dilbert said:

It is even more interesting to note that whilst you quote the dpreview article for the D810 review you clearly did not read the page that talks about why it took so long. Maybe you would like to explain why you didn't read or chose to ignore that part of the review?

Click to expand...

Two years for this...

"we realized that not only did we have to revisit some of our existing testing methods, but that to properly test a camera like this we had a responsibility to create entire new tests."

Sure...

Many websites use Imatest to measure resolution of lenses. They never state what lines/mm or cycles/mm the measurements are so we don't know whether they are reporting on contrast or resolution. Could someone please enlighten us.

xps said:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d500


DpReview scores incredible 91%!
What a score! I hope Canon will strike back!

On my browser, the compare-function does not work. But I think, in many categories, the D500 is superior to the 7DII

Click to expand...

Same old slow live view implementation.
"Autofocus is contrast-detection-based, and is prone to rapid and drastic attempts to refocus that leads to distracting unprofessional-looking footage"

Most of the pics posted for auto focus test are very soft / out of focus like 80d. But looks like they did a different AF test. I think a6300 nailed lot of these shots.
"In this instance, the rider started off too far back for us to be able to specify that the camera should focus on his face, so instead it's focused on his shirt, but the consistency between shots is excellent."

But most well rounded camera?. Not sure though without live view / video AF. It is definitely best crop camera in terms of IQ though.

I am still not sure why did 80d do bad in that same AF test. It should have focussed on something like bike/face/shirt like d500. I got similar results like d500 with my simple 70d test (bike/face/shirt in focus).

neuroanatomist said:

hne said:

Can you see an elephant while you're wearing glasses? The whole elephant at once through 30mm diameter lenses?

You can see an entrance pupil appearing 92mm in diameter through a 60mm front element if you depart from the thin lens assumption...

Click to expand...

Ironic that your analogy much more closely approximates a thin lens. It's not relevant, though, given the position of eyeglasses in relation to the biological optics.

In this case, scyrene is looking in the right place – 'focal length' is the distance from the image plane to the apparent position of the entrance pupil when the lens is focused at infinity. The design of the MP-E precludes infinity focus, so the 65mm focal length is a theoretical not a real measurement, i.e. the FL would be 65mm if the lens could focus at infinity. It can't, so the actual focal length is shorter. Ignoring rounding of the aperture value, f/2.8 with a 19.5mm front element would be a max FL of 55mm. In fact, the actual FL with the focus racked out as far as possible is probably even shorter. As an example, the FL of the 100/2.8 Macro is 100mm focused at infinity, but ~67mm at 1:1.

Click to expand...

How do you have measured the FL of the 100mm or do you have some source of people who measured the FL?

My internal conflict is: The EF 100 (non-IS) needs a 4 times increase of the exposure time between infinitity and 1:1 which is conformal to a lens(group) of 100mm FL over the whole focusing range. While the MP-E 65 is sth. like a zoom where zooming is used to focus.
I alway thought the EF 100 Macro and EF-S 60 Macro are lenses which shift principal planes optically to simulate the shifting of a 100mm lens (having a fixed lens arrangement).

Would be great to have some additional info about that - Best, Michael

jd7 said:

dlee13 said:

I own the current Sigma 85mm and for me to sell it for an Art version, it would have to be a substantial upgrade.

Click to expand...

Agree!

The lens I'd really like to see next from Sigma is a 135 f/2 Art - or ideally, a 135 f/2 Art OS.

Click to expand...

Count me in. I used the current version and I was impressed with the results. I have been awaiting long time for the 85A, but I doubt it will have OS using this very wide aperture.

I see camera wifi as general DSLR advancement even though I have no use for it. It should be cheap and easy to implement.

I definitely see where studio shooters want high speed wifi over the inconvenience of cable tethering.

For me, I want to process the photo properly or not at all. The intermediate/ half assed sharing via phone seems pointless though I recognize some people want it.

Nuno Santos said:

Hi guys,

Talking about professional FF, like the precious 1Dx, take a few minutes and read this article, I think is resuming what I always saw in the Full Frame mirrorless, and I thought that I was alone.

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sonys-full-frame-pro-mirrorless-fatal-mistake/

Cheers

Click to expand...

The 'rant heard round the world' -- I remember. Sator sent the interwebs into a tizzy with that one.

Mirrorless's size/weight savings only really pay dividends if you use slower glass, use APS-C, etc. Once you step up to FF, you aren't fooling anyone. Stuff will be big and heavy, and at that point, it's all about head to head performance against SLRs.

- A

CSD said:

PureClassA said:

FastRAW Viewer? Where can I find that? MAC capable?

Click to expand...

Yes:

http://www.fastrawviewer.com/

Another application worth looking at is Photomechanic which is heavily used by sports photographers and events.

http://www.camerabits.com/products/

Click to expand...

I had to step out so thanks for supplying the links. If you search, you'll find some other threads where I discuss my experience with PhotoMechanic. Short version is essentially that I didn't have a good experience with their staff so I didn't buy the product after evaluating it. That's when I found FastRAWViewer. It works BETTER for what I use it for (culling mostly), is updated often (every month or two) and is a fair price ($15). IMHO, Photomechanic is way overpriced for what it does ($150). Heck, it costs as much as Lightroom!

Mt Spokane Photography said:

I have yet to hear of a price increase from reliable sites who have close ties with retailers. For example, Canon Price Watch usually gives a one month or more warning when a price change is imminent.

Click to expand...

Same here. I rely on CPW as they seem to have a very good handle on prices. I would be very surprised if any of the recent or pending camera releases (1dX II/80D/5DIV) are affected. I would guess that if Canon is planning to raise prices, they have simply built any increase into the release price of new bodies.

Keep in mind as well that, as hard as Canon tries to enforce MAP pricing, they have been less than successful. In the end, the market sets the price.

The very best option is to put the filters on eBay and learn how to blend exposures. Saves you some space in your bag and saves you a lot of money.

Click to expand...

I often use the software approach, but as coastal landscape specialist I regularly encounter situations where the old fashion approach is either the more effective option or achieves a similar result quicker.

You can buy antistatic sprays designed for computer screens and spectacles.

Click to expand...

Has anybody tried this ? Were there any detrimental effects ?

I guess Ive been pretty lucky, my 6D has gotten pretty soaked on a number of occasions.

This is all shot off base!

As for Fallon! it will be easier to get with the Public relation of the base since spotting outside FAllon is not advisable! although I have done it before!

DaveC

Shoot ISO400 color film for a while and then compare. If the 5DIII images still look soft, then you have a problem.

(I suspect pixel-peeping and over expectation are the issues)

My 7D2 has gone back to Canon, to be replaced.

I recently used my (original) 7D with the 70-200, and also the 1Dx with the 1.4x III. Very happy with both results, so it looks like the 1.4x was the right choice.

The 7D has shown competitive results with my new lens and is probably too old to get a decent return. I'll sell the 7D2 replacement when it arrives, and be 'down to a sensible' two-camera collection!

CDD28 said:

Anyone know how far the backorder log goes/how long the wait will be? I just ordered mine on Friday.

Click to expand...

I spoke with them on Friday. They are waiting for my check to clear (they got the bank check on Thursday). They said that they have cameras in stock and mine should ship Monday.

Maybe check with them tomorrow via chat.

sek

150-600 Sports just got tested at PZ, FYI

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=29925.0

- A

Sigma's better 150-600 lens on the 5DS R:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/977-sigma150600f563sports?start=1

Recall that last week they ran the same test on the Tamron 150-600:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/976-tamron150600f563vc?start=1

An interesting disclaimer is made before resolution is reported:

"Some may be surprised by the relatively moderate performance figures below. Please note that two effects are coming together here. First of all - the "common" peak performance on the EOS 5Ds R, out test camera, is reached around f/4. The Tamron lens is slower than that thus diffraction effects are already decreasing the resolution potential at all aperture settings. On top of that comes the fact that we are talking about a super tele lens here. Remember that this is a chart-based MTF system and the longer the focal length, the longer the distance between camera and chart. Beyond 300mm air diffusion is starting to have an impact and as you can conclude, it's correspondingly more pronounced the more you zoom out. Please keep that in mind here."

(I either missed this completely last week with the Tamron review or it was added after the fact. I'm aware MTF testing needs to be modified with longer lenses, but for those who know this better than I, is this an appropriate statement?)

At any rate, comparing the two lenses just from a resolution perspective:

150mm @ f/5 --> Sigma clearly better
150mm @ f/8 --> Tamron largely closes the gap as you'd expect

600mm --> Sigma better, stopping the Tamron down doesn't close the gap.

- A

I usually take a picture of the back of the camera first...

Just wow. A wonderful man. A bit shy with large groups in spite of his ability to communicate in seminars, I found him to be very warm one on one. "Pixel-peepers, Expose to the right, most lenses/cameras are better than most photographers" and a lot more you know but didn't know came from him.

Several years ago when I bought my first sturdy tripod (a Gitzo) I bought a standard Gitzo plate to go with it. It had a thin layer of cork glued to it and when the plate wasn't horizontal to the ground (i.e. a vertical or tilted) the cork would slowly move entirely defeating the purpose of a tripod. A photographer at the park I was visiting told me about RRS and I've stuck with some kind of form fitting plate ever since. At this point I probably wouldn't risk losing some photos to saving $ on a plate. With my luck it would work great until I got up early to hike to to a beautiful location the sunrise would be perfect and then my plate would start moving... Murphys law.

The non removal tripod collar is really a non issue once you move it out of the way-it does not get in the way.

I have used it several times now, both on my full frame and on my crop. The lens is ridiculously sharp wide open and is a great addition to my collection.

Here is a full size portrait at 100mm at 1.8. I used LR Screen Standard sharpening upon export with a slight crop.

The second one is from a cosplay session and was shot at 2.8 at 67mm. I was shooting HSS with my 5D MKIII and the 7D MK II would not go into HSS. I stopped down to 2.8 but still blew the exposure out and had to recover it in post. I gave up with the 7D MK II because I could not get the same exposures as the MKIII during the shoot. Once I got home, the camera entered HSS no problem..who knows what I was screwing up.

Maybe hold on for the Irix 15mm? It's manual focus but designed with night photography in mind. Due for release this Summer.

ahsanford said:

romanr74 said:

Did I ever mendion that i think people who make "everyone" statements are poorly informed/educated (to say it very very friendly)?

Click to expand...

You just quoted two posts that did not have the word 'everyone' in it at all. Could you be more specific?

If you are referring to the 'everyone' in my frequently posted "canon please give us this lens" graphic, the use of that word is clearly being used for comedy purposes to express a plurality of folks who want such a lens. It's not being used to express an ignorant worldview or belittle others' opinions.

- A

Click to expand...

Keep your sense of humour ahsanford, you're going to need it over the next few years when you don't get your EF 50mm f/1.4 IS

midluk said:

sulla said:

ChristopherRay said:

So what exactly is the difference between the 600ex-rt II and the or original 600ex-rt?

Click to expand...

• faster recycle time
• higher number of subsequent, rapid flashes before the mark II model overheats and turns off.

Click to expand...

But the "faster recycle time" only applies when the CP-E4N is used. Normal recycle time using AA batteries without external battery pack seems to be unchanged.

Further changes:

• removal of remote trigger output for remote triggering pre 2012 cameras
• changed accessories mount (not compatible with old gel holder)
• some minor UI refinements (e.g. progress bar for recycle status)
• RT master fires any slave units that is ready, not only when all linked units are ready again
• larger flash case with space for all accessories

See also http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2016/speedlite-600ex-ii-rt/speedlite-600ex-ii-rt-whatsnew.shtml

Click to expand...

Thanks for the link that really explains it in more detail. I still just velcro my gels to my flash on 600ex-rt's the old accessory was a joke unless it was pointed right at the subject which I rarely do. I'm usually trying to bounce off of walls. The only thing though that would be the draw to upgrade is that it doesn't overheat as fast but that's it. That's not nearly enough to upgrade the the mark II. Why waste the upgrade without improved ettl the most basic function that is in need of an upgrade by canon. This is a disapointing upgrade to the 600ex-rt and now I have to also buy another battery pack for marginal improvement?! I don't see why they couldn't have at least just left the battery pack the same.

yes - me - picked up from Henry's last week

[email protected]