privatebydesign said:

kat.hayes said:

I am using a studio light with a shutter of 1/250. Please pardon my ignorance, I am new to all of this. I have been using these settings for many shots I took yesterday while practicing with the light and I did not have this issue. Perhaps my settings were slightly different and I didn't realize it? What is the issue?

Thanks!

Click to expand...

No issue, your camera sync speed is not 1/250, try 1/160 and the shutter shadow will go away.

Click to expand...

Surely this. Shoot faster than sync (without HSS engaged) and this will happen.

See 1/200s vs. 1/250s example here:
https://digital-photography-school.com/understand-flash-sync-speed-so-you-dont-sink-your-photo-shoot/

(This article is off on the specifics: all Canons are not remotely 1/200 sync! Check your manual or TDP)

- A

ahsanford said:

(Side comment: either my eyes are playing tricks on me or we lost North Dakota at the trade deadline. 49 stars?)

- A

Click to expand...

I think someone used Adobe products to make it

https://youtu.be/-h8YGkZnRRg

This is somewhat interesting in this more complicated scenario the entire sequence took something like 0.034 seconds.

Mavir Air would do what I need right now but I really want a better camera+lens combo so have postponed decision until the Pro 2 arrives. I'd really like a larger sensor and fast lens but not much payload capacity on a tiny copter.
Plastic lenses can save weight but.... yeesh. no thanks.

I was wondering where are all those 70-200 F4L IS II USM reviews, as it has been available for a week by now...

Old Sarge said:

kphoto99 said:

Mt Spokane Photography said:

privatebydesign said:

That's a naive expectation. I believe the intent is for sates to start collecting money left on the table, nothing more or less.

Click to expand...

Exactly, states relying on sales tax for income are suffering. Its Walmart and the Big chains pushing for the new rules.

Click to expand...

Instead of relying on sales tax, why not eliminate it completely and raise income tax. It is the same people who pay income tax and sales tax. This would reduce the cost of the extra bureaucracy for collecting sales tax.

Click to expand...

There are nine states which have no state income tax (though two of those states tax investment income) so that would be an issue. And the sales tax is often divided between state/county/city (in Texas it is divided between state/city with limits on both and how it is distributed). I once did some research on states with income tax vs. states without income tax but a higher sales tax. Using my estimated figures in retirement it worked out to about the same (I also figured in property taxes). Those states with higher property/sales taxes and no income tax ended up with about the same amount of my income and those with lower property/sales taxes and an income tax. Can't escape
taxes, I'm afraid.

Click to expand...

I did the same exercise and found the same results. Here in California we have some of the lowest property tax rates in the nation and an income tax with surcharges for the very wealthy. What it creates is a volatile revenue stream for the state that swings wildly with economic conditions. Yet the native cowardice of legislators coupled with the foolish notion that somehow we can have low taxes AND government services prevents any remedy.

What many are ignoring here is that the decision was on SD law which exempted smaller businesses from the law.
As for filing in multiple tax jurisdictions, yes, pay a service to do it. Then pass the cost on to your customers just like everyone else does.

I am astonished how many people feel that they have to shield their customers from cost increases. When my rent goes up, I pass on the cost. When my insurance goes up, I pass on the cost. When my gas goes up, I pass on the cost.
If you think you can't pass on the cost maybe you are in the wrong business.

Matt Granger just posted review of Sigma 105mm f/1.4 (Nikon) :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXY938gHDdc

melgross said:

3kramd5 said:

melgross said:

privatebydesign said:

ahsanford said:

melgross said:

It’s why I want to see a 1.5 stop improvement. That will have to hold up for 3 years in any particular camera model, even though companies will have even more updated sensors in cameras they release a year or two after that one. Just remember that Nikon/Sony aren’t standing still. What may slightly beat them this year, may be noticeably behind them in a year, or two. So you want to stay ahead of that now.

Click to expand...

I hear you, but that's neither reasonable nor consistent with the trends of sensor progress over time. Using the generically cruddy numbers from DXO (as a convenience to make a general point):

A7 I: 14.2 Base ISO DR / 2248 ISO (using their SNR / DR / Color high ISO cutoff)
A7 II: 13.6 / 2449
A7 III: 14.7 / 3730

A7R I: 14.1 / 2746
A7R II: 13.9 / 3434 (in fairness, this is a jump from 36 to 42 MP here)
A7R III: 14.7 / 3523

From gen I to gen III, both A7 lines above gained a fraction of a stop of DR and high ISO performance. A fraction of a stop. It's easy to look at how these sensors test (or how RAW files handle in post) and declare the latest product 'the best ever' -- but when you look at it critically, it's more a trend of creeping up on an asymptote over time.

O course, on chip ADC was a huge deal. But everyone's done that now and any one-time bump to base ISO DR is effectively industry standard now.

Yes, Canon sensors are behind Nikon and Sony. But they are not tremendously behind them for me to want to walk away from the EF lenses + first party AF routines, build quality, ergonomics, service, 3rd party ecosystem, etc.

- A

Click to expand...

No they aren't, if ultimate DR is your primary criteria then the 5D MkIV with dual pixel RAW processing ETTR'ed is the best performing 135 format sensor available. Yes the 5D MkIV out DR's any Sony or Nikon ff camera.

Click to expand...

I’d like to see some real evidence of that.

Click to expand...

Can you define “real evidence”?

https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/Canon-dual-pixel-technology

For my uses, it is too much of a pain in the butt to consider, but then I’m able to “make do” with 1Dx dynamic range.

Click to expand...

That’s nice. Rawdigger is comparing the Canon sensor to the same Canon sensor. I get the dual pixel technology v]Canon has, and it has a lot of potential. I will agree with that. But that link only shows the Canon.

Click to expand...

I don't make a "claim" I made a statement.

The above linked page illustrates that there is another stop of highlight latitude within the second frame, which if you think about the way they are processing the master file is obvious. Ergo add 1 stop to any testers DR range for a normal 5D MkIV file.

Most agree that the measurements here are the best indicator. http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Nikon%20D850,Sony%20ILCE-7R

On this chart the standard 5D MkIV reading is 0.8 of a stop behind the D850 and 0.82 of a stop behind the A7R (Sony's best performer). Add back the stop the Dual Pixel RAW affords you and the 5D MkIV is the best by 0.18 of a stop. I'd also point out that below 600 iso the 5D MkIV comfortably outperforms the Sony A9 even without the dual pixel cleverness.

These are not "claims" they are facts backed up with results and a published methodology you can replicate yourself.

pj1974 said:

rubensu03 said:

drmikeinpdx said:

The only thing that has been frustrating is finding a zoom lens that is small enough for travel, but sharp enough to look good with the hi-res sensor. Images taken with the 18-55 kit lenses look horrible when enlarged. My best results have been with prime lenses, most notably the 24mm pancake. This is still a work in progress.

Click to expand...

Hi drmikeinpdx,

I see you have the EF-S 15-85. Could you please share your opinion on how it deals with the 24 MP sensor?

Thanks!!

Click to expand...

Though I'm not drmikeinpdx, I do have the Canon 80D (same sensor as the 77D) and the Canon 15-85mm lens. The 15-85mm is a great lens, very good image quality, fantastic range (gives noticeable wider and tele options than the 18-55mm). The newer 18-55mm kit lenses are actually pretty sharp stopped down 1 stop (unless you get a bad copy of the lens), but the 15-85mm is a bit sharper wide open, and also has better handling, and superior AF. I obtain great results on my 15-85mm with the 80D's 24MP sensor.

Having said that, for ultimate image quality, only a few zooms get close to the levels of good (or the best) primes. The Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 pancake is very sharp from f/2.8 already, and bitingly so from f/4 - f/8 on a 24MP APS-C sensor. I have created a lot of stitched images (e.g. panoramas) with the 24mm f/2.8 pancake, and it really does great - with minimal distortion and great across the frame sharpness.

I trust this helps

PJ 8)

Click to expand...

Hi PJ,

thank you very much for your answer!!

Fuji can provide focus distance in EVF...
I did not find it to be a useful feature.

Trigger said:

docsmith said:

Best camera advice (maybe life??). Do not wait. When you are ready, do it. For cameras, when you are ready and have the need, look at what is available and make the best decision you can at that time. There will always be a "new release."


For what it's worth, the rumblings and patents on new lenses can still mean that the new lenses are years away. We have all seen multiple patents for different lenses well before their actual release.

So, you wait based on a rumor, you could easily miss many great photography opportunities.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply. I know what you mean, and I agree, but on an item of this dollar value, it's a little different. One has pause when the current version is 6-7 years old, and there are rumors of new DO versions. I did own the previous (IS) version of the 500 f/4 for two years, and the weight was an issue. I've been using the 100-400 II for the last ~year, and while it is good and very versatile, the 500 f/4 II keeps me awake at night - LOL. You'd have to admit that the DO version of the 500/600 could indeed be released soon, maybe even announced this Fall, and the feeling (at that time) of having just bought the "old" II version at full price, should that happen, would not be good, especially when size & weight are a huge factor.

Click to expand...

Sure, but that is why they invented ebay. ;D

Then consider if Canon was to announce Mk III versions of the lenses or DO versions of the 500 f/4 and 600 f/4, I'd expect a price hike over the current Mk II versions. Mk I to Mk II was pretty steep. I'd expect less, maybe $2k. Also, how much of a gain in weight do you really expect? The 400 DO II is 4.6 lbs, the 500 II is 7.0 lbs (w/o hoods). The next gen 500 f/4 would still need the larger front element.

Just some thoughts, I do not mean to pressure you.

drnedel said:

Hi,

I heard a statement that the Tokina lens will be optically identical to the new Pentax 50mm 1.4, which starts selling approximately NOW. Anyone knows if this is true/likely?

Can we use any test/review results about the Pentax lens to evaluate what to expect from the Tokina glass?

Click to expand...

Well the Pentax one is on pre-order at Wex for £1,199, delivery due end of July, so it will be interesting to see how much Toking ask for theirs. According to info on the web Pentax developed this lens and it is Toking who are licensing it. Not the way round I would have expected as Pentax seems to have used Tamron for their recent FF zooms.

jolyonralph said:

mjg79 said:

Having said all that if the GM matches the abysmal build quality of other Sony lenses - a poor level of quality that Sony has indeed allowed to pass out the factory on $2000+ zooms so far - then the type of photographer who buys it won't be pleased, I really can't imagine them charging so much for a lens that isn't top notch but they sadly don't have a great track record on that.

Click to expand...

The most overlooked and critical part of Canon's attractiveness to professionals is the value that CPS offers. For professionals this service is invaluable, and issues such as copy variation are something that CPS swiftly resolves for their members.

Sony have recently launched their Imaging Pro service which seems to be pretty much modelled on the way CPS works. Considering that Sony photographers were pretty much left to fend for themselves for the longest time any official support is an improvement, but I wait to hear from others whether their service is anywhere near as good as Canon's. But if it is then I'd expect they would resolve issues with poor lens copies for professionals quite rapidly.

Click to expand...

I agree - and other things feed into that. For example Canon designs their lenses so they can be repaired relatively easily. Sony treat them more like electronic products where several big parts come pre-fabbed and have to be replaced at enormous costs. The lens rental teardown of the 70-200 GM made this clear with some parts (or more precisely collections of parts Sony doesn't supply individually) costing half the price of a new lens.

I think this impacts not just professionals but also committed amateurs who want to know that if buying an expensive lens it should last many years and if there is a problem it can be easily corrected.

Unlike many here I am not hostile to Sony. I've been able to use an A7R III and was impressed. Paired with a Loxia 21 it is a superior landscape set up - especially if weight and size matter - to anything offered by Canon or Nikon. Another great lens with the 55 1.8 Sony Zeiss. It's like having an autofocus Otus which is tiny and matches a camera with IBIS. But from reading online, the data sets presented by lensrentals and the experience of a friend I can see in particular the zooms have many quality control problems. Add in that they are very expensive and it adds insult to injury. If I had a Canon 100-400L and it got damaged or I found it was decentered or whatever I would feel confident I could get it serviced and as good as new and at a reasonable price - I wouldn't have the same confidence with Sony to be frank or if they could repair it the bill might be enormous.

I hope Canon is paying attention to what is going on and letting Sony make the mistakes. As I said, especially for wide angles, there are clearly some benefits to be had from a mirrorless set up allowing the rear element to sit closer to the sensor. I hope when Canon moves to make use of that, whether through a new mount or allowing EF mount lenses to protrude backwards, that they really double down on quality as it's an obvious area they can easily beat Sony in.

If you read on the fredmiranda site many of the landscapers have gone over to Sony for the small size and high quality Zeiss Loxia and Batis primes. But when it comes to the Sony lenses it's fairly common to hear stories of having to go through 4 or 5 copies of a lens to get a well centred copy - right now Sony has that market to themselves but I can't see many people bothering with that level of nonsense once Canon and Nikon enter the market.

Sony can implement it very quickly, as they have the muscle and agility to make it happen with their own R&D and component manufacturing tied together, as they would want it on their most advanced video and still cameras. Canon will wait until they can use it for as much of their product line as possible, which depends heavily on third-party component makers having parts available for them to use. At this point, SD Express is not a proven design like it's competitor CF Express is, so we'll likely have to wait at least 2-3 years for R&D to do it's thing before we see any definitive movement on the format.

Seriously, some people around here need some Prozac. Canon is constantly upgrading products, but the whining never stops. Perpetual downers.

Dear LSXPhotog, did you get the Sigma 24 Art? What's your feedback on that lens? I'm seriously thinking on getting one, as I have had two copies of the 24L Mark II and had to return them as they missed focus a lot when shooting wider than f/2.2 on my 5D3's and 5D4's.

Thanks.

Seems like Sony is also slowing down with their camera releases.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

Cory said:

So I have a 6D, 16-35 4.0 IS and 135 2.0. Almost snagged a 50mm lens, but didn't and have a longer telephoto lens on my wish list.
I do paid headshots, family portraits, word-of-mouth whatever and lots of "running" events plus my son's Marching and Jazz Bands. Even my "lighting" skills are taking on a new higher level of excellence.
Would a numbnut like myself who's unable to make decisions possibly do quite well with just my UWA and one of the new 70-200's (maybe the 2.8, but maybe the 4.0)?
Thanks.

Click to expand...

It depends on how you use your camera. I could not do without the 24-70, while I have no use for 16-35, its just what I shoot, and not necessarily what others will do. After getting the new 24-70m MK II, 70-200 MK II, 100-400 MK II, and keeping my 100mm L Macro and a 17mm f/3.5 Tokina prime(virtually never used), I sold my 15mm fish eye, 16-35mm f/2.8 L, 35mm f/1.4/ 50mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8 and my 135mm L. The primes which had been my main lenses suddenly fell into disuse and the 16-35 sat unused. Some will make the opposite choice, if its right for them, that's great.
Do what works for you.

Click to expand...

Sounds similar to me, with 11-24 being extra weight most of the time. I still regard my 24-70 f/2.8 II to be essential for the landscapes I typically shoot. Two fireworks shows tonight, both fell within that range, cityscape and the Hotel Del Coronado. Depending on what you are shooting, the 16-35 may be ideal, but I've found it too short too many times to buy another copy of it.

That’s a use for a TS lens, to keep the film plane vertical and shift the lens instead of tilting the camera up. But Photoshop works so well that you don’t need to pay big bucks just for that. I hope to rent one for a week some time, but that will be in cooler weather and after the novelty wears off of my new 15-35 and 100-400, which could take a while.

YuengLinger said:

Thanks, Mt Spokane and others for your thoughts.

I recently had Duracell AA's leak in my backup Buff CyberCommander. I had forgetfully left the batteries in it for over a year, only finding the problem when taking out the CC to apply the latest firmware update (now with 1/3 stops!). Fortunately, a little diluted vinegar on a toothbrush and Q-tip cleaned up the contacts and all seems fine.

So, when I realized I had left those Eneloops in the Speedlite, even though it was only for a few months, I was trying to connect dots... But it might be the alkaline that are more likely to cause problems?

Click to expand...

I really have to watch Duracells, if they sit in a appliance for a long period, they leak, and they may still produce power, so you don't know it.
They do have a warranty, its usually not worth the trouble to complain, but they ruined my Nikon CP990, so I went thru the process, sending photos of the damage, and of the battery with date code showing. Since the battery was not beyond the date code, they settled with me for its current value which was reasonable.
I have about 40 eneloops, the oldest ones are pretty old now, much older than 10 years. They have never leaked, and still keep over 90% of rated capacity.

canonnews said:

Mt Spokane Photography said:

This is a improvement to two IBIS patents issued several years ago with the main feature of miniaturizing the gyros. Its otherwise the same patent from 2006 and 2008 which will be soon expiring. Its common for patent owners to make changes or add features in order to expand patent life or take advantage of new technology to make them more practical to manufacture.
It is a In Body Camera Stabilization, sometimes referred to as IBIS, the gyros are mounted on the rear of the sensor.

Click to expand...

it's not in camera stabilization.

Canon puts the velocity sensors as close to the sensor as possible as that is the axis movement. this has nothing to do with sensor stabilization.

Click to expand...

Right! I did not intend to imply that its a stabilized sensor, I see that it can be read that way, I will fix it when I have more time.

It is not like Sony or others where the sensor moves to stabilize the image. I'm not sure if this is a firmware based IS that works on the image, or sends a signal to the lens.

Attached is a picture of the Yongnuo Canon EF to Sony E Smart Adapter. Does anyone knows if it is possible to glue a filter adapter ring onto the part marked in red in the picture? I'd like to get this adapter if it is indeed possible so I can attach UV/ND/polarizer filters behind the EF lens

SLRClub has posted a review of the new Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS II USM

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2.php?id=slr_review&no=611

dtaylor said:

applecider said:

Given premise that the more MP the worse the high iso performance...

Click to expand...

This is a false premise except, possibly, for very long astro photos.

5Ds isn't good at high ISO became a meme in early reviews thanks to pixel peeping and Canon capping the max ISO at 12,800. In reality it's as good as any other FF when viewed at the same physical size, i.e. the same print size. A few sites figured this out and reported accurately on the 5Ds high ISO capabilities. One big one being Imaging Resource in their print quality section.

Even today, 3 years later, it's maybe 2/3rds to 1 stop behind the newest FF bodies at high ISO. (5D4, D850, A7 third generation.)

Click to expand...

Correct, and its even only like that until iso 400 - after that 5DSR is on par with the 5DIV.

Funny!
On a side note, Tamron introduced a f2.8 28-75mm for Sony ff mirrorless mounts.
Even if Canon went with a E-AFU mount, somebody will fill the hole.
http://tamron-usa.com/product/lenses/a036.html