Posts

hanifshootsphotos · Jun 11, 2014

wsmith96 said:
Canon has the 60D refurb on sale again and the price is such that it's calling my name. For those who own this camera, what do you think about it for $460 USD?

My usage would be for children's sports and general vacation type usage. I'm not shooting super models here.

-w

I've owned the 60D since 2012 without any major concerns, although I only have 2 qualms: lack of AFMA and high noise above ISO 800...otherwise a great body I currently own the 6D now but still use the 60D with good results!

wsmith96 · Jun 11, 2014

I've bought 2 canon refurb lenses - both were in new condition and I have not had an issue with them. Just bought a refurb body as well.

fragilesi · Jun 11, 2014

Guys, thanks to everyone who responded. All I can say is that you've given me exactly what I wanted which is a variety of insights and opinions and some ideas / combinations that I simply didn't think of plus the benefit of experience that I don't have for myself with these combos. I've read what everyone has said and can find few faults with it all.

What I would say is that if the 70-200 plus extender is not as good at the long end as the 70-300L as someone mentioned then it's not for me as most shots are at the very long end outdoors. I'm also very much hankering for that extra stop of light from the 135 for indoors. For example school plays my daughter is in.

The Tamron 150-600 calls to me, it really does, and I suspect that or the 400mm Canon could be next to tempt me once the piggy bank refills! I want to keep the 70-300 though.

One reason not mentioned much for not getting the 70-200 is that it is very "LOOK AT ME" and at family events etc like swimming galas or out and about I'm not sure I want that. I'd much rather my kit was subtler and more transportable to be honest so I can have a choice of lenses.

One day I will get the 70-200 I'm sure but to me I don't think I can lose. If I get the 70-200 I'll love the zoom but often as not regret the slower aperture on APS-C. If I get the 135 I'll love the extra stop of light and miss the zoom. Either way though I think I'll get much better pictures than today!

Thanks all!

PS Having re-read that it kind of sounds like I'm saying "Yeah I've listened to yer yacking on but I'm going to do what I first thought of anyway" . . . it's not meant to sound that way at all though ;D

Renaissance · Jun 10, 2014

Tried the Sony RX series, nex 6&7, the Fuji X-e2, x100s, and X-M1, finally just settled on the SL1

Saved me a bunch of money and still totally pleased with the results. My wife feels the same.
It'll be terrific until I get an SL2!

raptor3x · Jun 10, 2014

aznable said:
candyman said:

Looks like Sigma will have to deal with AF reports first and check this before release of the 85mm f/1.4 Art. This is not good advertisement for Sigma and their products.
My 50mm f/1.4 Art does not have AF problems. I am extremely happy with my copy.

Click to expand...

no one has problems with AF of this lens except the one that has a 1D series, like me

Yeah, I've found that the focus on the 5D3 is really excellent with the new sigma, but unfortunately pretty bad with the 1D3 and 1Ds3.

RunAndGun · Jun 10, 2014

Policar said:
Low budget indie crowd is generally shooting Alexa.

And major big studio features and major episodic TV shows and even TV feature pieces….

I would say you see way more RED's on indie set's and Alexa's on major Hollywood features and TV show

It may not be a 4K camera, but the Alexa is the digital workhorse of features and TV shows.

Mt Spokane Photography · Jun 10, 2014

wickidwombat said:
I still can't get over anyone liking the tamron 18 -270 ..... :-\

Kinda makes you wonder why buy a 6D, when just a good lens would be such a huge improvement.

Northstar · Jun 10, 2014

hangtime said:
And, just like that, I've taken it in for exchange. I really wanted to like the lens and not be "that guy" that is returning lenses because they're not sharp or whatever. But I took some photos of the moon last night (good tripod, 1/4s exposure, f/4, mirror lockup, 2s timer, IS off etc) and the stars showed some serious problems with coma or astigmatism with weird crescent shaped flares instead of points across the whole field of view. So, serenity shattered, it was returned this morning and I'm awaiting a replacement when stock arrives.

Sorry to waste everyone's time - I appreciate the advice.

you made the right choice to return it....for $2k, you should have a brand new 2014 manufactured lens, not one that is two years old and probably has been handled by dozens of people in the shop over the last two years.

Jun 10, 2014

1. To me 18MP is plenty - I wouldn't mind more but only if there was NO compromise in ISO performance.

2. I am not having issues with DR, more is obviously better just not a particular issue to me.

3. I am finding the usable ISO range on my 1DX great, again more would be better especially below ISO 50.

4. Mirroless cameras are of zero use to me. When they can AF fast, have a viewfinder/screen that I can use in real world lighting conditions, balance properly on large lenses and have a decent size battery - then I will be interested.

5. Switch brand? Only Nikon offers the sort of lens range that I mainly use - tried a couple (with D800e and D4) - staying with Canon for foreseeable future.

6. Don't find much use for IS on my 800mm F5.6 - on a wide angle? No thanks - it just adds another (dead) element that serves no purpose for me and IS slows down AF..

7. No idea - so long as it works I am happy!

8. DSLR's have Video?

9. Err no.

jrista · Jun 10, 2014

clicstudio said:
I've been asking the same question for years. It's funny that I was just about to start a thread bragging about the amazing HDR capabilities of the 5DIII…

I did a furniture shoot yesterday. I didn't take my 1DX. Instead I took my friend's 5DIII because it has in-camera HDR which WORKS… Unfortunately, this only works with a tripod. Since the camera takes 3 images and then combines them into one. Also, there is a little bit of cropping on the final image, so u always have to frame wider...

I also wish for the day my camera can see what my eyes see. Even the most expensive cameras can't capture a perfect sunset or a backlit portrait without a lot of tweaking…

Magic Lantern has a hack for the 5D and I think 7D that enhances the DR but it makes the image noisy.
My suggestion? Dual or triple Sensors. One for highlights and one for Shadows.

IF one sensor could be calibrated to "see" only the top range of light and the other the bottom, it could work…

I attached one image of yesterday's shoot. Taken with available light only… This photo would be IMPOSSIBLE with my 1DX. I am very impressed with it and it looks great. Check out the white curtain. U can see the trees outside and not a washed out 100% white curtain. and the detail of the orchids against the backlit. Also, no noise or distortion.
So, to the OP, get a 5DIII and a tripod and it will change the way u see things…

Technical info: 5DIII, Canon 24-70 F2.8L II, ISO 320, 28mm, F8.0, 1/20

Happy Shooting.

Wow. I want that house! NICE!!!

johnhenry · Jun 10, 2014

Makers for medium format IGNORE all the best glass produced by Zeiss since the 50's for the 'blad.

I have lens from 1957 that work just as well as my last lens, a 50mm FLE.

Make a drop in replacement for an A12 magazine that is digital, has at least 80% the size of 6X6 and works on a Hasselblad 500 series camera and a lot of people would pay for that

2n10 · Jun 10, 2014

jdramirez said:
2n10 said:

LOL, funny and unfortunately true. Someone has too much time on his hands or loves to ponder.

Click to expand...

I have a boring job and very few sexy co-workers to otherwise occupy my attention.

I know what you mean. It would make the job more enjoyable but completion dates would be seriously skewed.

Canon Rumors · Jun 10, 2014

HTML:

<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=16660"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=16660">Tweet</a></div>
Bryan over at <a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com" target="_blank">the-digital-picture</a> has completed his review of the Sigma 18-200 f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS lens. While Sigma has been releasing a lot of segment leaders in terms of image quality and pricing, this superzoom offers nothing the others out there already do. While it’s as good as other superzoom lenses and is priced quite well, it’s not a stellar lens optically. That being said, we’d probably take this lens over the Canon offering.</p>
<p><strong>From TDP

</strong><em><span style="color: #222222;">“While the Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM C Lens has an excellent range of focal lengths in a small, lightweight package that doesn’t hurt the wallet, I have trouble getting excited about the image quality this lens and any of the other superzooms deliver. Everyone has their own values, and with this lens, Sigma is targeting those placing a high value on convenience and budget. The Sigma 18-200 C is one of the best choices among the APS-C superzooms.”</span></em><strong>

</strong></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-18-200mm-f-3.5-6.3-DC-Macro-OS-HSM-Lens.aspx" target="_blank">Read the full review</a> | <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1023565-REG/sigma_885_101_18_200mm_f_3_5_6_3_dc_macro.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">Sigma 18-200 f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS at B&H Photo</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">c</span>r</strong></p>

2n10 · Jun 10, 2014

I agree very interesting. I noted that the wildlife folks had pretty much the same lens recommendations. The motorsports shooter gave just about the same recommendations also. I could see the 200-400 as being a favorite due to the extender and the weight savings in travel offered by a zoom tele.

Skywise · Jun 10, 2014

Well I just tried the "manual cleaning" trick as seen here:

http://wiegaertnerfilms.com/blog/tutorials/how-to-fix-a-hot-or-dead-pixel-canon-7d-5d-550d-600d-60d/

And that seems to have resolved it for now.

I'm not opposed to doing that if I need to but it's impossible to see those dead pixels on the back screen and now I've got a trip full of videos that have stuck pixels and I'm nervous it's going to happen to me again. :/

pato · Jun 10, 2014

If you want to get one step further, buy an underwater casing. They don't mind sand and allow you to put the camera on the sand. Just make sure to rinse and towel the case first before you open it (in the hotel room)!

Halfrack · Jun 10, 2014

Might consider the 4x4 CP or LP filter as well. How many filters are you going to combine the polarizer with? How wide of a lens are you going to use this with?

I know, so much money, and no one carries them on hand. I got the 105mm holder for my Hitech 4x4 stuff, but returned it since when I want to go wide, I really need the 130/150mm stuff.

lintoni · Jun 9, 2014

Re: The Person Behind \

mackguyver said:
R.I.P. Fake Chuck. He and his dirty yet hilarious posts will be missed.

I didn't even know about the blog until today, and have wasted several hours reading it today.

sdsr · Jun 9, 2014

sdsr said:
On the off-chance anyone reading this cares, my 10-18mm arrived today. Just for the heck of it, to test it out I attached it to my Sony a6000 rather than my SL1 and was pleasantly surprised to see that, even though it's a new lens, the Metabones EF-Nex adapter provides full support for it - AF works even though it doesn't with many older EF lenses (it seems a bit faster with EF-S lenses than with EF), as do aperture control, IS and (I expect) exif data. Given the difference in crop factor, this makes the lens a tad wider/shorter. I look forward to trying it later on my SL1.

I don't want to get into the "who needs IS on a wide lens" debate, and I've so far not had a chance to look at any of the photos I've taken except by zooming in on the camera's monitor, but so far the IS seems impressive - I took a string of photos in a rather dark space with the lens wide open, set the ISO at 400, and obtained images that, without exception, look sharp at 1/8s.

If the camera's monitor isn't too misleading, this lens may be the ridiculous bargain of the year.

(It will be interesting to see whether it can be used on an A7/r similar to the Sony equivalent.)

Update - at 10mm on an a6000 you don't get 15mm equiv. unless you don't mind the fact that the extreme corners are too dark to remedy (well, maybe with a lot of fiddling that may not be worth the effort). And unlike the Sony equivalent, it doesn't work at all as any sort of ff camera on an A7r; so much for that, then. But otherwise, it works just fine on an a6000 - no extreme corner problems after 10mm, and the image quality is impressive. I look forward to trying it on my SL1....

Click · Jun 9, 2014

Thanks for a good laugh ;D

Pieces Of E · Jun 9, 2014

The lens is light and superb. The noise the IS makes is neglible and won't scare off anything you're shooting either.

mackguyver · Jun 9, 2014

Stig, that sounds like a nice set if it's been taken care of and can be had for a good price. Florescents are great for studios where you can control all of the ambient light (i.e. make it very dark inside) but are too weak for most settings and are really more for the video guys, at least for now. HMI lighting is what the Hollywood types use and is very hot and very expensive...but some high end photographers use them as well.

Strobes are the best choice unless portability is a concern (especially air travel), and then flashes/speedlites are the way to go.

wickidwombat · Jun 9, 2014

totally different lenses
what exactly is the nikon 70-300 lens?
is it a nikkor do you have more info
the D80 was a pretty good camera

the old canon 18-55 is crap and basically worthless as far as value goes you can buy them for almost nothing
pretty much the same for the nikon kit lens too

why are you limiting yourself to those options

for $350
this kills both those options a million times over as the glass is pretty damn good much better than the old 18-55 canon lens or the old nikkor one too.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1040896-GREY/canon_eos_m_ml_camera_18_55.html
and its brand new and magic lantern works on it to give tons of extra features

GMCPhotographics · Jun 9, 2014

Random Orbits said:
mackguyver said:

GMCPhotographics said:

My advice was to buy the new one outright, compared them and then sell the f2.8....but I guess this advice is a little late now!

Click to expand...

That was my plan, too, but I thought I'd go ahead and get my lens out there before eBay is saturated with them. With 3 days left in the auction, my lens is at $1085 with 12 watchers, so I think I've timed it well. Also, when I get the new lens, I'd rather be using it instead of shooting comparison photos . If the lens isn't amazing, I'll just return it and use my TS-E 17 until the 14-24 f/2.8 or whatever comes out.

P.S. Okay, I admit that I might have to indulge in a few 16-35 f/4 IS vs. TS-E 17 f/4 comparisons...

Click to expand...

The 16-35L f/2.8 II market has softened quite a bit already. I got mine used about 2 years ago for about 1200 (lens, caps and hood only) when most of used copies were going for 1300, and I sold mine on eBay for 1150 (even with 30+ watchers). I tracked a few others before selling mine and they were going in the 1150-1250 (with box, pouch, etc.) range unless scammers were involved (i.e. 0 feedback accounts bidding the prices up).

Ideally, I think I would have preferred a 16-35 f/2.8 III to the 16-35 f/4 IS if it is at least as good as the 16-35 f/4 IS's MTFs. I tried the 24, 28 and 35 IS, and I don't find the IS as useful at these shorter focal lengths, but the 16-35 f/4 IS looks so much better than the 16-35 II that I'm switching now and am willing to lose the 10-20% of the price until the 16-35 f/2.8 II's replacement comes to market, whenever that may be.

Of the 10+ lens I have bought, this is the first that I've ever ordered before it was widely available and reviews were already out. I blame the Canon store's error in giving 125 off the new lens price for my hastiness/impulsiveness. ;D

@GMCPhotographics: I agree that the used market prices for the 16-35 II won't change much now. I've been considering selling the 16-35 II for months, especially after snagging a refurbed Zeiss 21. If canon can design the 16-35 f/2.8 III as good as the 16-35 f/4 IS with good coma control wide open, then I'll be looking to the 16-35 f/2.8 III to replace both the 16-35 and the Zeiss 21.

It's too bad Canon couldn't stretch the 16-35 f/4 IS to be a 16-40 design. All this typing to distinguish between the 16-35 f/2.8, 16-35 f/2.8 II, 16-35 f/4 IS and the 16-35 f/2.8 II replacement (III?) is going to be a pain!

The 17-40L was expanded at the long end so that it could perform two specific roles. An ultra wide zoom for the full framers and die hard film users. Full frame digital users were very few in those days when this lens was released. The other crowd was the other 99.9% of Canon DSLR users who were mostly 1.6x crop users. This lens predates the EF-s mount. It was envisioned as a cost effective standard lens range for those users (28-65mm effective). The only other option was the very expensive 16-35L and out of the pocket for most users....so much has changed! In those days, Canon saw the 1.6x crop as a temporary thing and had a plan to make their entire range full frame within 10 years. When Canon saw that many users liked the 1.6x crop, they backtracked and started to develop the ef-s mount and lenses. So the long term future of the 17-40L has always been questionable. I'm sure Canon has thought...hmmm, 17-40 f4L needs replacing and it's original mandate is no longer valid....so lets start with a blank sheet of paper...an ultra wide f4 lens...lets make it a 16-35mm with an IS unit....yeah that'll work well.

2n10 · Jun 9, 2014

Great review. Sounds like an excellent lens to recommend to beginners to see if they will want/need such a lens as the grow in the hobby.

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics