Posts

NWPhil · Jan 20, 2015

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
NWPhil said:

WOW - I have to say it Dustin, you really disappointed me with this review.

Do you realize the that the throw from infinity to 1 foot is just a smidge over 3/4inches?
Aren't you aware that a common trait, welcomed and desired in macro lenses (even half size as this one) in indeed the heavier focus dampening and long throw below 1 foot range, as precision focusing really matters?
Also, it's very common to see the a very narrow DOF in macro lenses, as it's common to have an above average sharpness.
Further more, almost no macro shooting occurs with a lens wide open- nor even if doing photo stacking.

I am surprised and shocked after reading other reviews from you, seeing you bluntly fail and commit such amateur, uninformed mistakes thru your comments.

Can't compare this lens to a canon 1.8 nor even the Otus 55 - It's a whole different league, and built for a special purpose...but can be used everyday.

Click to expand...

You are certainly entitled to be disappointed with my review (BTW, Zeiss certainly isn't: https://www.facebook.com/carlzeisslenses/posts/937419462934961; https://twitter.com/CarlZeissLenses/status/557213223095894016), but I'm not sure where some of your points of view are coming from.

If you have used the lens, then you should recognize that the focus throw is very long. As I point out, that's great for accuracy, not so great for speed.

The reason for the heavier damping that I give is directly from the president of Zeiss of the Americas. I don't personally like the weight compared to all other Zeiss lenses I have used.

Of course the DOF is very narrow at macro distances...that's the whole reason I supply that information. "That aperture advantage over the typical f/2.8 of most macro lenses is great for use in a variety of applications, but macro is really not one of them. DOF is only .08″/1.98mm at minimum focus distance and maximum aperture. That is TINY! Even at f/5.6 the DOF is only slightly over half a centimeter at the minimum focus distance." - The point here is that you AREN'T going to be using the lens at f/2 for macro purposes.

I don't think your particular criticisms here are valid.

I own and use the lens quite often - one of my favorites, and I don't like the 50mm focal range, but this lens it's the only 50mm (not 55) I like to use.

With that said, check again the throw from 1 foot to infinity or even from a more usefull 3 feet. And then compared it what other 50mm with AF are doing, as how much turn they need to accomplish the same.

The dampening on that initial focal range is not bad IMO - indeed becomes a chore after that.
No, I won't use f/2 for macro, but portraits or details at a bit over 5 feet will work very well - in the macro environment, the f/2 allows you to start with a brigher viewfinder view - a bigger difference comparing to the ef 180mm macro from canon, but not so much with the usual 2.8 aperture from other dedicated lenses

In all, looking at a halfsize macro from a point of view used to judge a generic walk-around lens it's faulty to say the least

My criticism applies to your generic review pointers on a non-generic purpose lens - I can see you coming around this "street" calling a canon EF 500mm as not great for walking around town and shoot candids

martti · Jan 20, 2015

RTFM

Sabaki · Jan 20, 2015

Lee Jay said:
These 70ish% numbers of in-focus shots for someone running slowly toward the camera just don't seem right to me. I tend to get high 90s for that on my decade old 20D and 5D even shooting at f/2.8 and even zooming while shooting. I'm planning to buy a 7D Mark II to improve on this, not degrade it. For example, these were all shot on the 5D and 70-200/2.8 at f/2.8, I was zooming while she was running, and they are all in focus.

Cute kid you got Lee Jay

I'm pretty convinced the 7Dii is falling a little short of the performance as indicated in Canon's promotional material.

A friend is getting his replacement 7Dii tomorrow. His 50D was killing the 7Dii for sharp images and keeper rate

Ebrahim Saadawi · Jan 20, 2015

Hey I like EOSHD!

Andrew had an opinion on the 1Dc 2 years ago, now he's expanding and looking into the strength points and finds it better than he though it was.

What's wrong with that? why is a slight change of opinion about cameras seem like a legal misconduct on the internet? I even heard people calling him with severe bipolar disorder because he changed his mind slightly on a camera. Lovely.

Come on people. Read the reviews on EOSHD and take the pros and cons he presents, and don't read if you don't want to.

Before I tried the a7s I kept going on how the colour science looks terrible, but when I used it for a while I changed my mind. What's wrong with that?

It's a camera. A cool gadget. A tool. Not a religion conversion.

I guess if these strong opinions and wars forums ended and everyone relaxed. these boards wouldn't be as entertaining as they are. So go on

martti · Jan 20, 2015

Canon Europe site has an edited version of the focusing handbook.
Better but no cigar.
Did you guys actually know all this:
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/AF_guide_EOS5D_MarkIII_eng_January2013.pdf

thewaywewalk · Jan 20, 2015

Thanks for all advices, I was finally really happy with the 24/2.8 IS and even positively surprised by it's close-up capabilities

Sporgon · Jan 20, 2015

LovePhotography said:
Picked one up on eBay. Waiting for delivery.
While shopping, found this commentary. Thought it was interesting.
Thoughts?

24 and 17mm T/S aren't useful.

The lens does two things that are practically unrelated, and both of which are borderline useless in the extreme wideangle. Firstly, the shift mechanism allows perspective correction. This was a critical part of photography in the days of large format, and I used this lens to get the same benefit on film when I started out with Canon. However, if you are working digitally, it is far easier and cheaper to correct perspective while editing. Second, It allows tilting of the plane of focus, which allows near/far compositions to simultaneously be in focus when simply stopping down doesn't do enough (or isn't desired for other reasons such as stopping subject motion, etc.) However, these extreme wide angles, with small apertures even wide-open, have extreme DOF already and it'd be a rare photograph that needed more DOF than a normal lens could accomplish at 24mm (or even more so, 17mm). On the other hand this ability would be very attractive at 45-90mm. (A related trick is to tilt focus in the opposite direction of your composition to minimize DOF. But again at 17 and 24mm, I'm sorry but nothing gets very defocused anyway.) As far as other details of the lens go: the construction is the very best Canon makes, comperable to the 70-200Ls or better. The image quality unfortunately suffers as you shift off-center, as the lens resolution falls off as with every lens. (There is also extreme cos^4 vignetting, though that can be fixed in your editing software.)

What the guy says is true - if you gloss over certain things. Yes, 24 and especially 17 have great dof anyway, especially if you stop down, but beware of 'hyper focal' distance with digital, especially for distant landscapes: your horizon will be soft. A lens such as the 24 is at its best fully open, you can achieve dof with this wider aperture with all the benefits this brings: resolution and light gathering.

Correcting extreme perspective in post: OK for small prints, not so good if you are producing A3 or A 2 size prints. Your computer program has to make a lot up.

Again on the new 24 IQ remains superb with 6 degrees ( which is a lot ), only falling off a little at the full 12 degrees ( shift).

You can see that here:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=486&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=8&API=1&LensComp=0&CameraComp=0&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

For many people he is correct in saying the longer focal lengths offer more benefit. However try telling that to someone who shoots in extremely confined circumstances, room interiors or outside of cathedrals in built up areas for instance.

Thaikon · Jan 20, 2015

DRR said:
I think... everyone's right. Also, everyone's wrong. It's all in how you look at it.

This is clearly an APS-C camera. Size wise it looks similar to an xxD (very similar to current 70D) but feature-wise, it looks more like a xxxD (lack of BB Focus button for example)

I realized that Canon has more APS-C camera lines right now than they realistically need.

EOS-M (Not DSLR so we won't talk about it here)
SL1
T5
T5i (xxxD)
70D (xxD)
7DII

I think, they are moving the xxxD line slightly up-market, and ceasing further development on the xxD line. The 70D is very close to the 7D line and I think they want more separation there. I also predict they merge the T5 line with the SL1 line, as these two lines serve essentially the same market - they want a DSLR but are both size and price sensitive, and are willing to give up features/performance because most of them will just be shot in AUTO most of the time.

From a marketing perspective, I think 2015 APS-C DSLRs looks like this -

SL1 (Older technology, size is the differentiator, mass market SLR that's small)
New xxxD, the T6i - (new tech, mass market, feature focused (wifi, touchscreen, GPS, NFC, etc) )
7DII - Flagship APS-C Pro build quality and features.

SL1 line, >$500 with kit lens.
New xxxD, >$1000 with better kit lens.
7DII, >$1500 body only (will drop in price in 2015)

Just my 2 cents. 8)

:

almost correct....it's gonna be the DIGITAL Elan with EyeControl ! ;D

Mt Spokane Photography · Jan 20, 2015

I don't think its possible unless you hard wire the camera to a tablet or computer, or hardwire the projector to computer or tablet (Most tablets do not have ethernet). A Tablet or computer can generally only connect to one Wi-Fi device at a time, but you might be able to add multiple Wi-Fi cards to a computer.

A possibility is using a Canon Wi-Fi adapter which can connect in a peer-peer situation without special software.

The the Wi-Fi cards and Wi-Fi enabled cameras need to have software installed on the device receiving the images, they do not just transmit to a folder on a computer or tablet.

Your 6D can automatically transfer images to a tablet, and a tablet can connect to a Epson projector. But, probably not at the same time, so that's the issue. Also, someone will have to operate or setup a slide show app to transmit images to the projector.

Assuming its one of the popular Epson projectors, you can likely figure it out how to do it here.

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/Landing/wpBusHow.jsp

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/jsp/Landing/ProjectorApp.do?iref=side-banner_projector-app?BV_UseBVCookie=yes

Greatland · Jan 19, 2015

Then its about time that they gave us something really spectacular in a high megapixel DSLR or something significantly better than the 1Dx

Rams_eos · Jan 19, 2015

I got my first as 70-200 F4 L IS and was really impressed by image quality. I then had a 100mmMacro 2.8 L IS and this is an awesome lens. The best ever I had in hands.
I then acquired the 24-105 L with the 6D, but I have to say, I have not been very impressed by IQ ??? . May be it’s not a great copy but I was expecting more :-\ .
I am now looking close to 100-400mm II. I believe I will dive as soon as availability is better. I tried it and IS is stunning and optic is sharp

.
I don’t know if it is GAS or L addiction, but this is definitively Sharp images syndrome

privatebydesign · Jan 19, 2015

Some great suggestions here, and as Neuro said, pre flash is a necessary function of ETTL.

So, switch to manual, or (as Will so fully said) get a Canon EOS film camera and shoot TTL, or get the 600-EX-RT (or any other flash with a thyristor cutoff) and shoot in thyristor mode.

Another option, and the last I can think of, is to use a long shutter speed and second curtain sync. The average human blink takes 300-400 milliseconds, so use a 1/2 second shutter speed, which isn't an issue if you are shooting in controlled situations as the flash duration is your effective shutter speed, and the blinker will have opened their eyes again by the time the true flash fires.

But truthfully, manual flash is the way to go.

surapon · Jan 19, 2015

OKO-SAN said:
Happy new year, Surapon! Happy new idea!

Thankssss, Dear Friend Mr. OKO-SAN.
Happy new Year 2015 to your family and You too.
Surapon.

Sporgon · Jan 19, 2015

Act444 said:
(although I did get it refurbished so I'd think/hope that Canon tuned it up before reselling it)...

Fat chance !

The amount of variability in the assembly of these lenses ( and indeed other L lenses) is alarming.

My 24-70 f4 now has a bad de-centring issue - it's very soft on the far right. Whether it was like this before or I've knocked it I don't know, but in future I'm going to perform the test that PBD demonstrated in a thread last year as soon as I get the lens.

Hjalmarg1 · Jan 19, 2015

BeenThere said:
OK, I've had the lens for 2 days and have taken a few shots. A Fish-Eye lens is a new kind of Fish in my camera bag. This is the first time I've use one and I have to say its a wild experience. At 180 degree field of view (diagonal) it puts practically everything thats in front of the lens into the frame. I've also used the Rokinon 14mm and 35mm lenses and was impressed with those, so decided to give this one a try. At $500. its not terribly expensive, especially for f 2.8.
I don't have a lot of shots yet, and none that can be considered artistic or print worthy. Hopefully that will change as time goes by. I am posting my initial "hands-on" thoughts at:

http://www.ronbrunsvold.com/tools/rokinon-12mm-f28-ed-as-ncs-2.html

If you get one of these, please post some of your images and thoughts about using this unique lens.

Do you find useful (besides artistic) your new fisheye?
I also have a fisheye and I thought I'd use it more but it doesn't get much use. I use my 16-35mm lens more often at the wide end than the fisheye, except when I want an artistic effect.

Jan 18, 2015

NancyP said:
Do you need an excuse to pack up once the light's gone and head out to the pub for a pint of fresh Welsh ale? I would be there too were it not for a large body of water in the way...

None whatsoever!

slclick · Jan 18, 2015

I'm going to try the Protactic 350. I shoot quite a bit in the 'field', 'bush', great outdoors whatnot. I like the idea of it being not too large (one body two medium lenses) and tough as nails. I like my Lowepro Flipside Sport 15L but it has developed tears and snags, not too mention the buckles aren't the most rugged. Also the waist strap is poorly designed.

I don't have much lens/body GAS but the holy grail bag search has me under it's spell.

jd7 · Jan 18, 2015

Act444 said:
jd7 said:

Count me as another happy user of the 24-70 f/4L IS. As I've said in another thread, my copy was excellent at 24 and 70 out of the box, but disappointing at 35 and downright poor at 50 ... my sister's 24-105L was definitely better at 35 and 50. However, after sending my lens back to Canon for calibration, I'll happily pit my 24-70 4L against a 24-105L at any focal length. As has already been pointed out to my by a couple of CR users, Roger Cicala has commented the 24-704L has a lot of adjustable parts (more than most lenses), and it does seem the 24-70 4L suffers from substantial copy to copy variation. Get one properly calibrated though, and I think it is a very good lens.

My brother has the Tamron 24-70 2.8 VR so I will have to do some comparisons if I can find some time. I did some very quick comparisons just after I got my lens calibrated and came away with the feeling my 24-70 4L was at least as sharp from f/4 (I was probably concentrating most on centre sharpness), and its focussing was quicker and more consistent than the Tamron. That said, my testing to-date was pretty limited (and the possibility of new lens owner bias cannot be ignored! ) so I wouldn't draw any conclusions from it.

I noticed this sentence in Dustin's review:
"The trend of many lenses that Canon has offered in the past few years have been lenses that didn’t necessarily wow people on paper (or thrill them with their announcement) but have proven to be extremely competent lenses that have won people over on their merits."

I have to say I agree with that. I wasn't that excited about the 40 2.8 or the 35 2 IS but now own and like both, and looking beyond lenses I think the same sentiment applies to the 6D. I think perhaps the 24-70 4L might end up being another lens to which the sentiment applies, if Canon can find a way to reduce copy variation and get the "average" 24-70 4L performing closer to its best performance.

Anyway, Dustin, thanks for the review of the 24-105 3.5-5.6. Interesting to get your take on a consumer-grade lens after reading your reviews of high end gear. The new 24-105 sounds like it could be a good lens for a lot of people, even if not many of the people who haunt places like CR.

Click to expand...

How does your 24-70 do at close focusing distance, particularly at the long end? Mine REALLY seems to struggle. It's fine until I get near MFD and then the picture totally softens up...

I find that the 24-105 is still noticeably better at 50mm though. It has gone back to being my default lens.

Hi Act444
Rather than hijack this thread further, I've started a new thread to try to answer your question about my 24-70 f/4 near MFD ...
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=24642.msg484694#msg484694

Hjalmarg1 · Jan 18, 2015

Mt Spokane Photography said:
henriksandstrom said:

Why doesn't Canon simply uppdate the IS in great optics like the 300 4L? With four stop IS, I guess a lot of people would pay a few hundred more. Is it so costly to change production or do you have to change the optical design as well?

Click to expand...

Why not just update the transmission in your 1991 Automobile? There is more than just the IS that needs updating. The design is good, but its 24 years old. It does not have coatings on the lens elements to prevent reflections from the sensor, which reduces contrast. It is also not all that sharp compared to newer lenses, and suffers from LOCA's or purple fringing.

I would not pay $500 more for it with better IS, it does not compete at that price. For its existing cost, its a good lens that allows those who are trying to save money to purchase. Many sports shooters turn off IS in any event, since it does not help with moving subjects.

+1

surapon · Jan 17, 2015

Click said:
Thanks for sharing Mr Surapon.

Have a great weekend Sir.

You are welcome, Sir, Dear Friend Mr. Click.
Glad that you like this DIY, Just 2 days ago that I think---And Build this One, Now, I will forget The Big Graslon, When I go aboards, and use this instead.
Yes, Sir. It very easy to carry on the airplane too, Just Flat Big Envelope.
Have a great weekend, Sir.
Surapon

Sebas · Jan 17, 2015

Hi,

I've got 2 of these Nssin Di866. Problem is : on the you tube video, under the TTl advance menu, 5 options are available including HSS. My flash and worst Nissin DI866 online manual mention only 2 options (Sub flash y M zoom). Any idea? I've updated the software but still...
Thanks for your help.

candyman · Jan 17, 2015

Some really excellent pictures! The 100-400mm with ext 1.4III looks to me as a wonderful combination to use

m8547 · Jan 16, 2015

According to the manual, the depth of field at 5x f/2.8 is 0.048mm, or 48µm.
http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Owners-Manuals/Canon-MP-E-65mm-1-5x-Macro-Lens.pdf

A human hair is 100µm on average. Some cells in your body are around 10-100µm. A sheet of paper is about 100µm thick. You'll probably want to use the highest possible F stop. I used one of these lenses once, and it was difficult. The challenge is getting enough light. I had a couple halogen lights several hundred watts each, and it wasn't nearly enough for good results. A newer camera with better high ISO capability would help.

Here's one of the photos. We were doing an experiment to see how much force ants feet could grip with. They have sticky pads that let them walk on smooth vertical surfaces, and they have rough hairs that let them grip uneven surfaces. The gray bar is a very tiny force sensor. The ants are held by tweezers, which don't harm them. The experiment wasn't very successful, but at least the eyes are somewhat in focus!

This was probably 1-3x zoom, 1/90s f/3.5 ISO1600 65mm with a Canon 30D. There wasn't enough light or DOF to zoom in more, and it became too difficult to get anything in focus or in the frame. At 5x on an APS-C camera, an object approx. 5mm × 3.3mm fills the frame.

Jan 16, 2015

I tried the L not long after it came out and was suitably impressed, it is a lovely lens!
However so is the non-L. IQ wise I could find no difference in real world usage, I shoot from a tripod so IS was of little consequence though the 3 position focus limited might be handy if and when I am not focusing manually (rare). The extra build quality is nice but it doesn't affect the images and 3rd party lens hoods (for the non-L) are cheap so no great advantage there.
If you are primarily shooting Macro from a tripod then I would (and did) go for the non-L version - it is simply excellent for the money. If you are doing more general photography and, especially, handheld Macro then the L is the better option in my opinion. They are both excellent lenses but the L version is more adaptable/versatile, the difference is not worth the price for my personal uses but it may well be for yours.

Shellbo6901 · Jan 16, 2015

Yea, I have the SD630, and have had this problem for the past 3 or so years, but the only reason I can't and don't use it is because of the batteries working for only a few photos

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics