Messages

76

Software & Accessories / Re: Screw-on ND filter for 16-35 II

« on: April 25, 2013, 11:57:13 AM »

I have been impressed enough with Haida's new Pro MC II filters in 77mm that I recently purchase one for my Tamron in 82mm.  I have both a ND1000 (10 stop) and ND64 (6 stop).  The filter ring is very, very slim and produces very little vignetting.

Here's a few on the 17-40L:


Anchored in the Light [Explored December 7th, 2012] by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr


Sheltered by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr


Room With a View by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Here's another shot with the ND64 on the Tamron:


Still Winter, Still Beautiful by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

They are available on Ebay for about $80 and are very high quality filters.  They are German made with high quality Schott glass.  I've been impressed.

77

Lens Gallery / Re: Helios 44-2 58mm f/2.0 M42

« on: April 25, 2013, 09:10:44 AM »

Here's another 44-4 shot, wide open.  The slightly dreamy look suits the lens very well:


Glorious Imperfections by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

78

6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D

« on: April 24, 2013, 06:02:34 PM »

I just wanted to say that I love my 6D so much that I have purchased a second one to replaced by 5DII as my second body at event shoots.  Low light performance is so much better, and the fast shutter response and somewhat better AF is critical in those situations.

Happy for you Dustin!

That's kind of you, Carl.  Thank you!

79

6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D

« on: April 24, 2013, 06:02:14 PM »

Hello again.   (I posted this first in the 'small' thread about 6D images - now found the right one, so I repost).

I entered some of the following in another thread, that started out with my questions about choice of 5D mkIII or 6D.  I ended up choosing 6D - and enjoy it much sofar.

I add some samples.
These first two are mainly test-shots. But they both show me lots of promises on what this camera can do.

It resolves and renders delicately (swan's feathers / water surface)
And it does quite a good job regarding focus (I tried a bit of BIF, which is not my regular domain).

Two last samples are some of my favourite motives. (They were entered a few days ago also under the Animals/ Birds-group here in CR.)

All four made using 70-200 mm f/4.0 L IS.

Also I noted that I can go HIGH in ISO - which gives me a lot more flexibility.
And the camera handles near to perfectly for me.

All in all: A giant step forward from my previous 450D / Rebel XSI.

Much more playing / testing / gaining experience to be done - love it.

Strong images.  Looks like it will serve you very well!

80

Reviews / Re: Review - The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS

« on: April 24, 2013, 05:37:17 PM »

Thanks for the thoughtful review and additional 100% crops.  It looks a very good safari lens. I bought a 70-200 f/4 IS for a safari trip just before the f/2.8 II and the 70-300 L.  I'm holding on to it because it is so sharp and small. If I was doing it again maybe I would get the 70-300L.

My pleasure

81

Lens Gallery / Re: Helios 44-2 58mm f/2.0 M42

« on: April 24, 2013, 11:32:19 AM »

Here's a wide open Helios 44-4 shot.  I find it has a bit less micro contrast than the 44-2, but also functions perfectly on a full frame body (no mirror hang).


Out with the Old; In with the New by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

82

Reviews / Re: Review - The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS

« on: April 24, 2013, 11:25:23 AM »

I thought I would also include the worse case scenario of the day.  A black subject that was in shadow with bright, harsh light in the outer area.  I initially grabbed focus pretty fast, but then recomposed as the bird continued to move.  The further it got into the shadow, the more hunting the AF did.  When I got focus confirmation, I shot, but the picture was NOT focused right, as both the original and the crop show.  I jumped to ISO 1600 to get this one (most are at ISO 500 or less) so that should tell you how reduced the original light was for the middle of day.  This is pretty ugly...

83

Reviews / Re: Review - The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS

« on: April 24, 2013, 11:16:12 AM »

Thanks for the real world review.  I find real world reviews to be far more useful than technical reviews and chart shots.

My favorite review of this particular lens was actually the one done here at Canon Rumors and served as my introduction to this great forum: http://www.canonrumors.com/reviews/ef-70-300-f4-5-6l-is-review/.  The beautiful real world images are what helped sell me on the lens.  I hoped to add my own voice in a similar way.

84

Reviews / Re: Review - The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS

« on: April 24, 2013, 11:10:20 AM »

It states under "pixel peepers" that the Canada Goose was at 420 mm. However, the exif data on the download has it as 309 mm. The others are correctly registered at 420 nm.

Alan - good catch.  I overlooked that one although I thought I had checked them all.  I just double-checked in LR and you are right.  I have replaced that pair with another set.  Here are the replacements:

85

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits

« on: April 24, 2013, 09:47:28 AM »

I've only recently started but here's a few of mine. All hand-held, 7D, usually ISO 800 or 1600, no idea of the other settings.

Geese Flying (100-400 L)

IM130780.jpg by sm_carey, on Flickr

Swans Flying (100-400 L):

IM131697.jpg by sm_carey, on Flickr

Those first two images are great! That synchronous flight is amazing!

Totally agree.  That second image is stunning.  Heading over to Flickr now to give it a fave!

86

Reviews / Re: Review - The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS

« on: April 24, 2013, 09:31:00 AM »

Great review. I like the simple and without emphasis way of writhing. Please make more reviews like this one!
 
I am thinking for a while at this lens and I was curios how good this is.

Thanks to you, now I know!

You're welcome.  I'm not trying to compete with the more technical reviewers.  I am a real world photographer, not a chart shooter.  It just gives a different perspective for those potentially interested.

87

Reviews / Re: Review - The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS

« on: April 24, 2013, 09:29:35 AM »

Great review!

I bought this lens month ago and I love it. I initially didn't want this lens. I was looking for Tamron 70-200 f2.8 VC and Tamron 70-300 VC to supplement my Tamron 24-70 VC but when I found this lens among used items on web site of my local retailer, I gave it a try. It cost me 70% of the new one and it still had one year of warranty. I also bought a tripod collar - Canon really can make money from nothing. The collar cost more than 50 f1.8! I somehow found the collar quite good for handling the camera with the lens.

My copy has IMHO little bit loose focus ring and IS makes a strange noise when starts and stops operating (it is only audible in silent environments) but otherwise it is flawless. I use it for animals (dogs, birds, zoo), flowers and close details in general. It has a very compact size (and pleasing weight) and fits to quite small backpack together with body, other lens and external flash.

I'm beginner and I still shoot with Rebel (and slowly collecting money for 6D) so I cannot compare IQ or build quality with other L lenses. This is my first one but it really make a great impression and I doubt it will be the last L lens I will ever buy (I already itch for 100L f2.8 ).

Edit: It is also lens which makes me think again about moving to FF. Extra reach on APS-C is a great bonus.

High quality glass is addicting.  I strongly recommend the 100L Macro.  It is also a superb lens.  The loss of reach is certainly a challenge when moving to full frame.  At this stage, at least, I find that the improved image quality more than makes up for it.  My FF images are just much smoother in color transition, noise, and dynamic range.

Might I recommend that if you take the plunge to FF, hold onto that Rebel and use it when you want the extra reach.  One area that can make a big difference above your Rebel is the ability to fine tune the AF  to your camera body through AFMA.  It made a very big difference on the 70-300L.  It was good before; great after.

88

Reviews / Re: Review - The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS

« on: April 24, 2013, 09:25:18 AM »

I don't want this lens.  But then, why am I checking the current price on Amazon??   

Actually, what I'd find useful is a comparison between the 100-400L at 400mm and the 70-300L at 300mm cropped to the 400mm FoV, on a FF body.  Since getting a 600, I use my 100-400L less, but I do still use it.  If it could be replaced by something smaller and lighter (70-200 II + TC need not apply!) without sacrificing IQ, I'd be quite interested in the 70-300L.

I've found myself in a similar place before.  Through 300mm there is no question that the 70-300L is a far more competent lens.  You might want to check out the new gallery with crops to see if the use with teleconverter helps.  I have found that the bare lens holds up to cropping exceptionally well.  Here is an unedited sample from the backyard of my cat:

--------------------------------

Where I can't help is that I have not used the 100-400L.  I am relying on other's information as well as the many pictures and chart testing that I have seen.

89

Reviews / Re: Review - The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS

« on: April 24, 2013, 09:21:04 AM »

I had assumed it was soft at 420mm  - see http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=738&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=1&LensComp=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=0

With the tdp crops, you have to check all copies they tested - in case of the 70-300L the 2nd is visibly better, unfortunately they didn't use it with an extender which will enhance the softness of the 1st copy:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=738&Camera=453&Sample=1&FLI=4&API=1&LensComp=738&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

Though even with that in mind, a tc is always for occasional use except if you use really expensive tele primes - if you want 400mm+, get a 400mm lens and not a 70-300mm zoom. The important aspect with the 70-300L+tc is that the combination is better than cropping (I'm on aps-c), so the 200€ for the Kenko are good investment and it's still a very small package.

I would definitely agree with all of this.  If I could add one thing, it would that as a travel package the Kenko tele will have about as much space and weight premium as the 40mm pancake.  I think between the near equal image quality and the much light weight and space + the vastly superior IS of the 70-300L, I would choose that over the 100-400L while traveling every time.  I also fully expect that opinion to change when the new 100-400L II is released.

90

Reviews / Re: Review - The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS

« on: April 24, 2013, 09:16:44 AM »

here is the conclusion:  I like the lens...a lot

... me, too, and I bought it back when it had a reputation as being an overpriced version of Canon's non-L lens - but it's interesting to see how it gained much more recognition since then. I esp. like the still handholdable weight for ext. periods of time and walking around vs. the 70-200Lii (ymmv).

Just a some random additions to your again very nice review:

* The 70-300L's white paint is just for show, there aren't lens elements that would heat protection like in the 70-200L. One drawback of the extending design is that you cannot camouflage and protect the lens completely with a neoprene hood.

* I really doubt Canon will add f8 af for the 6d and wouldn't advise anyone to gamble on that. On my 60d the Kenko likes to hunt on low contrast objects when using single point af, and for multi-point the 9 af points usually is spread too far apart - so while 6d/5d3 might do fine, on crop it's rather for static objects.

It actually focuses pretty remarkably well on the 6d.  I am attaching a photo I took yesterday at 420mm while quickly tracking.  I had very little warning for this shot.  There are scenarios where it will hunt, but that tends to be in darker areas.  I was actually surprised at how well it did.  I shot with that combo exclusively while exploring a marsh yesterday.

It is not possible to evaluate the quality of this lens for bird and nature photography based on photos like these. Here, the birds are too small and span too few pixels to evaluate what the IQ is for them. Similarly, the Canada goose, squirrel etc you posted are small blobs. Please post some 100% crops so we can see the details of feathers, fur etc to get an idea what the lens is really like native and with extenders.

I had assumed it was soft at 420mm  - see http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=738&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=1&LensComp=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=0

So, it would be nice to see what it is like in practice.

Fair enough.  I have added a new gallery to the review called "Pixel Peepers", all with shots taken a few days ago with the extender, at 420mm, f/8 (AKA wide open).  I have both the originals (almost all completely unedited) along with 100% crops (all unedited).  I am attaching one sample here for you - there are a total of 4 pairs in the new gallery at various distances from the subject.