Posts

CaptainZero · Jan 3, 2015

I need, well...wanted a 7d2. I bought from a local dealer, but I wanted to get it before the new year so I could write it off.

I took the poll before reading so I picked two. None of them really fit my situation.

Tinky · Jan 3, 2015

thanks for the input, the aps-c point was never up for discussion, I find 5d's horrible to shoot with, the 5d2 was too wobbly, the 5d3 too soft, and if you want to shoot interviews the reduced dof is impossible to work with, I find, but thanks for the affirmation.

Warming to the m idea. I'll decide whether to buy another couple and dedicate them to ML just for timelapse...

The 4k thing. Yep. I had a z1 for 4 years before anybody asked me for HD (Thank god, as the z1 wasn't really HD) and had moved onto xdcamhd eng's by then... I'm holding fire on it for now, as I just don't understand where people are watching it (never fully bought the 1080 cropping argument especially for line skipping cameras)

Thanks for the SJBR's so far.

dgatwood · Jan 3, 2015

East Wind Photography said:
Actually having torn a couple similar lenses apart. It takes a considerable amount of time to diagnose the problem, tear it down, replace the bad module, then reassemble the elements...keeping it all clean...then recollimating the optics again. It's not something you can just replace like a set of spark plugs.

I think 400.00 to fix it is quite reasonable for employing someone as specialized as they are to do it right. I personally would not attempt it even if I had a great YouTube video showing me how. The specialized tools and knowledge to do it correctly would cost more than the repair.

Unreasonable? Perhaps not. But the labor market isn't that different between Canada and the U.S. (in part because it is relatively easy for workers to move back and forth between them), so I'd expect the labor cost to be about the same (unless Canon put their repair center in the middle of Silicon Valley).

krisbell · Jan 3, 2015

Thanks for the input Gary - if nothing else it makes me feel better that I am not being completely incompetent. I guess it is just something that even the big whites struggle with. I have tried all the suggestions above and I'm still not getting anything better than a 10% hit rate (if that). For what its worth I also used to avoid any sort of backlighting but now believe that when done well it can produce more impressive and striking images than any front-lit subject.

tron · Jan 3, 2015

hello,

FYI: I came across the following:

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=14229.0

There is NOTHING at Canon's site though...

bdunbar79 · Jan 2, 2015

Well, to be honest with you guys, I'm not sure. I haven't had any events where I've needed it yet :-[

On the other hand I have a later development. I noticed with the SAME camera my 70-200 f/2.8L II IS lens has been front-focusing in basketball. Could be a problem with the camera and that is on its way to Canon.

I shot some night soccer with the 400 lens after I got it back and it worked fine; had no focus errors but that wasn't in bright sunny light where I had had trouble.

Now though, it could have been the camera all along. We'll see, the story continues.

By the way, I have a 2nd 1Dx where I keep the other lens but upon trying both cameras, the front-focusing problems have all been on the one particular camera.

zlatko · Jan 2, 2015

Terry Rogers said:
My question is this, is it really worth it? Is the IQ of a top quality rangefinder system with a couple lenses so much better that it justifies the hefty price tag? I know such a question is rather subjective (is it worth it), and different photographers have different needs. And what is good enough for one photographer is not good enough for another. But still, subjectively, is it really worth the added price?

The answer is entirely subjective. I would say the answer is "yes" if all of these are true for you:

1) you specifically want to use a high quality manual focus full-frame rangefinder camera with a system of very high quality, very small lenses;
2) you can afford it; and
3) you can put up with the issues associated with a relatively low volume hand-crafted product, such as slow repair times.

In most cases, it's about the whole package, that is, the experience of using the system, not the specific difference in image quality. That said, a lens like the 50mm f/2 Summicron-M is amazingly sharp wide open at f/2, not to mention the $8K APO version. Likewise, a lens like the 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M is amazingly sharp wide open at f/1.4. Canon doesn't currently offer a 50mm that is as good wide open. On the other hand, the newish Canon 35/2 IS is probably as good as the Leica 35/2 Summicron-M, and is much cheaper albeit much bigger.

docsmith · Jan 2, 2015

Thanks for the offer Sanj.

I also have the 150-600S (and shot with the 5DIII). I have been using it for a month. Once you get used to the weight (about 2-3 times out shooting with it), I have become more and more impressed with it as a lens.

But I do wonder about IQ and AF speed with the 1.4x TC. I currently only have the 2x III. I am considering getting either Canon's or Sigma's 1.4xTC if I start hearing reports that the IQ and AF are good. Thus far, I have heard one such report. So, I would love to hear your opinion.

Thanks

monkey44 · Jan 2, 2015

CLohmeyerJr said:
Valvebounce said:

Hi Charles.
That looks like a big improvement, I'd speculate that you are
A, very very close to having the camera "dialled in"
B, much happier with the sharpness issue you have going on here! ;D
By the way, Nice shot.

Cheers, Graham.

Click to expand...

I agree with the '7D2 chose higher ISO than necessary' ... at first, that seemed what it was choosing every time, the highest (rather than best) ISO and SS ... whenever I chose AV. And, was getting 'good shots', but not 'best shots' for the conditions. I switched to max 1600 ISO, and then most often choose ISO and then the settings according to the conditions. Got a lot of shots like I intended once I took away the auto ISO feature. I did not have this problem with the 7D ... I've only had the 7D2 out to really work it a few times tho', so lots to figure out on this camera still. Sure do like it tho' ...

I am much happier with the camera but still need further adjustments.
I find it interesting that on the old 7D I was able to freeze the majority of the wing action with 1/100 shutter speed. With the same setting on the 7D II I have a lot more motion blur so I am trying 1/1250 next time out.
The biggest challenge is with ISO. On the old 7D I used auto ISO and it worked 90% of the time. With the 7D II it tends to use a higher ISO than necessary and a lot of my shots are over exposed. I am going back to full manual and setting the ISO as I can recover much more out of an under exposed photo compared to what I am getting today.

I still have not done a micro adjustment as I think I am going to buy the new 100 - 400 and will just have that one adjusted.

surapon · Jan 2, 2015

Thousand Thanks to all of my dear Friends, Your answer of my post = Make my day with a big smile on my face.
Atleast, We all have FUN to think about this tropic.
Have a Happy New Year 2015, Sir/ Madam.
Surapon

NancyP · Jan 2, 2015

Thanks, raptor, for the very interesting article. I missed it the first time around.

Policar · Jan 1, 2015

Tugela said:
TPLS said:

Hello guys and gals.

In last couple of weeks I was trying to decide which camera to buy. 6D or 5D Mark III.

My primary job is filmmaking (music videos, short movies, documentary, webisodes, etc.).

It's easy to say, let's go and buy Mark III, but at this very moment I need to think about price and all. In a way, is it really good to put that amount of money (difference is around 1300$) in Mark III or maybe 6D is just enough for the most of work I will do.

And for how long I can be satisfied with those cameras? (in a way, I could work with those bodies in next 3-5 years...)

Cheers!

Click to expand...

If you are interested in a DSLR for film making you would be much better off with a GH4, NX1 or A7s than with either the 5D3 or 6D.

In terms of image quality alone, yes. In terms of buying into a system that's easy to use and doesn't require awkward adapters and difficulty interfacing with other Canon shooters, no.

But I agree. The A7S (other than its brutal skew) is quite a beast. The GH4 with XLR module (other than its poor low light and small sensor) is great, too.

I would still recommend a used C100, used FS100, or used AF100. But between 6D and 5D Mark III, 5D Mark III for sure!

LDS · Jan 1, 2015

LesC said:
I'm presuming a WA adaptor would be best/essential? Standard adaptor would cause vignetting?

I prefer to keep a UV filter on my lenses so would ideally fit a Hoya Pro-1D to the lens & then the adaptor ring - with a WA adaptor would I get any vignetting with a Lee 2-slot holder & 105mm ring fitted?

Lee site says the standard rings are good from "24-28 onwards", thereby you could experience some vignetting, especially on a full frame.

I do use the WA adaptor, and I do remove the UV filter, even it it's a "slim" B+W, when using the Lee adaptor. Never tried with the filter mounted to see if it vignettes - but it is also true I use it most of the time on a 16-35, not the 24-70. Especially if you plan to buy something below 24mm, get the WA one.

Anyway, IMHO when using filters is better to use the minimum necessary, even if they are high quality coated ones, the more you use, the more the image quality may suffer.

TeT · Jan 1, 2015

send it to canon.

sounds like hard enough impact to jiggle the insides.

AlexB · Jan 1, 2015

Thanks everybody, you've been of great help.

I'm now pretty much set on going with the 70-300L. I decided that the extra reach is worth it, and I prefer a more compact lens over a slightly lighter one for carrying around in my backpack. Will try it without the collar first and see how it balances on my tripod.

Someone mentioned that they don't like this lens because it extends and have a variable aperture. I can understand that, but for my application and use I don't think it will be an issue.

Thanks again
- Alex

J.R. · Jan 1, 2015

hoodlum said:
Bryan has posted the final review.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-100-400mm-f-4.5-5.6-L-IS-II-USM-Lens.aspx

Thanks!

User experience is pretty much the same across the board and Bryan sums it up beautifully with the following lines -

The new lens is completely redesigned and offers many advantages (many I've already discussed in this review), but image quality is the biggest. The difference in image quality between these two lenses, especially at wide open apertures, is significant. Also significantly improved is the image stabilization system (4 stops vs. 2) and the rotational zoom is my preference to the previous model's push-pull design. The new lens focuses much closer with a significantly higher maximum magnification ratio.

slclick · Dec 31, 2014

Just got an email from Esther at Profeel, they will have it in a day or two.

FTb-n · Dec 31, 2014

neuroanatomist said:
EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS as a landscape and walkaround lens. Another option would be the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6, either will give you L-series optical quality in a more useful focal range for APS-C (24mm on APS-C is normal, not wide angle; personally I prefer a faster aperture, especially on APS-C).

For portraits, the EF 85mm f/1.8 – IMO, it has about the best IQ per dollar value in the Canon lineup. I liked mine so well I replaced it with the EF 85mm f/1.2L II, and liked that so much that after adding a FF camera to my kit, I bought the EF 135mm f/2L (which is the FF equivalent of 85/1.2 on crop).

Also, if you'll shoot indoor portraits be sure to add an external flash, 430EX II or better so you have sufficient power and can tilt/rotate the head to bounce the flash off a ceiling or wall.

+1

Before going FF, the 17-55 f2.8 IS and 70-200 f2.8L II IS were my staples for crop -- the short zoom on a 60D and the long zoom on the 7D. I would strongly recommend the 17-55 as your "normal" lens and starter lens.

The 24-xxx lenses are great on FF, but have a more limited range on crop. In many cases, they either aren't quite wide enough or they aren't quite long enough. You may find yourself changing lenses more often.

Keep in mind that small DOF is harder to achieve with crop bodies. You need faster lenses and/or longer lenses for subject isolation. If portraiture is a big interest, you may either want longer lenses at 2.8 (the 70-200 works well here) or faster "short" teles, like the 85 f1.8 or 100 f2.0 -- both good lenses and both relatively cheap.

Another lens to consider as a "normal" prime is the 35 f2.0 IS. I've kept my 60D and 7D and like this lens with these bodies. It's very good in low light with the added benefit of IS and slow shutter speeds.

It's easy and tempting to enumerate the lenses that "you need to get", but the best advice I was given was to wait until you have an identified need before investing in new gear. Don't upgrade unless your current gear is holding you back. With this in mind, pick one lens to start with (and I would recommend the 17-55). But, don't assemble your "kit" with a single purchase. Build it over time. You will likely find that your actual usage will vary widely from your anticipated need.

Good luck and have fun with the 7D2!!

tpatana · Dec 31, 2014

Good to hear. If Canon/Sigma learns about the problem, most likely they'll fix that in coming FW update.

brad-man · Dec 31, 2014

chrysoberyl said:
The tripod is a Gitzo GT1542T Traveler and the maximum load will be 3 kg. I will greatly appreciate any feedback!

John

I actually have both ballheads in question (as well as the Gitzo). They will both lock up solid. The Markins is much smoother and locks up with less force than the RRS at the ballhead end. The panning locks are a different matter. They are both smooth, but the RRS locks up much easier than the Markins. You decide which is more important to you.

NancyP · Dec 31, 2014

I see nothing surprising about Samyang adding a 135 to its stable of manual focus lenses for video enthusiasts and even stills shooters. I am still using, via adapter, an old AIS Nikkor 105 f/2.5 manual lens on my 6D. Excellent color and contrast, but it does have a bit of chromatic aberration in the corners. I very much enjoy my Samyang 14mm, which is focused via magnified live view for landscape and does splendidly.

tron · Dec 31, 2014

Mt Spokane Photography said:
If you move the card between cameras, then you should delete it first, or info about image numbers, etc will be transferred to images with the second cameras. The camera will recreate it, and start numbering images from 0001.

We often see posts from users who bought a new camera, and popped in the card from their old camera. They see image 7033 or some high number appear, and think they bought a used camera. Some users do not move cards between cameras in order to prevent the issue.

Me included! :-[ (I saw 500+)

But, many shots later I installed ML and saw the shutter count being around 100.

So it was new. No harm done ;D

Lnguyen1203 · Dec 31, 2014

I have been on safari twice, one in Tazania/Kenya and 1 in Botswana. I had with me

1DX on 500f4 plus 1.4x and 2X
5D3 with 70-300 on first trip, swapped out with 70-200f2.8 second trip
24-70

For birds, 500 is OK, often used with TCs.
70-200f2.8 is great for night drive and close shots
Didn't use the 24-70 very much, got a few keepers. You really need a very experienced guide to get close enough for it.

Next trip I will add the 100-400 mark II. Just got it and used it on my dog running at the beach. Great lens. Should be good on safari.

Loi

jdramirez · Dec 31, 2014

So here are a few shots... I might give myself a passing grade... might...

R1-7D · Dec 30, 2014

How does this area look on other 1DX owners' cameras?

I'm still curious to hear others' opinions too.

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics