As a newbie I had my expensive lesson in the power of wind when a gentle zephyr shifted my Elincrom EL500 with a 40 inch umbrella from vertical to horizontal, smashed onto greasy concrete in a major oil refinery. Ouch!

My strategies to avoid a repeat vary. The first thing I did was research for lightstands with the widest footprint. This is always listed in the specs. I avoid raising the stand too high. Sandbags are useful. I often ask an assistant or junior client subordinate to just stand with a hand on the lightstand. They're usually eager to participate in the process in a useful way. Sometimes where practical I lash the lightstand to a pole, small tree, post etc with a bungy strap or releasable cable tie. It's the same with reflectors, though a fall won't be expensive, just irritating. I know photographers with white vans who occasionally use the van as a reflector if the location allows.

To achieve a given result, especially shooting outdoors, sometimes you just have to be a bit clever and invent something on the spot. It's part of the fun of being a photographer.

I overheard a friend at a social event who is a motivated, busy and successful photographer explaining to someone why he chose to be a photographer..."well it sure beats the hell out of having to work for a living..." ;D ;D ;D

-pw

johnf3f said:

A couple of months ago I sold my 24-105 to help fund a 24-70 F2.8 V2.
Is it worth it? Yes. However the 24-70 V2 is much more expensive, has no IS (Yipee!) and needs new filters (as you have noted).
The 24-70 V2 is an upgrade but, at smaller apertures, not necessarily a huge one. I am pleased with my purchase and feel it was well worth the price. Others may pixel peep and state that there is not much difference at F8 or so - they may be right. However my landscape images are looking better and that's all I care about. Very non technical but images now look sharper and have more life and colour rendition is superb.

Click to expand...

+1

Have the 24-70 V2, sold the 24-105. Glad I did for serious work. For walking around I miss the 24-105. Lighter and greater.

I have no idea what this is going to cost, BUT I WANT IT!

RichATL said:

I hate Scott Bourne and everything he stands for with the exception of one thing...
Filters...

"why pay thousands of dollars for high quality optics only to put a $25 coaster in front of it?"

Not a direct quote but close enough...

I use filters on my most expensive glass, for protection.. and the sub $1000 stuff I just go commando.

I only use B+W's XS MRCs with the nano coating... they are the easiest to clean, the most scratch resistant, and optically superior to most other filters.

Lenses were designed to perform at their best with exactly the number of elements they are built with...
If you MUST add another element, don't skimp on the quality.

Click to expand...

Ok, I know I'm a "little" late on this thread, but what's with your hatred for Scott Bourne and everything he "stands for"??
I know very little about the guy and I"m hoping to gain some perspective. Thank you. Ed

Just got mine and it handles better than mk1. Never really liked push pull design.
Am probably going to sell my 300 f4L as hardly use it now.

Hi all,

I've been using my 7DMkII with a Sigma 300-800 lens, sometimes with a matching Sigma 1.4x converter. Regardless of whether the converter is in use, when shooting bursts, I'm encountering frustrating levels of exposure inconsistency. The following images are untouched and unmanipulated, straight out of the camera, opened in Lightroom, and exported as jpegs. They were all part of a series or burst of images and feature the exact same exif data. The camera says the exposure is the same, Lightroom says the exposure is the same, yet it is obviously NOT. This is happening to about every 3rd image in a burst. Any thoughts? Is there a setting I'm missing that needs to be tweaked?

Some of these images are poor quality, but they represent the exposure issue quite well.

A few other details: Shot in AV mode, servo autofocus

I'm all ears for any thoughts on what might be done to remedy this issue.

dilbert said:

lo lite said:

I want a modern successor of the famous Flektogon 2.8/20, although this lens was made by the east german branch of Zeiss (Carl Zeiss Jena). I especially like the short closest focusing distance of just 19mm of this lens and wonder if an even shorter one would be possible. Also, I dream of a faster aperture of 1.4 for this focal length although I don't know if physics allows for this (F/1.8 is possible: http://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/20mm-f18-ex-dg-asp-rf and I would buy this lens if Sigma would bring a version with HSM).

Click to expand...

If Sigma did a 20/1.8 Art, you could count me in on that!

Rick said:

On the other hand, Zeiss released an 85 and 25 for their Batis lineup so maybe the new normal is the 25mm FL.

Click to expand...

If Zeiss used the 25 Batis as the groundwork for an Otus then why would they have separate names for the two lines of lenses? I think you'll find that the target price point of Batis and Otis lenses is slightly different.

Click to expand...

The Zeiss Batis lenses are designed for the Sony E mount full-frame cameras with a flange depth of 18mm (same as Canon EF-M). The Canon EF/EF-S flange depth is 44mm, and Nikon F-Mount 46.5mm which is where the Zeiss Otus lenses sit.

One thing that has bothered me ever since I've seen the 100-400MkII, is that if you do choose to remove the tripod foot you leave the mounting threads open to be filled with dirt.
A person could just find something that threads in there to fill the hole, but even then you're going to have to brush out the other spaces, and (most importantly, of course) it's aesthetically horrible.

You would think this should be a prime target for accessory manufacturers, but thus far I haven't seen anything that fits the description.
Does anyone make a cap for the tripod collar on the 100-400MkII when you want to use it without the foot?

And more importantly, are there any that add WWII crosshairs?

Yes. What I found interesting is that just choosing the fastest card does not mean it is the best card to get the most out of the camera. I will have to have a closer look at cards next time I purchase any.

So I was watching Matt Granger's review of the metabones speedbooster adapter and during the technical part of the video (the first 9 minutes or so), I hit upon an idea that MAY be a boon for wide angle astro work.

This may be crazy, which is why I included the question mark in the title. I'm posting it here to see if it has merit, not to boast about its virtues. Ok? Ok.

The basic idea is thus:

1) Take a 4/3 camera, preferably one with the best high ISO performance available.

2) Take a wide angle lens, preferably the fastest you can get. (thinking a Nikon or Samyang 14mm 2.8 or the Tamron 15mm 2.8). Alternatively, you could go for a 24mm or 35mm 1.4 and sacrifice exposure length for extra light via wider aperture.

3) Slap a metabones speedboster on the combo. If you're using a 2.8, then now you have a 2. If you have a 1.4, you now have a 1. (you'll still have to reduce your exposure time as even with the metabones you're still going to have a bit of a crop factor)

This would double the amount of light hitting the sensor than had you used that same lens on a full-frame or APS-C body, allowing a brighter exposure at high ISO or allowing you to lower your ISO and rely more on the raw light of the scene.

I suppose the major caveat here is whether any 4/3 sensors can handle high ISO the way full frame or APS-C can.

Anyway, just a little idea I had. Maybe there's some merit to it, maybe there isn't.

Here's a link to Matt Granger's video review, if you're interested.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydPUkBMu6lQ

AvTvM said:

PS: I do believe criticizing such design flaws in internet forums will help rectify things. Google lists this thread fairly prominently, when searching for "Sigma 24-35 / 2.0" ... so it will likely not go unnoticed by Sigma representatives.

Click to expand...

You're deluded if you think that Sigma (or anyone) relies on meaningless blather on the web for their decisions. Especially when you're the only one blowing up the board about this.

Re: EOS-1D X & EOS-1D C Used to Keep UK Train Tracks Safe

He probably came out of cave recently or is out of his mind using inferior IQ DR Canon gear, dilbert should talk to him and present him pros and cons of new awesome Sony mirrorless (the FUTURE of Photography) .

AcutancePhotography said:

First world problems.

Click to expand...

Meanwhile, Yongnuo lenses are used by CNSA with their space program. ;D

I've got the Tamron 24-70 SP for more than 1.5 years now and took thousands of pictures with it. Just a few week ago I bought a used EF 24-70 L II. The IS of the Tamron had been of little use for me. I got the impression that I lost a little bit of sharpness by the IS in situations of > 1/30 sec. - situations when IS should help you. But the mediocre IQ at the wide and tele end is the annoying factor and the reason why I bougth the EF lens for its slightly better IQ.
Maybe I'm too critical or spoiled by the TS-E lenses. The IQ of the EF 24-105 was too bad to even consider buying it, although it has IS. I shoot landscapes and quite often I stitch panoramas, so I need high resolution and sharpness from corner to corner because a lot of corners are right in the middle of the image later on. You also lose sharpness and resolution by the stitching process (at least with Autopano Giga). Normally I take my time and use the TS-E lenses but on the rare occasions when I leave the house with just one lens (24-70 zoom), I want the best IQ available. To sum it up: if Canons puts IS into the EF 24-70 f2.8 L, the IQ should stay the same or improve. Everything else would be of little use because there is already the Tamron lens, which became pretty cheap over the last months.

dilbert said:

I'm interested to see how the Nikkor 24-70/2.8 VR compares with the Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC.

Click to expand...

About 50% longer

Timothy_Bruce said:

Darwin Award ( I love this therm!) I use Lipo Packs for my Quadrocopters and know how to handle these Lithium stuffed things. Don´t worry about me, it will sleep in the battery bunker with the other ones.
But speaking of that, don´t try to do things like this without knowing what you are doing!!!
(These Cells with CIDs and good protection circuitry on the board are quite save, but better save than sorry)

Click to expand...

That's good, Li-Po cells can be scary. Any DIY'd ones are good to keep in a battery bunker when not supervised.

dcm said:

So, not for the typical do-it-yourselfer or first timer... prior experience with Li-Ion cells and electronics recommended.

Click to expand...

Definitely not worth playing with without experience with LiPo cells, and appropriate safety equipment. A battery safe / battery bunker is important, as is a CO2 fire extinguisher.

An angry LiPo cell started a pretty significant fire in our local Samsung store. I'll try and find the news article.

To put it bluntly, when I worked for Apple there were only two tests that you HAD to pass:

#1: Electrical and CRT safety. CRTs killed a lot of computer and TV techs in the olden days.
#2: Lithium battery safety. This is crucial as Apple doesn't use plastic shielding on most of the new batteries to safe space. It's fine if you are careful and know what you are doing, but even still, some packs get punctured or shorted, and then that's where the battery safe / fire extinguisher can come into play.

Don't mess around with lithium cells if you aren't sure of what you're doing.

to be honest, why bother? have you seen the 1080p output of that camera? It is awful. It doesn't even stand up quality wise to current standards for that resolution compared to others, let alone 4K, which is what it should shoot at but cannot. The reason canon removed these video features is simple: you're not going to want the footage you get anyway. They just left video in as a feature for marketing, but anybody looking for quality output will not touch this camera.

Why are you only listing tier 2 companies in video? If you said "consumer" 8K then maybe those names make sense.

It is interesting that they went for an option to counter the 3rd party lenses out there that target this segment rather than just match the canon 5.6 fixed telephotos at a higher cost.

ultimately I think it is the right choice. Budget shooters will certainly appreciate the flexibility even if it gives up somewhat on the optical quality. After tall that is why the 3rd parties have been selling so many of this lens class thus far. The reality is that while one may think budget shooters want to buy a set of 5.6 primes, that is a pain on the field and much harder on the wallet than these combo solutions. For the price, which will likely drop even more, it will be really hard to rationalize fixed prime telephotos at this point unless you're talking f/4 or faster in the 200-600 range.

Ken rockwell already has his reviews up and surprisingly tells you to buy them all ... what a guy.

I saw this video on a Facebook page that I frequent, the zoom capabilities of point and shoot cameras is astounding!!!
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=860138974053199&id=100001713126945

applecider said:

As I said I was shouting clouds in this image, so I don't think that it is a focus or metering issue, these photo are typical not exceptional. If the 7d is limited to iso 400, then it really is a poor wildlife platform.

Here is another sample at %200 that shows the noise that I'm getting that seems to be preventing sharpness. I'll try to find a low iso example with different metering

Click to expand...

time 4 u too get rid of that old 7D

Oakville said:

Hi, anybody knows of any gray market sales for Canadians? I mean not to go through converting dollars etc...
or why the Canon Gear is not getting cheap in Canadian Stores - especially the Canon 5DMk3?
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

www.OakvilleWeddingArtPhotography.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Canon 70D, Canon Rebel T3i, Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 II, Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L, Canon EF 50mm f/1.4, Canon EFS 18-135mm STM, Canon EFS 18-55mm, Canon EFS 10-22mm, Canon EFS 55-250mm, Canon 430EX II

Click to expand...

Short answer is no...I do not know of a grey market dealer within Canada. To your other question...Canadian retailers are keeping higher prices I think because of the weak Canadian dollar....and unfortunately I do not think that is changing anytime soon.

On the flip side, if you live close to the border like I do it's a good time to sell used gear to our American friends since you can make out quite well once you convert their American cash back into Candian dollars

Apparently this is an internal focusing design.
And it has .22 maximum magnification.
This lens is sounding better all the time, hopefully I don't get too envious (and hopefully IQ at 500mm holds up).

I really wish Sigma hadn't played the number matching game and made the Sport superzoom 500f5.6 instead.
A nice 500f5.6 prime might make up for it though.

dilbert said:

Canon's competition in this space now includes the Nikkor 200-500/f5.6 for $1399.

Click to expand...

Yes please ! Fine compliment to my 70-300L - I'd love to see it work with extenders on f5.6 cameras but that's not gonna happen :-/