mrsfotografie said:

That's three separate posts on your trip to Namibia so far... :

By the way, while you were there did you rent a quad bike in Swakopmund? it's a cool adventure

Click to expand...

Yip, one has to generate traffic somehow! No I didn't do the quads but went fishing with a pro and previously sand boarding which was great! Will post all the details in future...wait till you see my pics of the dunes and deadvlei!

Re: 7D Mark II: Could it be with a FOVEON?

Diko said:

Marsu42 said:

Yeah, right, I'm sure it's a completely different sensor that just happens to have the same resolution :->

Click to expand...

Well how about that? And McDonalds and Korea both use red as primary colour ergo McDonalds is a communistic company? ;-)

Click to expand...

My thinking is that it would really be a sensor tech, Canon would take the opportunity to go to 24mp. This isn't much more in terms of resulting resolution, but it would be important for marketing vs. Nikon/Sony - and Canon seldom neglects that.

LetTheRightLensIn said:

Now I did manage to tripod a couple different exposures for this one, but with the wind, lots of little stuff, especially the highlighted maple in the center moved around too much, so now it's a long process of just painting in the parts of the stable trunks that I can. As a single shot it could be processed a bit better with a ton of careful selective NR and so on, but it still won't be all that great and that is a lot of time wasted and not on anything remotely fun.

Click to expand...

High dynamic range scenes with movement (i.e. you cannot bracket or only with composite shots) is exactly what Magic Lantern's dual_iso module is for - it boosts your dr to nearly 15 stops. Why not use it?

Nobody "knows" anything about the next 7D, not a feature and not a release date. If you're under NDA with Canon you're not going to give it away I promise you. All we're doing here is speculation. We are speculating what the next 7D should be like. For fun. It's an 18MP sensor therefore we speculate it will increase like every new generation to 20 or 24. It does 8fps therefore we speculate the next step is 10 fps. It has an excellent 19 Point Af system sp we speculate it will get the next best in the line-up, the 61 point AF. We speculate of course it will get the new DPAF technology as the 70D, and of course better video features, and new 5D3 menus and other upgrades. However this ALL just speculation, no one actually knows what the 7D will be like apart from Canon itself.

To sum up the hard inside-information we've got so far:

-20.2MP as in 70D, and 20.2MP with New Sensor Tech. and 24MP with or without New Sensor Tech.
-10 fps, and 12fps
-61 point AF, and 65 point AF
-It will have Wifi and GPS, and not
-It will have the 1D top plate, and not
-It will have an integrated grip, and not
-It will be announced on Sep. 5th. and 15th.

You get my point. It's all user speculation of what the next step from the 7D should/could be, and some of the speculation will probably materialize in the final product. Only Canon knows what will be in the next 7D, and if contains any surprises.
Some things like new sensor technology for example are not to be speculated, that's why we did not know a thing about the DPAF in the 70D until the day it was announced.

If you study the market, the company history, and the competition, you can make pretty accurate speculations about future products. I for example know the next 7D will be called the 7D mk II based on the company's history. I know it will have a higher pixel count, and 10 frames per second, and the Dual-pixel AF, and the new 5D3 menus... and the announcement in the world's largest camera show is also probably true These are what we can accurately expect but anything innovative or specific is not possible to be speculated. We're just having fun.

Will be interesting to compare with the Sigma I have. I use it enough to definitely be interested, but I don't think I could justify having 2 fish-eyes, or would ever take both out with me.

I now have two fully functioning batteries, making this a pretty awesome flash.

Problem now: AF-assist red LED grid is knocked off-kilter, about 20 degrees one direction.

Any ideas how or where to get that fixed?

NancyP said:

Feature which doesn't exist, to my knowledge, but which would be easy enough to write: LCD split screen image: pick two points in image at 1x, hit button, get those two points magnified 10x. Handy for checking depth of field, rather than having to cruise the 10x box all over the image by 8-way button.

Click to expand...

I like it; also if the live view AF box could be made to zoom in and leave the rest of the frame as per normal then you could check focus and composition at the same time.

Jim

mackguyver said:

Sporgon said:

jdramirez said:

so I say get rid of it and consider a good f1.4 lens, but not the Canon 50 which ids also soft until you get to f2.8.

Click to expand...

The EF 50/1.4 may not be good on test charts wide open but it can do surprisingly well in practice. This was shot at f1.6, and it's good enough for me, unless you want sharp borders at 1.6, which is a rare requirement.

I really like the 40 STM as a 'walkabout' or landscape lens, but it can't hold a candle to the 50/1.4 for 'event' type work.

Click to expand...

That's a lot sharper than my 50 f/1.4 ever was. I didn't find it to be of much use until f/2.

Click to expand...

+1

I can hardly believe that's a 50 f1.4 @ 1.6... must be a great copy or something.

They have the same image quality, using the same sensors, yes. The image quality is not similar if the image is not focused properly. Therefore, dual processors make sense and produce better images if the situation challenges the AF system. More money buys you a better AF system and/or a better camera, which MAY result in better images. In un-challenging situations, my 40D gives me great results still. YMMV

Wow, that is pretty cool. Really, really w-i-d-e angle.

RLPhoto said:

jrista said:

RLPhoto said:

jrista said:

RLPhoto said:

My original point here is sony will sell a 50MP 35mm sensor, now will you ever get close to getting the full 50MP out of it with most of your lenses? Probably not, and the differences in practice will be similar to the current A7R. The only way you'll be able to resolve the majority of those 50MP to Definitely SEE the differences, is with the Otus or other lenses like it. Also don't forget we don't always shoot our lenses at F/8 and have to use wider apertures which makes the difference even less so.

Click to expand...

You won't ever realize the full 50mp...however, you could indeed realize more resolution than the 22.3mp or 36.3mp of a lesser camera. That's the point, right? Look at my numbers above. Theoretically, a 50mp at just f/4 could at best resolve over 37% more than a 22.3mp sensor. That's pretty much guaranteed if you slap something like an Otus on, but any other diffraction limited f/4 lens, of which many come very close to, will also perform better. Maybe not 40%...but a 10% difference is enough to be meaningful, and a 20% difference would be excellent.

It's not about resolving the maximum that any given sensor is capable of. It's about resolving more (in the output image) than a lesser sensor is capable of. You won't ever achieve the maximum sensor resolution so long as the sensor is the limiting factor...but you can and will realize useful gains by moving from a lower-resolution to a higher-resolution sensor. If that was not the case, we wouldn't clearly see such a HUGE difference between a 5D III and a D800. The difference in the smallest resolvable details between those two cameras is quite stark...even with lenses less than a Zeiss 135 or Otus. I have seen marked differences in the sharp in-focus parts with fast 85mm optics wide open...the periphery of the photos may be soft or totally OOF boke...but for the parts that are sharp...i.e. the center of the lens (which pretty much performs ideally on the majority of lenses)...the differences between a 5D III and D800 are massive. (And no, I don't mean in terms of DR...I just mean in terms of raw spatial resolution.)

Click to expand...

The d800 vs 5d3 resolution wise one shot with a 600LII and the equivalent Nikkor equal about the same total resolution in the image. That reflects my weekend with the d800 vs 5d3 with my L primes. The difference isn't as great as I thought it was going to be. The shots that were at f/8, the difference is more noticeable but at best marginal, like you said 10-15%. (Hardly massive.) To see the stark difference between the two, otus or better. (Then it's obvious, like 30% or more.)

And you cut out my biggest original point here, the A7 native lenses are not up to getting the majority of those 50mp yet. Sony should address there lens lineup before jumping ahead with more MP.

Click to expand...

Maybe it's just a difference in perception. I'd need to see the photos you took with the D800 and 5D III to see if I personally could see a difference. I never said anything was massive...just that 10% is meaningful, 20% is excellent. If anyone could actually realize a 40% difference, THAT would be massive...but you would really need a diffraction limited lens. I figure the Otus could do it. I think there are a few Canon normals and short teles that could do it. I think that many lenses, in the center of the frame, can do it as well. If you want that kind of performance corner to corner...then yeah...Otus and maybe some of the Canon great whites are probably some of the very few lenses that can do that.

Click to expand...

I wish I had them still. It was work for hire as a 2nd photog and we switched each others equipment for the wedding. We reviewed the files on his mac and we didn't notice the difference until the formals @ f/5.6-f/8 and it wasn't a huge difference either. He expected more from the d800 but it wasn't the E version either.

In short, he kept his gear/cards and gave me back mine. I don't have the files but I remember it wasn't that impressive with our tamrons and L&G primes at most of the working apertures we used.

Click to expand...

If you were working at around f/5.6 to f/8, the differences are going to be much smaller, for sure. Your more diffraction limited at those apertures, particularly f/8. There are some differences, but they won't be huge. Your going to notice more of a difference at f/4 and faster in the center of the lens (or across the frame with something like an Otus), since the diffraction-limited resolving power is much higher at those apertures. At f/8 and below, sensors are starting to oversample the lens...so, as you saw, differences were more noticeable. However, because you are diffraction limited, the differences cannot be large.

I'd be willing to bet with either companies 135, or the Zeiss 135, or even similar short tele Sigmas, that the differences in the center and center midframe would be eminently noticeable.

Diffraction is a fickle friend. By stopping down, you eliminate optical aberrations, which can present in a thousand ways and affect IQ in just as many ways. However, at the same time, by stopping down, your implicitly limiting your maximum resolution.

Valvebounce said:

Hi Diko.
Cheaper alternate solution, ...
Cheers, Graham.

Click to expand...

Will test it for sure. Thanks for the idea!

Cheers,
Diko.

She can't wait to go back. A nice friendly place to visit. And since she is also a geologist, Namiba has multiple attractions for her. I am going to ask her if she wants to post some of her pictures here.

Thanks

GMCPhotographics said:

It's as durable as you are careful with it. If you bounce it off a concrete floor...it's going to mark and chip. But objective lenses are far more durable than people give them credit for and usually far more durable than the expensive but crappy filter people buy to protect their objective lens.

Click to expand...

I am more talking about minor potential mishaps like cap coming loose and plastic brushing up against a lens, or photographic a plant and accidentally bumping into a twig (as things are closer than they appear). Not major damage scenarios. Lenses in these minor contacts can scratch, or not, depending on how durable the anti-scratch coating is.

adhocphotographer said:

From what i am hearing, it is US only... but other countries have dropped a bit. I just hope that it drops a bit here in India... I've been saving a long time for my 500 f/4 and would be miffed to buy and then it loose value right away!

Click to expand...

Canon India did drop prices a couple of months back. The lenses included in the recent drop were 180 macro, 70-200 II, both L TSEs, 85L and the 300 2.8 II L. The price drop was quite steep, approximately 14% or so.

The superteles. Including the 500 II are already reasonably priced in India. The 500 II can be got for INR 550K. This is slightly less than, or roughly equal to the US price which I believe, underwent a drop recently.

Steve said:

GuyF said:

I'll do a bit more research - I see Kenko tubes appear quite similar to Canon in that they use metal where it matters

Click to expand...

Brand doesn't really matter with extension tubes since there's no optics. Metal is probably better and you definitely want the pass through contacts. I've got cheap Opteka's and they're fine. They fit snug and are perfectly solid. I don't think I'd trust a full stack of them to hold the weight of my 300-800 but on a tripod its no worries.

Click to expand...

Internally, the Kenko tubes are plastic. I had one shear through when mounted to a large lens/teleconverter combination. The screws in the metal mount are fitted into plastic underneath. I've heard that Canon tubes are stronger inside, but I have no firsthand evidence of that.

The 1DX v. D4 debate is like comparing a Lamborghini and Ferrari...you can't go wrong with either!

I currently own the 1DX, and I used to own the Nikon D4. Both cameras are very similiar, and here are a few observations from my point of view:

* I don't care what the tests say, in the real world the 1DX has about the same dynamic range as the D4, even at low ISO i.e. with RAW files, I can pull about the same shadow detail in Lightroom from the 1DX that I could with the D4.

* Even though the 1DX has more cross type focus points, I'd say both camera's autofocus systems deliver very similar results. The D4 obtains focus a little better in very low light situations.

* It was easier to get the correct exposure with the D4. I think the D4 has better metering compared to the 1DX, especially in challenging lighting situations.

* The 1DX has better automatic white balance, and for me it is easier to fix the white balance of the 1DX RAW files in Lightroom if the camera doesn't get it right.

* I like how the autofocus points appear in the viewfinder of the D4 compared to the 1DX.

* The D4 is about 200g lighter than the 1DX, which can feel like a big difference after a few hours.

* It's so much better having both memory card slots take the same type of memory card, and compact flash cards cost a lot less compared to XQD cards...a big plus for the 1DX.

* The 1DX has a better menu system.

* I like the shape and rubber material of the D4 grip

I don't really care. My expectations in a camera are that it can integrate stills and video in the same package, and should be 4K capable. It is pretty clear from the rumored specs that the new 7D2 has video as an afterthought, so for me it is a fail even before it is announced.

My guess is that the first Canon camera for the future will be the 80D when it eventually comes out. So, another year of waiting. But I think by then I will probably using a Panasonic or Sony.

Keith_Reeder said:

You shouldn't do that - actually discussing this stuff logically with these whiny trolls. They don't understand "reasonable"...

Click to expand...

Who's a troll and what was said that's unreasonable? The 1DIV is widely available for the price the 7D2 is expected to be and does all the things Nancy asked for. The other guy said that even the 1DIII would be an improvement over the 60D in the specs that they listed and that body is even cheaper. How is any of this incorrect information?

Finding a $2,000 lens for $500 is not likely, and that's what you are hoping for.

One low cost alternative that I have, is a Tokina 17mm f/3.5 prime. If that focal length is what you need. You can pickup one (USED) for well under $500, and it will beat the sox off of a 17-40L both sharpness wise, and the construction is supurb. Its not a $2,000 Zeiss, but its very good and inexpensive. They are discontinued and only available used.

I picked mine up from a Craigslist ad locally for $150, but they sell for a lot more on ebay. I was amazed at the visible difference over my 17-40L the first time I used it. (I sold the 17-40L)

Do a search to read opinions.

Here is a start.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=233

I'm considering getting an underwater housing for my little S90. It's a great little camera (the original pocketable quality powershot!). I'm going on a holiday though and would like to try some underwater photography.

Interestingly, getting a new WP-DC35 for my S90 seems to be the cheapest way for me to do that and have acceptable image quality too (and RAW ability to boot).

Any recommendations regarding setup of the camera, tips and trick are welcome because I don't have much opportunity to experiment.

My S90 has been modified with Richard Franiec's Custom S90 Grip and Lensmate control dial ring. Can I leave these accessories on when I want to use the underwater housing or do I need to strip them off?

Many thanks.

Looks impressive but it will be hard for me to give up the compactness of my RX100II for it.

Don Haines said:

The problem I have is that there are multiple rumour sites and they all claim to have inside information. The specs are not consistent across them. For example:

24Mpixel and 20Mpixel are both claimed
1DX build and 5D3 build are both claimed
Dual Digic 5 and dual Digic 6 are both claimed
Wifi is said to be there and is said to not be there
Touchscreen is said to be there and said not to be
Both 65 point and 45 point AF are said to be there

I interpret this as nobody knows...

Click to expand...

And the hope (yeah! HOPE!) I have from these inconsistencies is, that there are different prototypes out there.
And that we can probably see a new sensor design and not only a pimped 70D with higher fps and enhanced housing.
This would prove Canon is leaving the way overcautious and reactive development they started after the tsunami and Fukushima (and the problems they had to handle from this).
As I am not into buying a 7D2, I still have time to wait, how Canon develops.

I also hope that everything is so quiet and confusing because of Canon wanting to get a real big bang with the new releases. We'll see and hopefully won't get too disappointed.

Everything I and friends have purchased from Canon USA refurb store have appeared as new.

Shutter count on two 6d cameras were below 20
lenses unmarked and as close to dust free as I've ever seen

I believe the bulk of camera bodies sold refurb are in fact overproduction. When Canon watch reports that suddenly there are 1500 6D bodies or 500 16-35 f/2.8 v2 lens available "refurb" you'd have to be very naive to think different.

I have just been arguing with myself about the same question. I have now ordered the 16-35/4 and sold the 35/1.4 and the 17-40/4 (the latter was the easy part...quite obvious). I agree, the 35/1 is a special lens but for my type of photography I rarely use 1.4 so I use the 40/2.8 instead. It is small (fits in your pocket), sharp and does not cost a fortune. Good for street photography.

/Claes