Messages

31

Lenses / Re: Question for owners of Canon 200mm f2.0 and 70-200mm f 2.8 II lens

« on: March 20, 2013, 09:16:44 PM »

And don't forget you can stack two 2x teleconverters and get an 800mm f/8 that will still autofocus on a 1D-series (I'd like to see how usable that would be though, any of you lucky-suckers who own one wanna test?).

32

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Which camera brand you actively use, other than Canon?

« on: March 15, 2013, 02:13:47 AM »

Cameras (besides Canon) in order of most use:
Cosina Voigtländer (Bessa L)
Mamiya (645AF)
Kiev (88CM and 60)
Pentacon (6)
Petri (7s Rangefinder)
Nikon (Nikonos V, just got it from a mate but haven't even done a test roll yet)

Non-Canon Lenses in order of use:
Zeiss (mostly on the P6-variants, can't afford ZE prices)
Sigma (8-16mm gets a fair workout on the 7D)
Cosina Voigtländer (21mm f/4 is a damn fine lens)
RokiBowYang (35/1.4, thanks to Roger at LensRentals I can't call it anything else)
KMZ (for the soviet versions of the P6-mount lenses, plus the M42 Jupiter, Helios, Cyclop, Tair, and Mir)
Lensbaby (almost everything except the 80mm and 35mm)
... and various others, like Asahi Pentax (Takumars), Olympus OM macro lenses, Tokina (a little-used 17mm), a collection of Schneider Kreuznach for some of the Kodak Retina models, and some that I have no idea what they are or where they came from.

33

EOS Bodies / Re: Pixel density, resolution, and diffraction in cameras like the 7D II

« on: February 27, 2013, 11:18:00 PM »

Very nice reading for us nerdly-types. I know not everyone around here is so-inclined, so for a real-world example just read this, maybe not even the whole thing, just the bit halfway down to the bottom.

The same Tamron Lens on the D800e and 5D3 scores better on the D800, because more pixels means better MTF. (I know he didn't test at allegedly "diffraction limited" apertures, but at least the bit about the denser sensor works IRL).

34

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Takumars, Anyone?

« on: February 27, 2013, 10:05:53 PM »

I finally just bought the Helios 44-2! I was looking for one in perfect condition from a trusted seller, so it took me a while to choose. I'm definitely looking forward to try it! If anybody's interested, I could post test shots whenever I receive it (I guess the ride from Ukraine to Québec might that a while). Thanks for the great advices on previous posts!

Would love to see your shots.  It is a very unique lens.

I've also just picked up an MC Helios 44M-4, which should be sharper than the 44-2 according to the Zenit website (you don't have to read russian, just google translate, or look for the line "MC Гелиос-44М-4 — 41/20 линий/мм", which means MC Helios 44M-4 has 41 Line Pairs per mm in the centre, 20 on the edge, better than non-MC 44-2 at 38/20. And before anyone asks, the much-better 44-7 is rarer and more expensive).

So one day when I get time (in a few months, if that), I'll do a proper scientific comparison between my:
Takumar 55/2.0
Takumar 55/1.8
Takumar 50/1.4
FL 55/1.2
OM 50/2.5 Macro
MC Helios 44M-4
EF 50/1.8 II
EFs 15-85 @ 50mm
(maybe the Shorty Forty?)
(maybe Zeiss 50/4.0 in Pentacon Six? Or Mamiya645 45/2.8 C?)

But until then I'll just keep shooting in the real world and comparing them that way...

35

Canon General / Re: The Canon EOS 7D & EF 400 f/2.8L IS II Break a Record

« on: February 22, 2013, 05:17:39 PM »

I'm sorry, what?

Can anyone say "parallax"?

36

Canon General / Re: The Canon EOS 7D & EF 400 f/2.8L IS II Break a Record

« on: February 22, 2013, 04:47:20 PM »

Too bad it's London so when you zoom in all you get is fog...

37

Lenses / Re: Are you using a filter on your 40mm

« on: February 17, 2013, 08:40:49 PM »

I've had a Hoya Yellow-Green filter on it for the last few weeks, because it was the only 'yellowish' filter that I had lying around in 52mm, but I just put in an order at B+H so I picked up a B+W Yellow-Orange (much better for skin-tones) and a Dark Red (for that really dark 'black sky' look). I've also got an old B+W CPL that I got off ebay for $10 that I put on it sometimes, it's not often that i shoot colour film with the McForty but it does help stacking a CPL on top of the yellow filter on black'n'white film to darken the sky a bit.

38

Lenses / Re: Is your midrange gear insured?

« on: February 16, 2013, 06:01:06 PM »

Wow, what a good rainy-day exercise (or in my case, it's 37C outside today so i'm indoors with the aircon on full blast).
Added in all my purchases from this year to my spreadsheet, put in some proportional weighting factors for things i'd bought all at once with combined shipping, converted the whole lot to $AU using today's exchange rates (which isn't exactly fair, some rates have changed 15% since I bought the stuff, oh well).
And the total cost of my gear is $19,867.
Sum total of everything $236.91 and over is almost the same as the sum total of everything $236.90 and under, that's my "halfway point" of value.

There's some more scary numbers in there, like everything that's cost me $20 or less including shipping, so really low-value items that I wouldn't even think twice about buying, have still cost me $755 added together. Even things under $50 that I seem to buy without thinking have cost me $3000 in total over the past few years.

So yeah, how do I insure that? Currently my home+contents policy gives me $5000 of 'accidental damage and theft outside of home', ie if someone steals my backpack or i drop it off a cliff. And my policy also gives me 'up to $10k of camera equipment', which i'm definitely well over, so I've got $15k of regular 'contents' specified damages, ie if someone breaks in and/or sets fire to my house. Is it worth updating to include the last $5k? That only includes stuff that cost me $85 or less per piece. The chances of losing absolutely everything are pretty low (especially in a double-brick house with only a wooden roof to burn).
Sigh, too complicated, I think i'm going to leave it at $15k to save on premiums and go shoot some pictures instead.

Another question since I stayed clear of insurances so far: What happens if I actually lose something and the company has to replace it? Do they say "No problem, no need for proof it was really stolen or it's a fraud attempt, here's your (insert value here) and have fun with it"? Does the insurance rate rise afterwards or (when) do they cancel the contract?

I'm not sure about genuine "losing something" whether they take your word for it. But for theft you definitely need a police report, like when I was backpacking and someone pilfered my P&S from my pocket at a pub (ok, it may have fell out, but for insurance purposes it was stolen), and I had to fill in a proper police report in German (thankfully I eventually found the only cop who spole decent english in Salzburg). That was Travel Insurance (don't leave home without it), so I'm not sure what would happen to premiums if I claimed on my home+contents, hopefully I never have to find out.

39

Lenses / Re: Is your midrange gear insured?

« on: February 14, 2013, 08:14:04 PM »

Get all your gear, and all your receipts (I hope you still have them), and you'll be surprised.

I buy a lot of stuff off ebay, and i mean a lot (check my gear photos in my signature, that was about 1 year ago and it's probably doubled since then). Being the complete nerd that I am (hey, i'm a gearhead nerd, not a photographer), I went back over my paypal and ebay accounts and worked it all out one day into a spreadsheet. (tip, another good reason to do this is to mark-down all of your serial numbers in case something gets stolen)

I have only 3 big-ticket items (well, 'big ticket' to me, not compared to some of you guys), my 7D and 15-85 (€1800 cost) and 70-300L (€1200 cost), which is about $4000 total.

Then my 'rung down' stuff, 85/1.8, 100/2.0, Samyang 35/1.4, Sigma 8-16, FL55/1.2+EdMika, 430EXmk1, EOS3, Zeiss 300/4.0, Voigtlander 21/4.0, Mamiya 645AF, Vanguard tripod, all of which were between $200-500 each, maybe another $3-4000 to the total.

A lot more stuff just below that, lots of Pentacon Six Zeiss stuff and a few 'nice but not the best' lenses for $50-150 like my Takumar 50/1.4, Jupiter 85/2.0, Shorty McForty and Nifty Fiftington.
Then comes all the crap. Russian lenses for $10-50 each, lenscaps for $2 each from china (I always get lenses without caps, and I'm so fricking OCD that everything has to have a cap, front and rear), filters of various shapes, sizes and colours, step rings from 39 to 106mm and down again, cokin attachments, grips, arca-swiss plates and clamps, a nodal-ninja, bellows, extension tubes, focussing screens, teleconverters.
You name it, i've bought it.

But get this. I typed all of this stuff into my big OCD spreadsheet, and the numbers are a bit amazing (and a bit scary). I can check when I get home for the exact magic number, but it's something like $150. Add up the total price of everything that cost above that 'per item', and add up the cost of everything below that 'per item', and you get roughly the same value (maybe $7-8000 or so). So despite my complete lack of 'big ticket' stuff like a 1DX or über-white, the value of my kit is a lot more. And I'm not going to carry it all at once. (I might get it all in my car at once, but that's because the car is a Falcon Station Wagon with a huge boot).

Anyway, how do I insure this? I've got a $5000 out-of-home accidental damage on it, which is probably the most i'll have in a backpack at once (and it's the most my insurance company will give me). But do I bother insuring all the small crap? The lenses that cost $10, and the caps to go with them? All the filters that I only bought because they were cheap, and probably won't buy again? The only way I'm losing the whole kit is in a fire, even if someone broke in they might take the 70-300L and 7D and leave the gunge (hey, I would too). So is it worth insuring $15k of stuff, even $10k?

40

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Panic button - 1Dx

« on: February 13, 2013, 08:05:02 PM »

You'd seriously hand over $6k of camera plus lens to a random guy on the street?

41

Lenses / Re: How do yall compose a shot using a fisheye lens?

« on: February 12, 2013, 11:25:02 PM »

Rule #1: Compose with {your/your tripod's} feet out of the picture.

Rule #2: Don't follow any other rules, compose how you like. Break rule #1 if you want.

42

Canon General / Re: Thailand (Bangkok) 120 film

« on: February 10, 2013, 08:40:33 PM »

Are you going to stay there a long time? Or just for a holiday? Or need them processed particularly quickly?

Personally I'd take the whole lot back to my regular developer, someone I know and trust (he's one of only 2 left that I know of, in my city of 1.2mil, that still does film, so has to be doing something right).

43

Lenses / Re: I've tried the 200-400 today! :D Very happy

« on: February 08, 2013, 06:13:28 PM »

How heavy is it?  How long can you hold it?

Could you hold a suitcase with one thousand   $10 bills out like that?

Something tells me you'd still come up another half-a-suitcase short...

44

Lenses / Re: Need advice on telephoto zoom Lens

« on: February 08, 2013, 06:09:17 PM »

OK, finally found the manual and scanned the relevant pages (not the best scan, I've never done flatbed before, only negatives)

45

Lenses / Re: Need advice on telephoto zoom Lens

« on: February 08, 2013, 05:59:39 PM »

Yeah, I had the 70-300 IS USM non-L, then i ditched it and got the 70-300L.
It's certainly got the mode 1-2 switch (I could just take a shot of the lens, but I like this photo more).