I went for a modest hike today and took along my new 77D with the 24mm pancake lens. I wanted to see if this made a good lightweight hiking combo.

It was a cool, overcast day at Beacon Rock State Park. There were some nice wildflowers and the light was ideal for macro work. I was wishing I had a macro lens along, but I didn't, so the pancake lens was pressed into service. Here is a full frame image:

ISO 400, 1/80 sec, F/8, hand held, Av



And here is a crop from that image:



After I got that shot, I happened to look closely at the lens and discovered the word MACRO on the side. I was pleasantly surprised.

privatebydesign said:

IglooEater said:

Agreed. I'd be disappointed to see it north of 1800 and very disappointed to see it above 2K. I know I'm delusional. The D750 has been calling to me since it was released, at 1500 it's looking like a good deal.
However, we heard a lot a while back of the new 6D moving upmarket, which could theoretically mean their might be a new entry model coming down the pipes.

Click to expand...

Prepare to be disappointed, the D750 introduction price was $2,299 three years ago, there is no way on earth a new 6D is going to be below $2,000 launch price.

Click to expand...

Oh I'm very prepared

wildwalker said:

I agree with you Brian, I have a 5KMk2 among other bodies, and it's a great camera. However it really has poor AF. I refuse to pay the (in my opinion) way to high price for the 5DMk4 (the 5D Mk2 came out at £2000, so nearly £4000 at launch for the Mk4, no thanks).

Click to expand...

5D Mark II was released at 2499 euro.

you can't fault canon for the euro dropping in value to the Yen in the 8 years since the 5D Mark II came out.

NancyP said:

I love my 400 f/5.6L, bought about 6 years ago new. If you like shooting BIF, and you don't have money for a 400 f/4 DO or money plus strength for a 500 f/4 LIS I or II , you can't do better than the old 7-element fossil, it has speedy AF and is fun to handle (well balanced).

Click to expand...

I second this one!
If I hadn't allowed mine to bounce around after a drop (including the body) I would still praise my 400/5.6L. The only bad thing about that lens concept is the f/5.6 part - it is a sunny weather lens. I got mine used for something like $800-900. The weight is roughly the same as that of the 70-200/2.8L IS.

The have a manual focus indicator on Cinema cameras?!?!

I need one of those!

Not the Cinema camera, but everything with DPAF should have a manual focus guide in the viewfinder.

http://support-sg.canon-asia.com/contents/SG/EN/0400322602.html

Changes in the Firmware

Firmware Version 1.1.1 incorporates the following fixes:

1. Corrects a phenomenon in which shooting may not be completed while using HDR (High Dynamic Range) Mode, when certain combinations of settings are selected.
2. Corrects the phenomenon of Err70 which occurs with certain combinations of settings.
3. Corrects the level display when the camera is held in the vertical orientation with the hand grip pointing downward.
4. Corrects a phenomenon in which, when using certain CF cards, it may take approximately five seconds for the camera to power on depending on when the camera's power switch was turned <ON>.

privatebydesign said:

HSS and ETTL are not related to each other, you can do either one or both at once.

Click to expand...

I came to that conclusion also, I remembered there is a ad600 that has HSS, but isn't TTL. Hopefully the Siros is here on Friday 8)

FYI.

Antono Refa said:

My understanding is this would be a 70-200mm lens with 88mm image height (read: medium format 3x zoom lens, how many of those are there?) w/ a .5x tele converter to compress it to 35-100mm.

IMHO, the reverse architecture (35-100mm w/ 2x built in tele extender) is more likely.

Canon made an EF 50-200mm f/3.5-4.5L, maybe it would be resurrected with a slightly larger zoom.

Click to expand...

Hmm. That 50-200L is interesting in theory, but I sprang for the 70-200/2.8ISii specifically so all the AF points would turn on. Guess I'm just stuck lugging around extra lenses, but it was a nice theory, and I do understand the use and purpose of this sort of lens, even if not everyone does.

Rocky said:

rrcphoto said:

AvTvM said:

I expect the M20 to be positioned exactly like its predecessor M10: smallest possible size, previous Gen sensor+AF [= M3], lack of control points, fairly low price. Everything else would come as a real surprise to me.

Click to expand...

I think so to, but i'm crossing my fingers on a 24MP DPAF sensor.

Click to expand...

That will be a great travel, "shoot and run" camera

Click to expand...

certainly would!

neuroanatomist said:

IglooEater said:

3kramd5 said:

https://diglloyd.com/blog/2017/20170525_2056-Sony_A9-PatternNoise-at-ISO100.html


Pattern noise at base ISO. Sony is doomed.

Click to expand...

In curious; this became evident when he isolated the Red channel. I don't see it in the complete image. Will this show up in day-to-day normal usage?

Click to expand...

Absolutely yes, given that for years now, Sony aficionados have tried to convince us that underexposing by 6-stops and then pushing images in post constitutes 'day-to-day normal usage'.

Click to expand...

Ah yes, of course. Given that kind of 'day-to-day normal usage.' Stupid me. Quick answer is no, but yes to SonyBoys

MrFotoFool said:

Yes it makes my head hurt too. It's kind of like a Lensbaby (whose look I never liked either), but I bet it will be ten times the price.

The lens itself is ugly too. Part of the appeal (at least I think) of third party manual focus lenses like Zeiss is they look cool. Even with a specialty effect, like the swirly bokeh of the 85 Petzval, a major appeal is the look of the lens itself. But this one is just plain ugly - both the pictures it takes and its build.

Click to expand...

I got the 2nd Petzval lens, the 58mm, and I have to admit, I've had some fun with that one...both with playing with the swirly effect but also the interesting aperture plate shapes you can insert in there....

C

sanj said:

Jopa said:

Not a 24-70 shooter, but if the price is good it'll be hard to pass...

Click to expand...

Curious to know what kind of photography you do that you do not need these focal lengths? Or you do not use zooms in this range? Thx

Click to expand...

A 24-70 is about convenience more than anything. My preference for zooms is a 16-35 and a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II. I have a 24-105 f/4 but it doesn't get much use. If I need something better in the 24-70 range I use a prime.

Nice B&W. Well done, wearle.

I have the distagon 15 - 18 and 21. The 18 is a great lens, but it's the weakest of these three, especially wide open. At f/8 it's tag sharp, but wide open in the corners it is noticably soft. The 21 is wide open significantly sharper and I tend to use that more than the 18. The 15 is very similar in sharpness to the 21, but of course much much wider. Downside is almost no possibility to add filters to the 15.

I don't care about vignetting as you can fix it with a mouse click in post

Hi rpt.
Thanks for the clarification

Cheers, Graham.

rpt said:

Valvebounce said:

Hi rpt.
Interesting series, nice set of shots.
Not really sure of the significance, (which doesn't affect how good they are) is this a rare bird where you are?

Cheers, Graham.

Click to expand...

Thanks Graham. Not a rare bird. It is a Cuckoo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_koel

Click to expand...

Keith_Reeder said:

Digiscoping is about using a phone (or originally, a P&S) on the back of a telescope, not a camera lens.

It was a very limited, cobbled-together way of getting more focal length onto a bird, before DSLRs and longer lenses started to become ubiquitous - no metering, no meaningful shutter-speed control, no AF, but it was enough to give the user at least a chance of an image that wouldn't be achievable with a P&S alone.

Digibinning is a similar idea, but putting the phone or camera behind the eyepiece of a pair of binoculars.

Click to expand...

OK - thought it was a lens!

brad-man said:

AlanF said:

There are no dumb questions, only dumb answers, and we are very good at those. Try the red hot needle test - it will go through plastic but not metal.

Click to expand...

How do you know there are no dumb questions? Have you heard them all?


If the button is the same as my old XT, it is an aluminum cap on top of a piece of plastic. You may now sleep at night

Click to expand...

thanks fir ur answer! i was just curious thats all. my 80d shutter button scratched real easily and usually glossy black plastic does that. was curious if a full frame camera, had a better quality button like them nikons! lol

luckydude said:

Is this fixable or time for a 5DIV?

Click to expand...

It isn't fixable. Like you said, "...time for a 5D IV."

I'll give you $100 for it so that I have spare parts. Go get the new camera. I wouldn't bother the Canon service guys with this.

LonelyBoy said:

Maiaibing said:

Dust is a problem for all lenses where the lens extends far and fast enough to create a certain vacuum/pressure. There was a lot of talk of the old 100-400 IS L being a "dust pump" with countless claims this was due to the push-pull action. Not so.

Instead it was due to air being sucked in/out when zooming and dust creeping along the extended barrel when extending/retracting. The II version has the same two challenges. Have not been able to play around with my version II yet, so cannot say if has the same amount of air flow as the old lens. The exposed barrel surface however is smaller which helps.

I shot the old version in one of the most dusty environments on the face of earth. Here I learned to wipe the lens barrel regularly, to keep zooming to a minimum and to only zoom slowly when needed. These three precautions kept dust down to an absolute minimum - almost none. If you have a problem you should try this.

Click to expand...

I rather think you're contradicting yourself - the push-pull allows for faster zooming (it's one of the reasons people liked the push-pull!). As you pointed out, that makes the problem worse, so while all externally-zooming lenses absolutely can get dust, push-pull allows the user to make the problem worse than twist zooms, and that's close enough to "makes the lens a dust pump" true enough in my estimation. If you do use the push-pull slowly, then yes, it'll be as ok as a twist, but I'd be shocked if that were the norm.

Click to expand...

Well, maybe I just push a little slower and twist a little faster than you do - but a normal fast twist of the new version creates a noticeable effect.

CanonFanBoy said:

I never thought I needed a lens faster than f/2.8 until I got the new 35mm f/1.4. Wow.

Now I believe it would be great to have a fast 50L and 85L.

Click to expand...

Ahhh haaaaaaa!

I wouldn't try to mix them, there are always going to be issues that occur.

transpo1 said:

And there it is--> "a lot of my videographer colleagues use Sony..."

I agree with all of the above things that Canon does better, which is why we are talking about improving the video features here, so us filmmakers can go on using these otherwise fine products

Click to expand...

Why don't we let the video freaks move to Sony and stop whining that a stills camera should be a top-end video camera?

Keith_Reeder said:

Don Haines said:

and if the 6D2 is fewer megapixels than the 5D4, that also helps for low light performance...

Click to expand...

But that doesn't happen, does it? Look at the entire 5D series - pixel count and low light performance have increased/improved with each model.

Same with the xxD series.

Click to expand...

My first DSLR maxed out at ISO 1600 and was unusable after 400..... yes, they have been steadily improving over time and now that we are hitting 70% and higher quantum efficiency on sensors, we only have a half stop left to go on the efficiency side of the equation...... the latest designs put the A/D on chip and as a result, the amount of read noise has plummeted....

As a result, even with shrinking pixel size over the years as we climbed from 6 to 30 (or more) megapixels, we got better and better quality pixels. Short of cooling the sensor, there is no significant source of noise left and one should not expect improvements of more than a few percent as new models come out..... That leaves pixel size as the big variable....

Take two FF sensors made with the same technology..... one at 25MP and the other at 50.... we can say that the same amount of light falls on each sensor and that therefore, after resampling both images to the same size, the low light performance should be the same, and we would be close to being right. Unfortunately, pixels have waste area around the edges and so does your Bayer filter and your micro lenses... as a result, the larger pixel sensor uses a greater percentage of the sensor area to gather light and therefore gives you a stronger signal. The lower amount of circuitry should result in less thermal noise, and therefore give a cleaner signal.

All that said, we are NOT using the same technology. Lessons learned from one sensor are implemented on the next and each new design is slightly better than the last. When the 6D2 comes out we can expect it to have the best Canon sensor (until the next camera is released), and with all of these variables included, we can reasonably expect it to be Canon's low light king....

Hi, I agree that chemical reacts differently to different materials. According to me most of the fumigation professionals aware you about the things which are getting affected by chemicals. Recently my friend has moved to his new house with the help of professional movers Brooklyn ny who provided him moving and moving and fumigation service. According to him, they provided good service and their way of working was quality driven and none of his belonging gets affected by fumigation process.