Posts

BillB · Jul 21, 2018

Twisterfiddler said:
I have a 11-16 f/2.8 , it is meant for crop sensors but also works on full frame as it has a EF mount.
Now, this new 14-20 f/2 also has EF mount , so.... how does it perform on a full frame ?
can you use it at 14mm f/2 ?
that would be awesome.
anyone please try and report ?
northern lights on a 6D with 14mm f/2 sounds yummy ...

Brian Carnathan has a review on his The Digital Picture site. Found it by googling Tokina 14-20.

shashankjigsaw · Jul 21, 2018

Good reviews. But I was wonder how does it compare to 105 mm Tokina lens

Valvebounce · Jul 20, 2018

Hi pierogo.
Glad to hear you have it working, thanks for letting us know, so often people come here, ask for advice and don’t bother to let us know how they got on.

Cheers, Graham.

pierogo said:
I set the 90ex to manual and the Sunpak fired IN SYNCH!
Plus, setting the 90ex to manual, which I'd never done, revealed that I can control its output as an on-camera fill, rather than just use it as a trigger, conserving its power and shortening its recycle time in the process.
I can't tell you how happy I am about this.
I'm looking forward to playing with this powerful old flash you folks have made new for me.
Thank you very much!

neonlight · Jul 20, 2018

I think EF mount FF will appear first as a professional 5D/1D alternative. NO adapters, straight big body.
I'm not a lens designer but shortening the distance between the last element and sensor suggests to me that the optics needs a greater convergence than a longer distance ...therefore is more difficult and maybe has more distortion. So I think Canon will leave EF alone and bring a full size FF mirrorless out.
But I may be wrong.

sachinkhanna48 · Jul 20, 2018

nice review
___
Best Zero Turn Mower | Best Self Propelled Lawn Mower |

Mt Spokane Photography · Jul 20, 2018

scottkinfw said:
Couple this with real time AFMA, and this would be a grand slam.
Scott

DPAF does not need AFMA. Its turned off when you are using DPAF.

Stuart · Jul 20, 2018

Why is it that even some mirror-less camera's use physical shutters?

FTb-n · Jul 20, 2018

stevelee said:
Great photos. With that cute a subject it would be hard to make bad picture, I admit.

+10, Great shots. I can see where a zoom may have helped capture these fleeting moments with an active grandson.

Graphic.Artifacts · Jul 19, 2018

Thanks for the link. The more I see of this updated vII the more I like. If you ignore the bigger, heavier, whiter aspects of the upgrade it's looking like a solid performer. I've carried both the original f4 as well as the v.I IS for more hours and miles than I could count and they have always been excellent. A 16-35 f4 IS and a 70-200 f4 IS and I feel like I can always bring home something nice.

I recently bought my second copy of the v.I IS. I don't really care to upgrade at the moment but if the upgrade costs drops to a few hundred dollars I might bite.

I love mine for stills but it doesn't handle DPAF video servo focusing well at all. I don't use it for video due to it's particularly ugly focus pulls, focus breathing and clunky IS which is a shame because it's a perfect focal range and aperture for events on a 5D4. Sounds like they may have corrected most of that in the v.II.

stevelee · Jul 19, 2018

When I read about a "thin mount" I am reminded of Celtic spirituality.

I guess I'm weird.

Chaitanya · Jul 19, 2018

24Mp Aps-C sensor
28mm(35mm equi.) F2.8 lens
https://m.dpreview.com/news/2300775454/fujifilm-xf10-is-a-small-wide-angle-aps-c-compact

3kramd5 · Jul 18, 2018

Orangutan said:
3kramd5 said:

Orangutan said:

Keith_Reeder said:

Orangutan said:

That's not my experience: according to DxO, my 70D has 11.6EV of DR, yet I frequently encounter problems in landscape where important highlights are blown out, and important shadows clipped in the same image.

Click to expand...

And which Raw converter were you using?

Click to expand...

Usually Lightroom, but sometimes DPP. Not much difference between them. I'm not sure that matters, though: the histogram tells me I'm at least 3-5 stops from full coverage of the scene DR. (I sometimes block a highlight area of the scene to see where it spikes on the histogram, then watch the spike move as I change exposure)

Click to expand...

You mean in-camera, yes? If so, it is JPEG-based, and not representative of the full capability.

Click to expand...

Correct, but not as relevant as it might appear, for two reasons: (1) even though it's JPEG based, the JPEG histogram is (from my experience and what I've read on the web) about 1 stop different from the RAW histogram; i.e., if the JPEG is clipped by about 1 stop, I can probably recover it in post, and I take this into account in my exposure settings. (2) I've also bracketed and examined RAW histograms after the fact. In deep forest, when exposing for the shadows, I'd need to take a second frame 3-5 stops darker to keep the back-lit leaves (or splashing water) from being blown-out in the RAW files. Of course, this depends on the angle of the sun (time of year/day) and other factors, but I've tried it several times with fairly consistent results. YMMV.

I will also say, that I have yet to get the full DR of a male wood duck in full light: I have several wood duck photos that are clipped at both ends of the histogram.

Sure. The histogram is a functionally useful tool, I’m just suggesting it can’t be used to quantify the dynamic range capability of a camera (even if it were RAW it couldn’t). It’s clear now that’s not what you were saying.

Mt Spokane Photography · Jul 18, 2018

Antono Refa said:
Mt Spokane Photography said:

For panoramic images, the critical point is the nodal focus point in the lens, the focal plane is not involved.

Click to expand...

Can the nodal focus point in the lens be found with no reference to the focal plane? If so, how?

No, it varies for every type of lens design, for a simple design, it is where the aperture is, but that is seldom the case.
You can find it experimentally, its seldom if ever marked on a lens, it moves on zooms.
https://www.panoramic-photo-guide.com/finding-the-nodal-point.html

gcrimmins · Jul 17, 2018

marcel said:
I have the EF 50-200 f/3.5-4.5L from 1987 the 4x zoom and the size/weight are perfect, I do not understand why they have not done something similar anymore.

That would also be a good fit on an APS-C body, as opposed to a 70-200 which doesn't go quite wide enough on one.

pwp · Jul 17, 2018

kat.hayes said:
Do you think 10lbs will be enough to put on the light stand to make sure the stand with iPad doesnt get tipped over? OR should I consider 15lbs?

You're going to have to figure that one out for yourself. It depends on what conditions you're exposing it to. If you're outdoors on uneven ground with high, gusty wind and lots of 5 year olds with their dogs, it's going to be a different risk level to working in the studio with an assistant photographing a toaster. Trust and apply your common sense and knowingness.

-pw

AlanF · Jul 17, 2018

It's 24cm long, the same as the 400mm DO II. It's going to £4,500-5000 based on the estimates. Interesting to read the comments about the Nikkor 200-500mm - either there is a lot of copy variation or variation in competence.

fullstop · Jul 17, 2018

https://www.dpreview.com/news/0388810394/gitzo-teams-up-with-sony-to-launch-tripod-and-l-bracket-designed-for-series-cameras

Right in the middle of Really Right territory. Especially on price. ;D

The Gitzo Traveler α costs $999.99, while the Gitzo L-Bracket α will set you back $199.99.

Steve Dmark2 · Jul 17, 2018

Because many hit on canon because of "lack" of improvements, I recommend to watch dustins review where he mentiones a few interessting points.

xps · Jul 17, 2018

Talys said:
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:

Talys said:

Thanks for another great review.

I've only used this camera in the store, but what I noticed right away was the EVF. It's such a step down from the A9/A7R3, that I don't think I would choose this model, between it and the "R". Then again, I'll freely admit that the VF is a critical part of my decision making, and, along with AF speed, remains one of the key reasons I haven't been convinced to switch to mirrorless.

Click to expand...

AF performance is, in my opinion, no longer a reason to not go mirrorless. I got better tracking results with the a73 than I have with any DSLR.

Click to expand...

So, first of all, most of the time that I need fast autofocus is birding, and that's the lens through which I'm making these comments (sorry, pun intended )

There's autofocus tracking, and autofocus speed, which aren't the same thing, though. I agree that the tracking capability is great, but you have to get autofocus in the first place.

I haven't tried an A73, but I did have an A9 for a couple of days (and an A7R3 for over a month). Using the 100-400 GMaster, the speed to go from near to infinity is horrible. If you defocus, then try to focus on a hovering hummingbird, for example, you'll never catch it in the second or two that you have. Now, if you throw on a 1.4x extender -- which his the only solution to go higher than 400mm -- the autofocus speed is just dismal.

Take a 1DXII, throw on a 100-400LII and a 1.4x extender (which, in my opinion, when using extenders, is the best AF speed camera currently on the market), and the autofocus speed just blows it away. Throw on the Sigma 150-600 (which will require an MC-11 adapter on the Sony), again, a huge difference.

I actually had the 100-400 GM + 1.4x extender beside a Nikon D850 with the 200-500 at the same time while at a birding spot. The performance difference was just night and day -- it's hard to overstate. The AF speed at 400 and 400+extender on full frame is pretty important, IMO, and it's still not there, yet, in my opinion. There is the additional problem of the VF being blacked out while you raise it to you, making pointing the camera at as small subject quickly at telephoto lengths sometimes challenging (by the time you see anything and the AF starts to engage, the subject has moved). As a result, you need to start at a lower focal length, track it, and then crank the zoom -- which is rather noobish and misses some great shots

The problem with autofocus tracking with birding is that it's almost useless. You want the bird to fill up as much of the frame as possible, for reproduction clarity. But then, most birds are moving so fast that the tracking has no chance, and anyways, you only have it for a brief time.

Thanks for your opinion. The A7III is an very good body, indeed.
For birding (used with 600 II, (w/Wo 1.4x III extender) & Metabones V Adapter) my combo is not the best to use. Also on my 400 DO II. On the 100-400 II ist works satisfying, but really not as good as I wanted.
Af "pumping" to get sharp, and the loose of the AF-sharpness, when there are even just small bird movements did not satisfy me. In shots and in video. Also, changing settings takes some time on the A7III...

Compared, the 5D IV is much better working on genuine Canon lenses.
On the other hand, using the A7III on the Sony 70-200 2.8 GM (rented from my Grandgrandson) AF performance of the A7III is incredibly fast and relyable on fast passing birds.

So, I hope there will be a chance for AF improvemts on Canon MLS bodies, as you can see on the A7III, when using it on genuine Sony lenses (maybe not on the 100-400, but on the 70-200 definitively).

But I will keep it, as the MLS system works super on my DP slider for timelapse. And I´ll have to work hard to get just 10% of the experience like Mr. Heck frome timestormfilms has.

Aussie shooter · Jul 17, 2018

Just for clarification. I was using a 7d2 and the longest exposure was about 40 mins at Iso 400 with a couple of shorter ones as well. And yes. The noise was pretty horrendous as you would expect on a crop sensor camera like that. It certainly is not what I would call a dedicated astro rig. Sounds like sensor damage won't be an issue though so thanks for the help. The noise I will just have to live with.

3kramd5 · Jul 16, 2018

Markus D said:
He/She also has a wedding ring on left hand - no pink tape on that so not going incognito.

That was at the same time incredibly confusing and extremely unsettling...

privatebydesign · Jul 16, 2018

Re: Canon's First Full Frame Mirrorless Won't Have the Exact Same Sensors as the EOS 5D Mark IV. [CR

Cthulhu said:
3kramd5 said:

Cthulhu said:

3kramd5 said:

rrcphoto said:

Canon Rumors said:

The 30.4mp sensor (which we haven’t confirmed with certainty) will be “very different than what is found in the EOS 5D Mark IV”.

Click to expand...

this stands to reason. Canon's been happily applying for WAY too many advanced sensor patents to not pull a rabbit out of a hat and skip a few EXMOR generations and catch up quickly.

Click to expand...

Patents don’t necessarily translate into production, but didn’t they already essentially catch up (5D4)?

Click to expand...

No

Click to expand...

Please elaborate.

Click to expand...

In the rare occasion where Canon comes within 1ev of sony, it still has less detail and sharpness.

What a load of garbage.

Arty · Jul 16, 2018

NancyP said:
Arty said "I hardly need another macro lens" - Hey, I resemble than comment! I don't "need" another lens now (though I am eyeing the TS-E 24 v.II .....)

Some people who prefer primes may also like the 70 mm focal length for general work.

That is exactly why I got the lens. Sometimes a 100 mm lens is too long, even on full frame, and a 50 is too short. I think that 50 mm makes for a better general purpose focal length and is great for copy work, but 70 mm has advantages on full frame for some macro uses. The review on Lens Rentals has 70 on the short side, but there are advantages.

Cryve · Jul 15, 2018

So far almost every sport camera kept the megapixel count to arround 20mp no matter if fullframe or aps-c.

Now with the 7d III slowly apporaching release im wondering what is actually limiting a sportsbody to go to higher megapixel counts.

Previously it was assumed that the megapixel count affects low light performance. The lower the megapixel count, and therefore the bigger the size of the photocytes, the better the iso performance.

Recently i came across some articles that discussed that the megapixel count only really affects the per pixel performance, but the overall iso performance of a picture, scaled to the same size, basicaly stays the same with increasing megapixels.

Thus it seems that the only limiting factor is data thoughput or perhaps sensor read speed?

Does anyone here have insight on this? could we, given current technology, however unlikly, see a 7d iii with 26 or 28 mp and about 12 fps while still providing an improved iso performance?

slclick · Jul 15, 2018

YuengLinger said:
Is this becoming the -Adderall infused OCD post stacking forum?

OR is it still CR?

Tiresome as hell to read grindingly dull pontfication merely for the sake of getting to 10k posts.

Do you get a hat? Or a pennant?

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics