neuroanatomist said:

SwampYankee said:

f6??????? I hope this thing costs less than $99 because f6 is is a huge step back. When is the last time a major camera producer had the audacity to release an f6 lens? I think the 1st iphone was faster. Keep ignoring mirroless Canon. lets see how that works out for ya!

Click to expand...

Oh, like a couple of the existing Canon EF-M lenses, like the Sony 55-210mm, like the Nikon 18-300mm (that's for dSLRs!), all of which are f/6.3 at the long end. They're all current lenses, released in the last few years.

Did you mean more recent? Well, for a mere $1800 (that's just a bit more than $99, I think), you can pre-order the recently announced Leica 100-400mm f/4-6.3 OIS.

If you're going to drip sarcasm and spread scorn, try to get your facts straight first, mmmmmkay? :

Click to expand...

Tamron 18-200 f/3.5 - 6.3 also comes to mind. There's actually quite a few with f/6.3 at the long end. Seems quite normal. Maybe it's just that f/6 looks strange on paper! We don't usually see it in a f- stop range!

I have the 17-40 for a number of years and supplemented it with the 24 IS lens. There are times I prefer a more compact lens and prefer this to use with neutral density filters for water falls and the 2.8 is a bit better and sharper for night photography. Overall I think the 17-40 is a decent lens, could be better in the corners for landscape work.

That said, buying now, I would definitely get the 16-35 IS lens over the 17-40. The IS is useful to me, regardless of what others say about not needed on a wide angle. Overall the 16-35 is a vast improvement (from what I read) over the 17-40. Upgrading from the 17-40 is second on my photo equipment updating. Adding a 14mm is priority, but also unaffordable at the moment.

Khristo said:

Great shots!
Specially like the 2nd one.

Click to expand...

+1. Well done, tpatana.

neuroanatomist said:

niels123 said:

Strange Canon...

Click to expand...

The camera presumably worked normally until it was modified, but the strange behavior is Canon's doing? ???

Glad it sorted itself out.

Click to expand...

It was modified a couple of yours ago and has been working perfectly fine until yesterday...

surapon said:

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:

surapon said:

hacra said:

Have you ever tried to use a dandelion chip?

In my rokinon/samyang 16mm i have attached a dandelion IV canon chip and works quite well with my 1Dx.

http://www.peleng8.com/af-lens-adapters/af-chip-dandelion-af-chip-dandelion-iv-generation-for-canon.html

You can program it in a way that the files will retain the F stop used.

its also quite inexpensive (+/- 20 USD). While the AF confirm is a bit wide (i think it can be adjusted somehow) it does work quite ok.

here is a link to some of the parameters it can be programmed.

http://filmprocess.ru/oduvanchik/instructions/programming_en.html

Had no problems with it, and might be the solution to your problem. It does take some adjusting of the position so that the camera detects the chip but once thats done, it just works.

This being said, i hope in the future rokinon included such a chip in the lens itself.

Not sure the same chip exists for other camera systems, but it somehow solved my problem.

Click to expand...

Dear Friend Mr. hacra.
How can you mount this dandelion chip and control the Manual Focus Lens of Rokinon for EF-M mount ?
No Power point on Rokinon Lens at all.
Thanks.
Surapon

Click to expand...

No, you can't control the aperture or focus with a chip. What you can do is get electronic communication and program in the focal length as well as calibrate the focus confirm chip so that the appropriate focus point in the viewfinder will light up when the lens is in focus.

Click to expand...

Thank you Sir, Dear great teacher Mr. Dustin.
Now, I am understand 100%.
Have a great night, Sir.
Surapon

Click to expand...

Dear Mr Sir von Surapon!

I just want to make sure that you and other readers understand that the Dandelion chips won't work with EF-M lenses. Only with EF/EF-S such. The latter will report to your M camera thru an wired EF to EF-M adapter thou. You also need an EF camera to program them, that can't be done on a M.

With the most Sincerely and Honorably Regards

Canon buys come camera sensors from Sony, but cell phone censors are Sony's big sensor product, and that's what is made in the Kyushu plant, IPhone camera sensors. PlayStation electronics are made in a different Kyushu plant.

Canon does not have sensor plants located there.

The extremely precise alignment of fab machinery means it may take weeks or even months to get restarted again, depending on the amount of damage. The plant runs 24/7, so shutting it down may delay IPhone production if it stays shut.

Monchoon said:

Not really a betting man, but I think Sabaki maybe meant an update based on QC.

Click to expand...

Oh... Got it. Oily splotches don't look nicer at ISO 1.6 million, eh?

- A

If you dig into DXO metrics they are very useful for comparison but if you compare their overall scores or read the reviews you are absolutely wasting your time. Nikon gets what they pay for with the overall scores and review headlines

5D Mk III 'Going Grey' Edition. Another reminder that a Mk IV is due soon.

d.

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/09/sigma-24-35mm-f2-dg-hsm-art-mtf-curves-and-sample-variation/

I love mine!

I find it amazing that the foundations laid for the EOS lens mount before it was commercially available in 1987 are still viable today in 2016, 29 years later.

Any lens made since introduction will work on a current Canon camera, and any modern lens will function on an EOS 1V film camera (possible exclusions for the functionality of IS systems).

I'm not really familiar with Nikon, but they probably would have been better off in the long run with the clean sheet of paper approach, which must have taken a long time to finally get greenlighted at Canon way back when.

My only complaint would be the sunsetting of components to repair "pro grade" lenses that are still commanding high prices today.

zim said:

slclick said:

haloGRAPH said:

tpatana said:

If your shooting style is boudoir, you'll get annoying pixellation on the pictures.

Click to expand...

;D Oh no... and this on a camera that has the ability to render pubic hair in formally unachievable detail...

Click to expand...

Oh, pubic hair is so 2015.

Click to expand...

I'm hoping for a come back now that canon sensors have good dr and shadow lifting.

Click to expand...

That's not what they're saying over on the 6D2 thread but they're all acting as if they aren't old enough to have pubic hair.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

It matters not if its a great lens, if you don't use it, sell it! If you change your mind a year or two down the road, you can probably buy another at a lower price.

I do not keep lenses just because they are great. I sold my 35mmL and several other primes when I purchased the new Canon zooms. They were not being used, so they went to someone who would use them.

I could buy them today for a lot less.

Click to expand...

This is also my strategy. If I haven't used a lens as much as I hoped or it's made redundant by a more recent purchase / overlapping then it gets sold promptly. It annoys me just having something in the house that isn't being used, feels like a waste of money. In this regard the 50 STM is my best price:usage ratio lens!

A 24-70 should see a lot of action, those are some of the most common focal lengths. My most used lens is the 24-105L and I'm not particularly fond of it just that it's really useful. The only reason I haven't gone with a more superior 24-70 lens is that I get more use from that extra focal length range at the long end when traveling.

24 and 35 are great for landscapes and panos. 50 to 70 is perfect for walkabout, portraits, events, festivals, flowers, fireworks... The list is endless.

OP it sounds like you just need to get back in the game and be inspired to shoot more with the 6D.

fentiger said:

lens now sold, to me ;D ;D 8),

Click to expand...

Congrats on your new acquisition.

WOW! Great reading stuff! Thank you for sharing, LostBoyNZ.

I knew that coatings help a lot but I never expected them to have such a dramatic influence.

Sabaki said:

Just a quick question, how many better is IQ on the 5Diii vs the 5D classic?

Click to expand...

I have both and until iso 400 i can't see difference unless i do pixel peeping.

Its not a good choice to adapt to a EOS Camera. EF lenses have a 44mm flange distance and Exakta has 44.7. A glass lens in a adaptor would let you use it, but cheap adaptors with glass don't give high IQ. Expensive ones (If they Exist) which have a mini Teleconverter with multiple glass elements will work but give a longer focal length.

Unless its a really rare and fine lens, its not worth the trouble. There are many good Olympus, Pentax, and Nikon lenses that are low cost and easy to adapt. I prefer M42 because there were a ton of them.


http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~westin/misc/mounts-by-register.html

+1

neuroanatomist said:

scyrene said:

It's always struck me as odd that they would use the same name for two totally different products available simultaneously. (Your explanation clarifies the logic behind the name of the closeup lens but still, names are a matter of marketing, and giving every product a different one is surely preferable. But it's a minor confusion).

Click to expand...

It's also confusing when they use the same name for similar products at different times...

Click to expand...

My son still uses that same Elph!

The philosophy behind this camera is still mystery to me. Time will tell.
I like how he washed it in the "river" though - literally like shoes.

Wish I had one. Or I could settle for the Canon version too.

My favorite tool on Premiere is the Lumetri color tool, I gave up Davinci Resolve for the Lumetri. I am anxious to see how more they can improve it.
On the other hand, it is time for them to show something more practical on the proxi workflows given the cry for 4K and possibly 8K from users. It is about time.

AlanF said:

The Moire seems to be introduced by using DxO as the RAW converter. Here is the crop from using DPP4 to convert, which is noisier (no sharpening or noise reduction applied) but lacks the Moire in the long tail feathers and on the left of the DxO. The regular repeating patterns of the feathers in this shot are perfect for setting up Moire, independent of having a low pass filter. Otherwise, I haven't seen Moire patterns.

Click to expand...

There is less moiré in the DPP4-converted image than in the DxO-converted image, but it's definitely still there. So I suspect that DxO is just accentuating it (e.g. with 'lens softness correction' / sharpening).

Thank you very much for your replies nda, TeT and gmb!

To make it short: lens seems to be within normal specs.

To make it long:
I couldn't compare them to the lenses mentioned by you.
I took my time to get to a store and compared it to another copy.
AF sound was quite similar, focusing ring felt the same.

Thank you for your help. Case dismissed.

I've used Lensbabies for years but as I age I tell you I'd prefer a focusing screen in the 5D3 to use them a bit better. My eyes appreciate the Canon AF more and more these days.