September 21, 2014, 10:07:59 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 - Plainsman

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« on: February 07, 2014, 11:00:34 AM »
Dare one ask the question 7D vs 70D vs D7100: which has better image quality?

Worth considering because the D7100 is cheaper than the 70D.

Lenses / Re: Lens Announcement Coming in February? [CR1]
« on: February 07, 2014, 07:14:28 AM »
If the new 100-400 is another extending zoom lens like the latest flimsy Sony and Nikon zooms I personally wouldn't bother waiting for it.

The new Nikon 80-400 appears to be hardly any sharper than Canon's current 100-400 and is a lot more expensive.

The current Canon 100-400 lens is a very good design and the only way Canon will significantly improve on it is to bring out an IF version say 140-400/5.6 ie a scaled up version of the peerless 70-200/2.8.

But will they do that - I doubt it - it would be to sharp and affect sales further up the chain. That's Canon logic for you.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 150-600 Shootout via
« on: February 05, 2014, 07:37:43 AM »
There are a lot of financially or sensibly constrained punters out there looking for a sharp used prime capable of good performance with 1.4x and 2x TC.

I am thinking of the 300/2.8 IS to give 420 and 600, 400/4 DO to give 560 and the Sigma 120-300/2.8 to give 420 and 600 again. But all require stopping down 1 stop to get any reasonable performance at 600 ie 600/8.

As test results come through and IF it is really true that Tamron 600/8 performance is OK then it may become blindingly obvious that if you really want the 300-600 range the Tamron is the lens to get.

Tamron has placed the cat amongst the pigeons and good luck to them.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: In-Depth Review: Tamron 150-600 f/5-6.3 VC
« on: February 04, 2014, 12:09:36 PM »
A quick sharpness test....

The goal is to see what effect the F stop has on sharpness with the 150-600 when used at 600mm

All shot with a 60D from a distance of 20 feet and processed in lightroom. All images are with the Tamron 150-600 profile enabled and with chromatic aberration correction enabled.

The target is the fine print on the back of the packaging of a laser pointer... it was the smallest size printing that I could find lying around the house.

The first image has the colour balanced, sharpness slider at 0, noise reduction slider at 0

The second image has the sharpening slider at 80, noise reduction slider at 50, and blacks level at -50. There is a typo on the picture description.... The first bar is F6.3, not F5.6.

Obviously F8 or F11 is far sharper than F6.3 and it falls of by F16. With sharpening enabled, F11 appears slightly better than F8. When you consider that I could not see the pattern around the "danger" symbol when it was inches from my face, yet the lens could pick that up from across the house, this lens is great bang for the buck!....

With all due respect Don testing a 600 lens at 20 feet is a bit ridiculous - IMO! Nevertheless many thanks for your post.

But then I suspect Can/Nik, Tamron etc are optimising their optical designs to come out well in imatest reports at 30-40 ft and may not be all that sharp at distance.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: In-Depth Review: Tamron 150-600 f/5-6.3 VC
« on: February 03, 2014, 12:09:39 PM »
I am looking forward to trying out this lens.

If you get a good copy I think it might be as good as 300/2.8 IS (and maybe IS2 on a good day) with converters AT 420 and 600 without the darned inconvenience/extra cost. To get a half decent 600 with the 300/2.8 IS you have to stop down to f8 anyway.

The Tamron appears to be a very versatile and good value long lens which costs only a fraction of the price of a nice second hand 300/2.8 IS plus the two Canon converters.

It should also beat the Sigma 120-300/2.8 OS Sport plus converters on performance at 420 and 600.

It all depends on how much you want to use the 300-600 range.

Can anyone advise on a suitable type (ie NOT the prism right angle type that Canon make)?

Any recommendations for the ones on ebay?

Magnification of 1.3 to 1.5X would be fine.

Nikon make a good one but doubtful whether it would fit Canon.

Thanks in advance for any replies.

Third Party Manufacturers / New Nikon 300/4 VR II on the way.......soon?
« on: October 13, 2013, 06:25:48 AM »
The current 300/4 non VR lens is by all accounts very sharp - even wide open.

This new prime will likely to be even sharper and lighter and could be a real stunner especially with D7100 type high res Nikon's bodies.

And with a new 1.4xTC also coming along you have the potential of a very nice 420/5.6 VR II as well. Canon - where are you?

Lenses / Re: any 100-400 mark 2 update?
« on: October 02, 2013, 02:32:12 PM »
Buy the Mark I ASAP.  That will ensure that a new one is announced 31 days later, just after your return rights expore ;)
The lens has been rumored for 7 going on 8 years now.  When Nikon finally updated their 80-400mm to a high quality $2700 lens, many thought Canon would quickly up the ante as well as the price.  If there is going to be one, history has shown that there are no leaks.  Digital cameras get leaked because a lot more people know about them.  Lens announcements usually come as a complete surprise.

"..Nikon...high quality $2700 lens......"!!   An overly expensive lens with a p**s poor tripod mount and according to photographylife review not particularly sharp at 400/5.6.

It would be nice to think that the new Canon could be a scaled up version of the the 70-200/2.8 ie 140-400/5.6 with internal focussing and so sharp that a 400/5.6 IS prime would not be necessary!!

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumored Sigma Lenses Coming in the Next Year
« on: September 11, 2013, 04:48:37 AM »
Although not on the list, maybe a 400mm f5.6 before canon updates  its version to V2.0? :)

 Dream on!!

Unfortunately there seems to be a gentleman's agreement (cartel??) between Can Nik Son Sig etc not to produce a quality image stabilised 400/5.6 (or even a 400/4 non DO) so as not to impact on their consumer 400mm zoom sales.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumored Sigma Lenses Coming in the Next Year
« on: September 09, 2013, 02:09:21 PM »
The 300/2.8 OS looks tasty!

Could be the same price or maybe cheaper than a used EOS 300/2.8 IS I but with OS equivalent to IS II.

Canon General / Re: procamerashop?
« on: September 08, 2013, 07:09:19 AM »
Handing over big money to a "cut price" outfit is a bit risky - you always wonder how difficult it's going to be to get your money back if it suddenly ceases trading.

I understand this shop only supplied their own warranty so even though you might have received your ordered item the warranty is obviously worthless if it goes bust.

Always worth paying a bit extra for your lens in order to get a proper Canon warranty IMO.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Big Sigma Primes [CR2]
« on: August 26, 2013, 12:52:35 PM »
Mr Sigma - go for a 400/4.
All the other lens fl/apertures combinations are covered by the big boys.

EF 400mm 4.0 DO IS

The Canon 400/4 DO is very expensive and is slightly mediocre optically.
I was thinking that Sigma could wisely ignore the 10 year old DO concept and give us a conventional sharp wide open 400/4.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Big Sigma Primes [CR2]
« on: August 26, 2013, 12:31:04 PM »
Mr Sigma - go for a 400/4.
All the other lens fl/apertures combinations are covered by the big boys.

EOS Bodies / Re: The Canon EOS 70D is Hitting Stores
« on: August 21, 2013, 12:32:52 PM »
After the 70D could the new 100-400L be far behind?

Lenses / Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« on: August 19, 2013, 07:03:52 AM »
This is a very interesting topic!

My most used lens is the 100-400L IS and I think I have got a good copy of it.

My modus operandi is to support it from a car window or off the car roof or solid wall or sometimes a monopod at f5.6 with the IS always on. The shutter speed in sunny conditions will be about 1/1000 sec and 90% of the time I always get a  good sharp image at 400mm - the image swims about a bit initially for 2 secs max and then stabilizes - that's when I press the shutter.

The 400/5.6 gives slightly sharper images but never supported as above - only if mounted on a tripod using cable release.

There may be an upper shutter speed limit for effective IS but 1/focal length is to low for Canon IS.
Maybe it applies to Nikon VR.
Then maybe Canon IS is the best image stabilizer you can get!

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7