March 02, 2015, 08:07:55 PM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
Lenses / Re: APS-C 60mm or 100mm macro lens?
« Last post by ScottyP on Today at 07:09:17 PM »
A macro lens is one I would seriously consider buying pre-owned because so many seem to get very little use before they are unloaded.  It seems like every one I see on Craigslist is a case of "I really thought I would use this thing, but I shot it 4 times then put it away for 3 years....". 
Lenses / Re: 16-35F4 L IS, Any good?
« Last post by Ruined on Today at 07:08:34 PM »
No, the 16-35 F/4 L IS is a great lens. Really the best purchase last year.

I even think now to sell my 14 f/2.8 Lii and 24 f/1.4 Lii. Don't use those lenses anymore after I got the 16-35 f/4

I'd agree on the 14 f/2.8L II because the usage would be very niche when you have a 16-35 f/4L unless you *really* needed 14mm or f/2.8 at 14mm.  But how often is that the case?

The 24 f/1.4L II I would reconsider though.  While it is true the 16-35 f/4L likely bests it for landscape, the 24 f/1.4L II with its wide angle and wide aperture open up some commonly useful creative possibilities not possible on the 16-35 f/4L such as subject isolation or stopping motion in a tight space.  And it is still possible to get a mostly undistorted people image at 24mm if you keep the subject near the center of the frame.  If you don't feel those possibilities are worth $1200, on the other hand, it might be worth selling.

Personally though, I think the 16-35mm f/4L IS and the 24mm f/1.4L II actually make a great pair.  16-35 f/4L for landscape and 24 f/1.4L II for environmental portrait/wide motion stopping/shallow DOF.
Lenses / Re: Canon ef-s 17-55mm 2.8 is usm GONE
« Last post by tyger11 on Today at 07:07:34 PM »
I cant imagine an updated 17-55, with new IS, STM, better sealing, and better optics (as all Canon updates have) going for anything less than the original list of the 17-55. Which was $1179. Cant see the market for it over $800 with options like the Sigma 18-35, and a lens like the (full-frame) Tamron 24-70 going for around the same price.

It'd have to either extend the range (17-70, 15-55, etc) or be <f/2.8

Those three lenses aren't really all that equivalent, though. The Sigma doesn't have IS, and doesn't go out as far, adn the Tamron isn't anywhere NEAR as wide as the Canon. Those things may not matter to you, but to some of us, those features are what makes the Canon such a great deal (in addition to the fine IQ, of course). Lenses appeal for different reasons.

I'd definitely like to see an updated version with 14 or 15mm on the wide end, STM, and an aperture ring.
Lenses / Re: 16-35F4 L IS, Any good?
« Last post by Ruined on Today at 07:04:08 PM »
Thanks for that info, Ill have to rent a copy and check this out, I also like the TSE 17mm for keeping lines straight in buildings and for the shifting, do you guys think that is a good thing? Ill have to rent them both and see which one is for me.

It is, but a couple of downsides over 16-35 f/4L
-Bulbous element more susceptible to damage
-No front filter support
-Only one focal length
-No IS

On the plus side, yes you can correct lines, etc - but then again that requires a tripod and intricate adjustments.  Do you want to commit that much time to each shot?
Lenses / Lens suggestions for trip to Grand Canyon
« Last post by re7777 on Today at 07:01:08 PM »
I am going to Sedona and the Grand Canyon (south rim) next week and am trying to decide on which of my lenses to bring, and better yet, which lenses I should rent. I am very interested in landscape shots, dessert foliage shots, as well as trying out some night shots.  We will also be taking a helicopter tour over the canyon.

I have a 50D and the following lenses:
   > EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 USM IS
   > EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
   > EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS

I love my 70-300 lens, which is great for wildlife shots; but not so great for wide landscapes. While the 28-135 kit lens is ok, I think I want something wider.  I was thinking about renting the EF 16-35 or the EF 24-70, as well as the EF-S 10-22.  Any thoughts or suggestions? 

Also, would any of these lenses also be good for night landscapes or should I be renting another lens for that? 

I really appreciate any suggestions you might have on what lenses would be best to bring on this trip.

Lenses / Re: How to fit your Canon 1.4X Extender to a Tamron 150-600 lens
« Last post by candc on Today at 06:56:39 PM »
I really like the tamron but trying to use it with a tc is a waste of time. It works with the kenko but the af is about useless and your not going to gain anything optically.
Lenses / Re: 16-35F4 L IS, Any good?
« Last post by AshtonNekolah on Today at 06:52:31 PM »
Thanks for that info, Ill have to rent a copy and check this out, I also like the TSE 17mm for keeping lines straight in buildings and for the shifting, do you guys think that is a good thing? Ill have to rent them both and see which one is for me.
Hey all, I know it's been a while since I first posted about this, but I wanted to follow up.

I ended up sending my CF card to Gillware Data Recovery (note: zero affiliation). It wasn't cheap but they were able to recover all the formatted video files. So I got my vids back.

I did try a number of consumer recovery solutions and while most were successful in getting back .jpg files, the video files were no good--all black with audio static.

Thanks again for all your great suggestions!
Lenses / Re: landscape/astro lansdscape lens advice.
« Last post by NancyP on Today at 06:34:27 PM »
What format do you shoot, APS-C or full frame? Lens recommendations might differ.

Third yes vote for SamRokBowYang 14 f/2.8 manual lens, great value for money. On full frame it is really wide. The thing to check for on any astro lens is the degree of coma aberration. Few reviews address this - but see "lenstip review" for a Polish site (English-language) that has a specific coma test for each lens. Samyang has several manual rectilinear ultrawides for APS-C only (10mm f/2.8, 16mm f/2.0) and some for FF (14mm is FF), and a fisheye each for APS-C (8mm) and FF (12mm).

One thing I suggest is to go look at other astro-landscape photographs with EXIFs. What focal length do you like best? If you like 24mm, check out the newly released Sigma 24 f/1.4 Art, not yet reviewed. The power of f/1.4 for astro can hardly be overemphasized. This page by Roger Clark (astronomer and photographer) has some useful information:  go to table 1 to see the effect of f/stop and focal length on photon-gathering capacity - and astrolandscape photography is all about getting as many photons as possible.
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D II - what's inside?
« Last post by ScottyP on Today at 06:26:18 PM »
How about a flash sync speed above 1/180th?  A simple standard 1/250th would be nice, but if Canon could find a way to get faster without HSS it would be a nice selling point on all Canon cameras.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10