Posts

tayassu · Nov 23, 2014

This is from the Camera Store: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=H2ljRc-glN4

And this is Jared Polin: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UX6gK0bkq3g

Triggyman · Nov 22, 2014

Thanks, Viggo.

Well I got home with a replacement lens - the store manager told me she gets the same concerns mostly for the 24-70 II (since it relatively costs more than any other standard zoom) - normally she reserves their right to refuse returns or exchanges but since I was not happy with the lens and one of their rental lenses had been damaged beyond repair by a customer, she offered an exchange. She showed me a Nikon 24-70 that had a louder click similar to my canon 24-70 II but still works flawlessly, so I don't know what to make of it. The same thing: put the lens upside down, no click. Upright: it clicks.

The new lens's zoom ring is stiff and makes that "safe lock combination" clicking sound, and I'm back to square one testing the IQ and focus. I hope I don't get two clicks next time LOL.

On a side note: The 16-35 f4L IS I played around with at the store was awesome. Never ends!

Marauder · Nov 22, 2014

Thanks for sharing, it's a good review. Now I'm off to read the one at The Digital Picture, which is the one I've been most anxious to read!

Koemans · Nov 22, 2014

keithfullermusic said:
So, I have have two Bowens 500R studio lights. They are rated at 15Ws-500Ws over 5 stops. But what exactly does that mean?

To me I'm guessing that every time a turn it up a stop, it doubles the Ws - but I might be wrong. I would think that it actually has 6 stops which go as follows:

1 - 15Ws
2 - 30Ws
3 - 60Ws
4 - 120Ws (roughly 125)
5 - 240Ws (roughly 250)
6 - 480Ws (roughly 500)

I should also note that I have two dials:

The first is for complete stops (1-5)
The second is for 1/10th stops (0-1)

It actually goes up to 6 (the full stop dial turned to 5, and the 1/10 dial turned up to +1.0), so did Bowens list that incorrectly?

THEN, that leads to my next question - how much dimmer are the 400W and 250W lights? Is the 400W less that 1 stop at full power compared to the 500W, and is the 250W exactly one stop less than the 500W at full power?

I only ask because I'm looking to get a two more lights, and I want to keep my options open. Thanks.

I have a bowens 250watt with a large travelpack kit.

You have 5 stops of power control since it starts at 1.0
Altho the 500watts kits are cheaper, it will give you far less control in areas with not much room available, especially on location.
It is a fools mistake to think more watts are better. Unless you want to Fry insects from 20 meters or you want to make classroom photos, go for a 250watt kit. 250watt also Works longer on location with the travelpack

And btw, it Works a bit different with strobes thanf-stops on a camera. It is just 500 watt split over 5 stops. What i am trying to say is : use a lightmeter to save time

Your calculations appear to be correct, the official specs say the range is 15-500ws

Snapper02 · Nov 22, 2014

Bennymiata said:
Try setting your flash to strobe (high speed flash).
With the 7D2's 10fps, you'll get plenty of good shots.

I need the flash to shut down and allow the camera to auto bracket based on the choices I've made. HS sync won't work. I shot this morning and I had to remove the flash from the camera and the tripod was a must which makes thing very slow and kludgy.

Sporgon · Nov 22, 2014

justsomedude said:
Sporgon said:

Agree with what has been said so far in response to the comparison; this is not a valid test - unless you are aiming to show the 7DII is better.

1: As has been said, the 24-105L at 100mm and f4.5 does not have the same sharpness and contrast as the 70-200ii f2.8 at 100mm at f2.8.

2: You shot the 5DIII at ISO 3200 at 1/125 with a focal length of 100mm, so at best for critical sharpness you were probably dependant on the efficiency of the image stabilisation. You shot the 7DII at ISO 2500 at 1/250 at 100mm, so much less dependant on the IS.

3: You shot the 5DIII at f4.5, the 7DII at f2.8 in relatively dim light, so the 7DII had over twice the (volume) of light reaching the sensor than (the crop area of ) the 5DIII. ( Bearing in mind exposure is calculated on light density, not quantity).

These three points are why you obtained the result you did.

Click to expand...

1. I disagree that the 24-105 f/4.5L is any less sharp than the 70-200 f2.8L (Mark I) at 100mm. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=355&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=1&LensComp=103&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0

2 & 3. And yes, in my initial post I noted that I would have preferred to compare the same lenses side by side, with the same settings. This was more of an "after the fact" attempt to compare images, as I wasnt planning this review during the shoot. In a next step, I will definitely be comparing the same lenses with the same camera settings.

Thanks for the input! It definitely helps with future videos and reviews, so I can provide better data.

Two apologise; just re read this and I see I didn't realise you were using the mki version of the 70-200/2.8 IS. Agreed, in the centre at these apertures the 24-105 is equal, possibly a tad better.

Also ignore my point 3, I think I must have been working on you having a longer focal length at f2.8. (The longer the lens the greater the volume of light that passes for a given aperture. So in this situation you would have been much better to use the 5DIII with the 70-200 @200, @f2.8, because although exposure remains the same, you would have had a much greater volume of light in your shot.)

I think we are really looking at point 2. 1/125 at 100 mm is risky for critical sharpness, 1/250 is much safer.

surapon · Nov 22, 2014

Dear Friends
Yes, These beautiful Thanksgiving Cactus in my Sun Room/ Solarium are full Bloom this morning. By Canon EOS 7D MK II, and Canon Lens EF 100 mm. F/ 2.8 L IS USM., Hand Held Shooting.
Enjoy.
Surapon

PS. Thousand Thanks to come to see this Album.

nc0b · Nov 21, 2014

A few things I forgot to mention. The altitude was a non-issue since we live in Denver at 5200 feet. Only got a little winded hoofing it up to the little "house" way up top. Since my wife has some mobility limitations and used two walking sticks, we hired a private guide who could adjust to our pace. He was fantastic and gave oodles of historical information. He even knew how to use manual focus to take our inverted picture in the reflecting water mirror. His English skills were top notch. For 150 Soles ($50 US dollars) having a private guide was a bargain.

The buses ran every few minutes, as fast as they could load them. We stayed in Aguascalientes so an early bus was no problem. On the way back the bus let us off at the museum which had a good number of interesting artifacts. The botanic gardens, unfortunately, were a disappointment. The walk back to town was about 30 minutes.

ahsanford · Nov 21, 2014

dgatwood said:
If you get the chance, there's a bridge across between the north and south rims with an old bridge next to it that they've converted into a pedestrian bridge. Besides being able to say that you walked across the canyon, you might also get to shoot some pictures of whitewater rafters down below.

No GC this trip, unfortunately, but we'll check it out next time we go. We're in Southern California, so it's easy to come back to this part of the country when it's warmer or when we have more time to spend.

- A

Marsu42 · Nov 21, 2014

bebestylee said:
Many Thanks!

Lookie here, it's only 4 posts below :-> ... http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=23764.0

TLN · Nov 21, 2014

Hi all.

I don't know how this math works, but I live in Kazakhstan and we have a Sigma 35/1.4 for $830 and Sigma 50/1.4 Art for $830. Seller is grey market, but that's not a problem.
Typically you get the lowest price in US on almost everything, and I cannot get how do those dealers sell Art primes for $830 and having profit from that.

I believe they get stuff from Japan and get really sweet price from currency exchanges. This means there are even better prices for Sigmas somewhere.

Any ideas?

And, btw, this prices are 100% legal, my friend bought both of this from them, and really happy.

alexanderferdinand · Nov 21, 2014

35mm on FF or equivalent 23mm on my Fujis.

distant.star · Nov 20, 2014

.
Interesting tech piece on new polarizing material that transmits substantially more light...

http://www.rdmag.com/news/2014/11/novel-polarizing-filter-transits-more-light

wsmith96 · Nov 20, 2014

and some more...

lo lite · Nov 20, 2014

For those pixelpeepers and digital noise addicts amongst us:

http://www.clarkvision.com/reviews/evaluation-canon-7dii/index.html

Cosmicbug · Nov 20, 2014

Hello All,
I've used my 7D for five years and other than the high ISO noise issue, I've been very happy with it's performance. In particular when shooting birds with my 400 f5.6.
I see from the specifications that the mk2 is mostly an incremental increase in performance, ie more Af points, more FPS, slight improvement in high ISO IQ etc.
For those of you who have made the jump from 7D to the mk2, could you enlighten me on the areas where you have noted a major improvement and areas which have fallen short of expectation. Please comment on IQ, handling, features and durability.
I'm about to buy mine and really hope it will be a change without reservation.

Thank you.

mnclayshooter · Nov 20, 2014

thanks for all of the input/suggestions.

I have the CapturePRO clips in hand now. Going to test them out this weekend, hopefully. We'll see how it goes.

ahsanford · Nov 20, 2014

Halfrack said:
Check out the WonderPana system - it has a CPL and isn't extremely expensive. The thing is that the WonderPana also has the adapter rings to get down to 77/82mm.

I'm also invested in the Lee 100mm stuff, and I think my general point is this kickstarter doesn't do a good job of telling me why I want their product.

This new idea is wretched on a boatload of fronts -- there's no value proposition and no details, so we are left to speculate. Best I can tell, it's a price-undercut of the $400 SW150 holder with a push-on functionality (and I had to guess that from the video). I have no need for this.

The very next day, this link surfaced and broadly blew my original link's idea out of the water:

http://petapixel.com/2014/11/17/cheaper-filter-holder-nikon-14-24mm-f2-8-created-3d-printing/

It's another SW150 killer (price-wise), but clearly further along in the design and at a much more manageable cost.

- A

Quasimodo · Nov 20, 2014

To answer my own question. I went to a professional photostore (mainly for professionals) and we tried to find a solution, but alas, seems Canon will not allow it in the software. I ended up buying six PW plus X, and a Sekonic chip for my 758 Cine, and it works like a charm

mackguyver · Nov 20, 2014

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
Reviews in the pipeline: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART (next week), Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar T, Metz 64 AF-1 flash units, Vanguard ABEO Pro 283AT + GH-300T head, Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4, Canon 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 STM, and Zeiss 50mm f/2 Makro-Planar.

Not much going on in your world is there

. Just kidding of course and thanks for the nice review (as usual). It seems to match what Roger at LensRentals and others have said. Also, as an owner of the Canon TS-E 24 f/3.5 II, I had to chuckle a bit about the lens hood comments. The one Canon supplies serves little purpose other than to take up lots of room in your bag

symmar22 · Nov 20, 2014

Nothing very new here, it's just an ALPA architecture camera (the same have been existing with MF film backs, for decades). They just added a digital MF back. If one want to call it mirrorless....

Basically, all view cameras are mirrorless, since the 19° century. The ALPA / Phase One combination is nevertheless a wonderful tool for architecture, for the ones who can afford it.

rs · Nov 20, 2014

rrcphoto said:
lintoni said:

rs said:

Also the back focus of just 3.26mm means its not even EF-S, as that has a 44.0mm flange distance and a mirror box to clear.

This appears to be an EF-M lens.

Click to expand...

+1 I don't think it's a coincidence that this patent coincides with rumours of a new EOS-M.

Click to expand...

kind of moronic because there's already an exceptional 11-22mm EF-M out there.

Moronic or not, read the patent. How can it mount onto a DSLR with that BF?

Please remember that just because there is a patent, it doesn't mean this lens will become a production reality.

Hjalmarg1 · Nov 20, 2014

Really good information here but seems to be too complex. I am happy cameras have very smart algoritms.

dash2k8 · Nov 19, 2014

I would say get the Canon 135. Cheaper and very little discernible difference in performance (pixel-peepers need not apply).

East Wind Photography · Nov 19, 2014

GraFax said:
Decided I'm keeping the 7D2 so I unwrapped the new LP-E6n battery. At first my Watson Duo charger refused to recognize it but after charging for a bit on the LC-E6? I was able to get it going on the Watson. Anyway, man that thing is slow taking a charge. My canon LP-E6 has gone from 45-95% in the same amount of time as the LP-E6n has gone from 45-65%. Hope that improves with recharges.

Let us know how that goes. I think it may also be the same issue as when the batt drains. The charger needs to learn the charge rate after several cycles. The new batts are higher capacity but not that much higher.

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics