FWIW, I've had focus inconsistency with my 100L. I've done a bunch of testing and finally nailed down what the issue is. The problem with mine is poor mechanical tolerances in the focus mechanism.

The way I tested was to put camera/lens on tripod and aim at test target. Use EOS Utility to control and view on screen. While attempting to dial in AFMA by magnifying 200% in EOS Utility, I notice that each time I change direction of the focus mechanism by clicking the single step "<" after clicking on the single step ">" a couple of times (or do it the other way around and click the > after clicking the <) , the entire image shifts noticably in the viewer frame and the focus goes whack even though the focus supposedly only took a single step.

So click > a couple of times then a single < and the entire image shifts leftward and focus whacks out. Click < a couple of times and then > and the entire image shifts rightward and focus whacks out.

None of my other lenses exhibit this behavior (and yes IS is turned off) and this is 100% repeatable.

So I'd highly suggest checking for this on a new 100L while you can return it since it is very easy to do and the lens is basically worthless if it has this issue.

Unfortunately mine is a few months past warranty so I own a $1K brick with Canon written on it. Too bad for me I didn't figure out how to diagnose Canon's manufacturing problems earlier, maybe they would have had pitty on me and given me a better one...but I'm SOL since warranty is expired.

Wow, thanks guys. Makes it clearer, will take some more time to read through more thoroughly. But I understand the basic dynamics better now. I didn't make out first that it had to do also with the elements.

You kinda just go based on what kind of lights you're using. If you're using daylight balanced lights, go 5200k to 5500k. If you're using tungsten, go 3200K. Last shoot I did was a mix of Tungsten and Daylight and 4600K seemed just right. really it's not that hard to eyeball, if it looks too warm, lower the temperature, if it's too cool, raise it. It's not that complicated at all, it's just one of those things that seems complicated until you get used to it. Trial and error will show you the way.

Re: DSLR & Lens Coming on January 15, 2013? [CR1]

DWM said:

I must have missed that because I haven't seen where anybody said a newer camera necessarily have a better sensor across all aspects.

Click to expand...

Oh my, please don't be too picky, I don't deliberate too long over everything I write here and it's a recreational rumors thread - but there was talk of "significant iq improvements" somewhere in the vicinity of your name :-> ... I read this not only concerning snr and thus responded also to dr/sharpness, please do forgive me if I misunderstood.

Mikael Risedal said:

It is sensor data, and 6D is slightly better than 1dx at base iso regarding DR, 11,5 compared to 11.2

Click to expand...

Yes, I saw that, but who shoots at base iso anyway if it's no different from iso 800 except for a little more more dr (and high dr scenes require hdr anyway)? That's why I looked at higher iso levels, and here the sports-oriented 1dx seems to be the best of the bunch by a small margin.

Mikael Risedal said:

You can gp to http://home.comcast.net/~nikond70/Charts/PDR.htm

Click to expand...

Doesn't include the 6d (yet), that's why I was asking for other charts - thanks!

mirekti said:

It would have been great had you compared Sigma 12-24 II on FF. I own one and like it a lot, especially @12mm-14mm f8-f11.

Click to expand...

I know.
Right now I could get the KenkoTC + Keep this lens, and also use the TC for my 70-300L or ... sell the 8-16 and buy the 12-24. Buying the KenkoTC ends up being more flexible. Grr! If only someone would buy my old camera on ebay I could afford the kenkoTC.

If you have the $ and need/want way better AF, much better ISO and noise characteristic, mostly moire-less video, then 5D3 is a big upgrade IMO. I also like the color rendition better. I had a 5D2 and liked it but the AF and ISO/noise made me look at a 5D3. Glad I made the change.

It is a demo show room. It's great enough since I can try before I buy. Wish they can open more like Apple does. I do not live in a major city. So I might never have one in town. http://canonrumors.com/forum/Smileys/default/sad.gif

It's not that it's changing the lens characteristics, it's changing the way the photo is presented.

Extreme case: take a photo of a wall, process it in DPP from RAW twice.
First photo, set contrast to +5. Second photo, set contrast to -5. They are going to have vastly different vignetting *numbers*, because the numbers are taken from looking at the *photo*, and the photos look different even when taken with the same lens.

Now, i'm not saying that any review sites do that on purpose. But say one takes in raw and dpp processes at 0 contrast, and the other one just uses the camera jpg. The camera could be set to +1 contrast by default maybe? or even if the camera says '0 contrast' in its Picture Style menu, that could be more or less than what '0 contrast' in dpp gives you? Or even some thoughtless reviewer pressed for time accidentally leaves the 'vignetting correction' on by accident in-camera?
I don't know, it's all possible. In short, as long as you trust a single reviewer to keep doing the same thing over and over with the same equipment, then their results are comparable to each other. (Even if you trust a single reviewer, sometimes things out of their control mess up. Bryan at TDP noticed a bug in DPP a while back, where he'd set noise correction off for his processing, but in certain cases it turned itself back on and invalidated a lot of his results. At least he noticed and has since gone back and re-tested all the affected lenses, I hate to think how long that took him)

For further reading, here is a well written article by Roger about comparing results between reviewers and sites. He's mainly talking about resolution numbers, but just susbtitute the word 'vignetting' and you'll still have the same idea.
Or read any review at photozone.de (at least in a Nikon review), you'll get the following warning:

photozone.de said:

We're performing our vignetting analysis based on (uncorrected) JPEGs straight from the camera. The JPG engine of the Nikon D3x features a rather flat gradation curve, thus has a moderate contrast characteristic, resulting in comparatively low vignetting figures - the corresponding Canon figures are roughly 40% higher due to the more aggressive default contrast setting.

Click to expand...

Were any of those Sigma reviews taken on Nikons? Or even if they were all canons, do the 5D2, 5D3, 1Ds3, 1DX all behave exactly the same? (I think you get the point by now)

tortilla said:

Efka76 said:

I understand that maybe optics is could not be significantly improved, however, it is a shame to produce APS-C sensors when all cameras can easily accomodate FF and even larger sensors!!!

Click to expand...

It's rather a shame that you haven't yet noticed that many manufacturer already do sell cameras with FF sensors, Canon was the first of them to do so. Why bother about that cameras with smaller sensors are still being produced? They have their advantages (cost, weight etc.) - you don't need to buy them.

Efka76 said:

Canon EOS 7D is 4 year old model!!!!!

Click to expand...

It's 3 years actually.

Efka76 said:

I really hope that times will come when FF sensor will be used even in entry level DSLRs and we will not see such criples as 6D, which has even worse AF than 4 year old 7D!!!!

Click to expand...

Maybe you are too negative... you complain about the 7D because it's APS-C and about the 6D because it doesn't have the 7D's AF. I think what you really want is a 5D3.

Click to expand...

Almost 3.5 years, to be precise! And I am still waiting for the update...

Silent mode at least on the 5D3 also helps with the camera shake on a tripod.

Cptn Rigo said:

Pfffff... a lot of useless posts, Nobody knows everything, ok?? :

Some tips for hdr or tripod shooting:

- Almost all the lenses induces movement when used on tripod, as a rule of thumb, when you use the tripod, switch the IS Off

- Use a remote shutter, cable or wireless

- If you don't have a remote shutter, use a 2 sec delay shutter

- Its useful to use mirror lockup to eliminate the mirror shaking when taking the picture

Good luck

Click to expand...

RustyTheGeek said:

prjkt said:

RustyTheGeek said:

Get a SunPak RD2000 Flash for walk around fill flash and a bunch of eneloops.

Click to expand...

I'd recommend the Canon 90EX (from the EOS M) over the Sunpak, a little bit more cash, but down the track you can use it as an optical off-camera flash trigger for the EX series - works brilliantly on my 6D for that purpose

Click to expand...

The 90EX is larger, twice the price and doesn't pivot which is critical to me. I also have the StoFen diffuser on it all the time. I have some very detailed reviews up on Adorama, B&H, etc. You can get a small RD2000 with the diffuser for less than $100.

Click to expand...

I think you're thinking of the 270EX... the 90 is a little smaller, cost me ~$100, while it doesn't have a diffuser or tilt, it's light, and i find the wireless E-TTL a big advantage when using with my 560/600EX flashes

well....you kinda answered your own question as you dismissed any options available to you. but i'll take a stab..

though i haven't used the 24-70mm 2.8II, it looks as though it is a stellar lens. much better than the Mrk I (which i own and preferred over the 24-105 in overall performance). the Mrk I version has a useful if not true macro capability for getting close to small objects, not sure if the Mrk II duplicated this feature or improved upon it but i would be shocked if it didnt.

i never found the 70-200mm unbalanced on a tripod so long as you mount it via the supplied collar. couple it with a ballhead and it can be a pretty fluid setup for recomposing on a set of sticks. it is also a tremendous performer especially for headshots. but if you seriously aren't comfortable with it then i would suggest the 100mm 2.8L Macro. great for headshots and will cover any macro/close focusing for small product type shoots.

In my opinion Canon needs to make a F2.8 24-105 or F2.8 28-110 both with slight macro that is tack sharp, little distortion & vignetting whilst having a smoother OOF / bokeh than the 24-105 or 24-70 more like the 50 1.2. And I would pay a lot for this

Click to expand...

thats a pretty tall order for a single lens especially over that range of zoom. zooms will always sacrifice in one area over another by design so we are kinda forced to incorporate high end primes if we want the kind of performance you are looking for.

again, i have gotten great use out of my 24-70 28L and was never impressed by my friends/colleagues shots coming from their 24-105mm 4L's. i even did a head to head comparison on a shoot with another photographer and both of us agreed the 24-105 came up short on IQ compared to the 24-70 mrkI.

i would say get the 24-70mm 2.8 mrk II. it appears to be an absolute great performing lens.

The concept reminds me of an Apple store, and the logo reminds me of a Windows store.

neuroanatomist said:

...thus, I upgraded to the 1D X. Can you tell I'm a Libra?

Click to expand...

Only if you had followed in my footsteps and complemented the 1Dx with a D800: matching assignment, gear and whim.

neuroanatomist said:

I've taken several thousand shots with a 5DII in the ISO 100-400 range, and guess how many I've rejected due to 'horrible low ISO FPN'? Zero.

Click to expand...

Same here. Three years of heavy shooting with this camera. Zero photos rejected due to this "horrible" problem. The 5DII has been good.

neuroanatomist said:

I should add, by way of maintaining objectivity and putting things in perspective: I've taken several thousand shots with a 5DII in the ISO 100-400 range, and guess how many I've rejected due to misfocusing by the less than stellar AF system of the 5DII? Hundreds at least, likely thousands.

Click to expand...

Again, same here. AF could have been better.

NWPhil said:

this might help a little bit:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/11465234@N03/sets/72157632509078088/

Click to expand...

Thanks! That is very helpful.

Does diopter shrink DOF in proportion to how teleconverter and tubes do? I would assume it would.

cayenne said:

Jesse said:

Looks like they're going through Jan 5 now

Click to expand...

Hmm....

Looks like it is still running on most sites I see.

I wonder how long this will last??

cayenne

Click to expand...

The current rebates end on Feb 2nd.

I'm looking at a good deal on a manfrotto monopod and maybe a 2nd fluid head.

They use 501PL and 504PL plates they say...are these interchangeable for the same bases? ARe these arca swiss compatible?

Thanks in advance,

cayenne

I prefer the 20-21mm focal length over 24mm so for me the call is easy zeiss 21mm all the way
I have the 20mm voigtlander with AF confirm and electronic aperture control so using back button focus
the only real difference is my hand is the focus motor but it beeps and confirms focus quickly plus if i'm using my 5Dmk2 with brightscreen its very easy to see when MF is achieved. I've been thinking about getting the zeiss but i am happy witht he little voigtlander which is tiny like the 40mm so it goes everywhere with me where as the zeiss is much bigger and heavier so I dont think i'd take it along as often

bdunbar79 said:

I have the same problem with both of my bodies, in low light and trying to AF on fast-action. It boils down to the fact that I just don't think the 1DX's AF is as good as all the hype when it was first released

Click to expand...

I believe this is true. The Ai Servo AF on 1Dx and 5D III does not seem to warrant all the initial hoopla, especially in Ai Servo. However, I just got my 5D MkIII back from Canon Service, where I had it cleaned and checked before the warranty ran out. I did mention to them that the Al Servo mode seems to have tendency to misfocus, and the service summary mentions:

"Confirm autofocus to factory standard (Ai Servo). It was found that the adjustment of the AF assembly was incorrect, causing the focus to operate improperly. Electrical adjustments were carried out on the AF assembly. Product function was confirmed."

There is no way to perform proper A-B testing of Ai Servo in exact same situation pre and post "AF adjustment," but I do believe the Al Servo focusing is working perceptibly better now, which is very difficult to quantify. If your recent Canon body is having unusually worse-than-expected Ai Servo performance, it may (or may not) be worth it to have Canon Service check it out before warranty runs out. They probably need a cleaning anyway..

Sorry to hear your local retailer is going under=/. The one in my town is close to going under too. I buy all my bags and Flashes there. I have a hard time buying a used flash.

On the mac front which seems to have hijacked the latter part of this thread. Rusty.. That episode was and still is hilarious.

I love my MBP Retina and my self built desktop. They both run SSD's and 16gb of ram (desktop is an older I5 but works great) and just SMOKE anything I do. I have to say for the price of the low end retina I have not seen a PC based laptop that can do what this little guy does. Clients LOVE seeing the photos or designs (I work as a patent writer and design/prototype engineer for a patent firm on the screen rather then the 46" TV we have setup in our conference room because of how vivid the colors are. I could not do half of my work though without a PC, since Autodesk does not program for Mac. I love them both... and honestly after writing this I don't think I could live with out either OS.

East Wind Photography said:

I would generally say no you don't. However if you have more than one body you may need it. Also FoCal does have quite a few features above just AFMA calibration. Aperture sharpness is one of them as well as verifying your equipment is still calibrated. Calibrations can drift over time.

But if AFMA is all you are concerned about then you don't need focal if canon got it all set up for you.

AudioGlenn said:

Question: Is FoCal really necessary after Canon calibrates all your stuff to work together? I just got all my stuff back from them and everything seems better without any AFMA at all!

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Yes, that's right. I do like using the Aperture sharpness test. I want to play with the AF point tests too.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

Its a pretty specialized lens, and not for general use. It is extremely susceptable to flare, and can grab stray light where you would swear it did not exist.
If you are able to take the time to wait for the right lighting conditions to avoid flare, its a super lens. If you are impatient, you might be frustrated.
Using a fully manual setup pretty much requires a lot of patience, and trial / error exposure.

Click to expand...

I'm a landscape guy and when I shoot Canon I typically use the 17 TSE which has the same curved lens, the 24 TSE (all TSE's are manual focus just the the Nikon 14-24 using a Novoflex converter on a Canon camera). I have but don't use the 14mm Canon because the 17 seems much sharper. All curved lenses need you to ensure that side light doesn't get in the lens. Since I shoot mostly live view, I am pretty familiar with keeping out lens flare. Since I depend on histograms and raw shooting, exposure is no big deal. I know about where F8 and F11 are on the Novoflex slide switch with the 14-24. Why use the 14-24? It is just a great lens with a wide zoom range and equal or better than the Canon prime TSE lenses. I never will give it up. I'm still waiting for Canon to make a high MP camera to better the Nikon D800E. The D800E is what I'm using for really all my landscapes and the 14-24 is my go to lens if I don't need the perspective control features for the composition. If I do, then I go to their PCE 24mm. Right now, the Canon 17 and 24 mark 2 lenses certainly have the Nikon PCE lenses beat. Now for a camera to match????

I have had my 8-15 for a while now and love it. It is damn durable and has survived a few bumps on my 7D when in the half-pipe at my local resort. I have even had a pole catch the front element with no ill effects from a skier.