by vignetting).
However, if you use the 17mm with the 1.4x III, it might or might not restrict the movement as much.
I am unsure  on the theory here, whether the 1.4x TC causes a lens to NOT use the periphery- if that is the case, there will be less vignetting.
The best way to find out is by trying- but unfortunately, although I have both the 17mm and 1.4x III, I couldn't find the $ 90 Lee adapter in a local store to try before buying.

4
Photography Technique / Re: Back-button focus?
« on: August 30, 2014, 10:59:00 PM »
If I need to decouple focus from the shutter button for any reason, I'm much more likely these days to switch to manual focus.

Inspired by a post in this forum, I recently changed my cameras to use "af off" on the "AF-ON" button. It needs holding down while focusing, but is quicker than to reach for the af/mf lens switch. Pity there is no "af off (hold)" option.

Not sure I understand...
If you use BBF, your system is essentially on manual focus (AF off- hold) unless and until you press the back button...

I think you will find Marsu has AF on the shutter button and the AF-On button set to AF Off, that means if he wants to manual focus he just pushes the AF-On button (that turns AF off).

Oh, I understand his set up :)
What I could not understand is why he can't set AF-On on the back button, and no AF function on the shutter button, essentially making it AF off-hold until and unless he presses the back button (since he was wishing for an AF off- hold scenario).

5
Photography Technique / Re: Back-button focus?
« on: August 30, 2014, 10:14:06 PM »
If I need to decouple focus from the shutter button for any reason, I'm much more likely these days to switch to manual focus.

Inspired by a post in this forum, I recently changed my cameras to use "af off" on the "AF-ON" button. It needs holding down while focusing, but is quicker than to reach for the af/mf lens switch. Pity there is no "af off (hold)" option.

Not sure I understand...
If you use BBF, your system is essentially on manual focus (AF off- hold) unless and until you press the back button...

6
Portrait / Re: Little girl looking at flowers
« on: August 30, 2014, 09:28:13 PM »
I gave it a shot, but 'pop' is subjective and I am not sure this is an improvement over your already very nice shot.

7
Lenses / Re: EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS versus EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
« on: August 27, 2014, 01:14:38 AM »
The vII is better, but the vI is no slouch.
Having said that, I have always had less than expected results with AI servo from my 7D (with BIF), although that might well be my technique.

Haven't tried BIF with my 5DIII, and with the 5DII and 5Dc, KIM (kids in motion) sucks some times.

8

1Dx is at least 1 stop better for noise compared to 5D3.

Is that true - DxO rates the 1DX only 0.28 stops better (http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-versus-Canon-EOS-1Dx___795_753 )? And Ken, bless his heart, Rockwell, rates both very similar ( http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/comparisons/5d-mkiii-vs-1dx.htm#iso  )? Perhaps someone who has both could enlighten.

I think Ken Rockwell says the 1D X is half a stop better than the 5D III, although someone with both cameras like FEBS might know better.

9
Lenses / Re: 200 f/2.0 vs 70-200 f/2.8 II
« on: August 26, 2014, 08:58:13 AM »
maybe this will help a bit
Lisa Holloway 500px profile

almost all of her portrait work are done using 200 f/2 wide open, enjoy!
Thanks for the link.  My GAS just shifted to another state.

Told you long back you have a vacant spot in your shelf with 200/2 written on it ;)

10
Isn't it usual for the American football pros to use a 400/2.8 and 70-200 combo? Considering football (aka soccer) has approximately the same field size, wouldn't that work better?

Yes that's fully correct. This is indeed the most used combination until a year ago. Then several sport shooters did find the quality and the flexibility of the 200-400 1.4x that high that there is really a change now. There are several photographers, depending on the place next to the field, that only use this 200-400 instead of a combo with the 70-200. I think (not counted or any statistics, but just from looking at the games) that during the last World Championship in Brazil almost, from Canon side, the 200-400 gets close to 50%. It's a real game changer that lens.


That's interesting. So people are finding the lens useful enough to give up the wide end (all of 70-200) of the range as well as a full stop of exposure?
I thought the real use of the 200-400 was in wildlife and distant daylight sports. Good to know that the lens is so versatile. You must be enjoying yours a lot :)

11
Isn't it usual for the American football pros to use a 400/2.8 and 70-200 combo? Considering football (aka soccer) has approximately the same field size, wouldn't that work better?

12
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Placing an order today (I think) - need advice
« on: August 26, 2014, 04:07:43 AM »
The 70-200 II is optically close to perfection, and takes TC's remarkably well, even the 2x. However, the 1.4x and 2x mk III TC's won't physically mount together. You'll need an extension tube (so you'll likely lose infinity focus), and the camera won't get the correct info about focal length or aperture reported to it.

Also the optical degradation will be significant. You'd be better off using the 2x TC and cropping in post if such a narrow AoV is required.

+1.
Also, it becomes unbelievably cumbersome to use.
If you think you will use the longer FLs a lot, why not get the excellent Tamron instead of either of the TCs? It would only be another $ 100 or so.

13
FOR SALE Photo Equipment / Canon 500D Close up lens 77mm
« on: August 25, 2014, 11:32:30 PM »
500D Close up filter- 77mm
With box and case, in perfect condition.
$ 100 sold locally, $ 110 shipped to CONUS (all inclusive)
Username sagittariansrk in Fredmiranda (20 'Great' feedback) and deepsbid in ebay (50+ positive feedback)

14
Sorry.. I didn't quite get why you didn't like the 560B.
I tried it and liked it a lot- if I ever upgrade my monopod that's what I'll get.
And I tried both swivel and ball heads on a monopod- a swivel head is much easier to control.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 24, 2014, 05:49:45 AM »
ISO 12800 and 1/30th second at F2.8 on a 60D with a 100F2.8L. This was taken in a venue where flash was not allowed.... and before anyone jumps on me for not using a FF camera under such conditions, this was a test of the camera pushed to it's limits... and I had a 5D2 sitting on the table in front of me.

Processing was minimal.... white balance and top noise slider in Lightroom.

What is scary is that the Sony A7S can do this at ISO204,800!

I wouldn't be happy with this level of noise reduction. Looks too smoothed for my taste.
Of course, I noticed it only when I opened the full sized image. Looks fine within the thread.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 84