November 23, 2014, 01:08:42 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 ... 100
1
No problem for the tripod.
Although:
1. Canon specifies a lower operating temperature around freezing for their cameras. I've had my 7D in much colder than that, but YMMV.
2. Beware condensation! Put your gear in a plastic bag before you bring it inside.

Way ahead of you.  Ziplocks and dessicant are at the ready!   :D

Any suggestions for larger items like a 70-200 f/2.8 that do not readily fit in a ziplock? 

Thx

- A

Vacuum sealed travel bags. You don't need to use the vacuum feature, but good ones will come with a sturdy and sealed zipper.

2
Lenses / Re: Critical View of 70-200 f/2.8 mkii+2xTC III
« on: November 18, 2014, 03:24:07 AM »
I often hear people citing the Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8 Mark ii with the 2X TC III as a serious option as a wildlife lens and I don't quite agree.

I wonder who says that. Most people recommend and use the 70-200 + TC exclusively when rarely using the FLs over 200mm (such as myself).
Even if the IQ was exactly the same, the 70-200 + TC is an extremely cumbersome combination, as Neuro stated. I lugged it all day at a recent airshow, mostly pointing it upwards, and my arms were sore... :(
I do love the photos out of it, but then I am not a professional, and my standards are certainly lower than those using the great whites (and yours, most likely). The one below was shot with the combination at the airshow mentioned above, cropped 1:1 from the shot below it. I am happy with this level of IQ and resolution.

3
Lenses / Re: 70-200 2.8II or F4 for Zoo Shoot
« on: November 17, 2014, 06:44:50 PM »
The 135/2 is my zoo go-to lens.
Easy to carry, fast as heck!

4
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8 with T3i or 70-200 f/4 with 7d II
« on: November 16, 2014, 02:47:15 AM »
Also, if you are just learning, being stuck with a low fps camera will teach you how to capture the moment rather than just motor driving.

This is a good point as well.  No offense intended but as cameras get better and better, I think photographers get worse and worse.  I don't mean this happens on purpose or necc results in bad images, I just mean that the photographer is robbed of the crucial experience of having to think harder and develop good habits and techniques that are required when the equipment can't compensate.  We all rise to the level required of us and much less is required if the equipment lowers the bar.  When the going gets tough, sometimes good technique and experience is what saves us.

For instance, I think all DSLR photographers that have never shot with older manual film cameras that only had a basic light meter in them to help set the manual settings have missed out on some great experience.  Now these days, shooting with an older DSLR like a 30D, 40D or 5DClassic will still force someone to develop better skills to overcome the sensor limits, esp in low light.

I am guessing that the OP has likely learned a lot using a T3i and a slow lens to shoot indoor sports.  He will no doubt appreciate the new technology of the 70D or 7D2 after having shot images with the older tech.


You know, I used to think this way earlier- but now I feel it is silly to handicap oneself to just learn something. If someone is passionate about learning what needs to be learned, they find opportunities. There's nothing useful that a modern dSLR isn't good for learning. I use a 5Dc which works fine in most situations, but there are numerous situations that I appreciate having my 5DIII around.

In this specific case, you can always set the AF drive to one shot or low continuous if you don't want to gun it at 10 fps. And people mostly do that, too. I don't think having an 8fps 7D ever made me fire off at landscapes in 'spray and pray style'. Choose the best tool you can afford. Of course, in this case the lens is a bigger priority, so I think the 70D is a reasonable compromise if that is acceptable to the OP.

5
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8 with T3i or 70-200 f/4 with 7d II
« on: November 16, 2014, 02:34:07 AM »
Hey all,

    If you are looking at the ƒ4 IS version, might I suggest, for the SAME cost, the Tamron 70-200 VC model (A009). It is about the same for both lenses and I saw $100 rebate on the Tamron! That lens, coupled with the 7D MarkII, would make an excellent combination!

Gary W.

+1

Do you all (recommending it) actually own the Tamron 70-200 VC? I heard that the AF isn't as accurate as the Canon lenses. Personally, I am not a big fan of third party lenses since I think Canon copies are always far better (except the Sigma 50A, and no I am including Zeiss in this at all)- but to invest >>1K on a lens with low resale value will need all quality assurance I can get for the long haul. I am curious to hear about first hand experiences.

6
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8 with T3i or 70-200 f/4 with 7d II
« on: November 16, 2014, 12:45:02 AM »
The 7DII improves at least a stop over the T3i, so yes, you will be able to use the f/4 zoom in place of T3i-f/2.8.
Of course, the AF will be much better, the lens is easier to use, etc. etc.
However, I agree with RustyTheGeek- since you don't need the exceptional AF of 7DII for wrestling, the 70D will be an ideal compromise where you can get better ISO sensitivity that the T3i, much better AF, and still get the benefits of f/2.8. Remember, the sensitive center AF focus isn't as good (even on a 7DII) with f/4 as it is with f/2.8 (I believe the center AF point precision varies directly with the aperture up to f/2.8, so it is twice more precise with the faster lens).

7
Lenses / Re: Did Canon Leak the EF 11-24mm f/4L?
« on: November 13, 2014, 01:10:11 AM »
Thanks, privatebydesign. Is that "11mm equivalent" two stitched frames from a TS-E 17?

Hi Nancy,

Yes it is from two shift stitched 17mm shots, they equate very well to an 11mm fov. But like I keep saying, I see the big issue is going to be projection distortion on the edges, when I do these shift stitches I almost always end up remapping them in PS by doing a 'spherical distortion' in the horizontal plane only, it brings the edges in progressively and actually works quite well.

If you are interested I'll post an example.

I'm interested, if you can illustrate it that'll be great!
Thanks in advance.

Hi there Sagitariansrock

First image is two 17 mm TS-E images shift stitched, this gives the fov of an 11mm rectilinear lens.

Second image is a 100% crop from the extreme edge of the above image. The boat is badly elongated by projection distortion, as are the spherical buoys.

Third image is the top image after PS 'spherical distortion' with horizontal only ticked has been carried out.

Fourth image is the 100% crop of the same boat.

You can see how distorted the boat is in the first image, it isn't a lens aberration, it is the projection distortion you get when you try to bend that fov into the sensor area, however the PS spherical distortion trick sorts it out well.

Hope this helps.

Thanks, great tip!
I shall have to try this out now.

8
Lenses / Re: Did Canon Leak the EF 11-24mm f/4L?
« on: November 12, 2014, 10:59:22 PM »
Thanks, privatebydesign. Is that "11mm equivalent" two stitched frames from a TS-E 17?

Hi Nancy,

Yes it is from two shift stitched 17mm shots, they equate very well to an 11mm fov. But like I keep saying, I see the big issue is going to be projection distortion on the edges, when I do these shift stitches I almost always end up remapping them in PS by doing a 'spherical distortion' in the horizontal plane only, it brings the edges in progressively and actually works quite well.

If you are interested I'll post an example.

I'm interested, if you can illustrate it that'll be great!
Thanks in advance.

9
Lenses / Re: The next three new lenses? 50, 100 macro, 70-300
« on: November 12, 2014, 01:08:27 PM »
The 70-300 IS USM is a cheap lens and suited to its price point - below that of Tamron's 70-300 Vi DC.

In which market? In the US, the Tammy is $ 450 and the Canon $ 650.


If you look closely at the 24-105 STM MTF graphs and compare them with the 24-105L graphs then it is possible the STM bests the L for pure IQ and is cheaper too! That sets the stage...

Yeah, but you are paying a price premium for the build quality, the L prestige, the quickness of USM and ergonomics. With a standard build quality, no L, micro USM and mediocre ergonomics (rotating front filter, no manual AF override), it will be impossible to justify keeping the 70-300 at its price point with a 70-300 STM that performs better. Having said that, I think it will be hard for Canon to build a 70-300 STM that performs any worse, and the price point of the lens isn't justified even now, to begin with.


One thing puzzles me... ::)
Why stocks mediocre 75-300mm never end? ??? :o
Does Canon will have to sell them for $ 50 to get rid of them. :P

I wondered about that, too.
Except people buy them quite a bit, paying about $ 200. I know three guys who did, and I was shocked that they didn't choose one of the 55-250s instead. The main reason is ignorance about other options, strong marketing by the sales people (I have heard it myself) and low price point.

10
Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 12, 2014, 02:46:24 AM »
So. Same filter size, same F range, same focal length, except heavier, longer, wider and also 50% more expensive than the previous version.  Am I missing something?  Unless the AF performance or sharpness or something blows the prior version away (hard to imagine at the same F stop) we just waited 10 years and are paying 50% more for turn-style zoom? Please someone tell me I am missing something major here.

You must have missed all the clamoring for an "improved" 100-400 on this and other forums that has been going on for years, and all the people who were ready to pay $ 3K.
I think apart from a rotating zoom (to which people seem to have mixed feelings) the usability with the TCs as confirmed by the MTFs, a reliable and more powerful IS, along with the much improved IQ is a sufficiently good reason for the widespread welcome this lens is getting.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Custom Dials - what do YOU do with it?
« on: November 11, 2014, 03:03:38 PM »
I never used custom functions until few days back someone advised me about it. It helped me immensely.
I was shooting jet aircrafts (ideally 1/2000) and prop planes (1/500-800) in the same event and needed to be able to switch back and forth quickly.
So my C1 was Tv, 1/2000, auto ISO, +1 stop EC, etc. C2 was Tv, 1/800, auto ISO, +1 stop EC. C3 was M, 1/500, ISO 200, for all the shots where I needed to adjust as required.
The bottom line is, if you know you will need certain very different settings you will use, and will need to switch between them quickly- custom functions will act as three memorized settings.

12
Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 08, 2014, 04:30:59 PM »
No mention of TC compatibility, but I'm guessing the Canon TCs will mount and work.

That was my initial worry when I thought this looked shorter. It isn't though, so I think all is well.
Looks like the lens will be released just in time for me to buy it refurbished with discount for $ 1500 for the 2016 spring birding season :)

13
Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 08, 2014, 04:28:43 PM »
now the 400F5.6....... please.....

You might not need it, if this is good enough ;)

14
Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 08, 2014, 04:28:06 PM »
Hello All,

Few points unclear in the CR description:

1. lens is equipped with a new inner focusing AF system ???

2. Customizable zoom performance??

3. What about the Zoom? There is no mention about whether there is barrel extension or not and if so what would be teh final length?

Can experts clarify....

Re: The barrel does extend on zoom, but can't tell you what the maximum extended length is.

At last! At this price, I'll be on the preorder list as soon as B&H lists it. I was on the fence about the v1 model, and there's no way the v2 won't be significantly better in terms of optical performance.

I actually like the fact that it's a bit heavier than the v1 ... speaks to the quality of the optics in the system.

Now, please ship before Christmas!

Thanks Jon...

ANy view on 'Customizable zoom performance??'

I think this is what it is: there is a tightening ring, so you can decide if you want quick but less precise zooming or slower and more precise zooming action.

15
Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 08, 2014, 01:57:05 AM »
I hope the compactness doesn't come at the expense of incompatibility with TCs.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 100