bvukich said:

Side note/question... Has anyone had any experience with the cine and non-cine versions of the same lens? They're optically identical, but is there any build quality improvement on the cine version?

I'm looking at the 14/2.8 and the extra cost for the cine version would be worth it for a focus ring that isn't sloppy.

Click to expand...

Not used the two versions of the same lenses, but I've used the 85mm next to non-cine photo lenses and it is a world of difference in ease of use. We have a 35mm lens at work that has the tiniest lens throw I've ever seen. I'm talking half inch turn that changes focal plan 10 feet. Pulling focus with that thing is a pain.

But the 85 is a beauty to use.

Any image file corruption is always going to be down to an error during data transfer. I had a load of RAW files corrupted in the same way when moving data to a new RAID array via a cheap RAID controller.

If this will be your first DSLR, I agree with those who have suggested buying a refurbished or used Rebel T2i/ T3i/T4i or 50D/60D. The T5i especially is over priced compared with the almost identical T4i.

Personally, I would prefer a 50 or 60D due to their larger, brighter pentaprism viewfinders and better control layout. But, the Rebels have advantages as well. I suggest going to a local camera store or Best Buy and handling these and other DSLR's to see how you like the weight and handling.

Starting out with a refurbished or used camera is a great way to learn photography. After a year or so you can upgrade to a newer, more capable camera if you feel you need to or continue on with what you have. I think its always more important to spend money on quality lenses instead of camera bodies. Lenses hold their value and will be usable for decades. Camera bodies become obsolete pretty quickly as new technologies are developed.

paul13walnut5 said:

J.R. said:

this was one of the reasons I chose the Lowepro Flipside - it opens only on the side which goes against my back. So as long as I'm wearing the backpack, there is no risk that someone will be able to open it.

Click to expand...

Except with a razor knife.

Click to expand...

Correct ... but the flipsides do act as a safety feature in a rudimentary sort of a way though.

However, if things have gone so far that I'm confronted with someone with a razor knife, I would probably be wise to meekly hand over my gear - a bag, howsoever safe, won't make a difference.

ahab1372 said:

I don't think you can do it more accurately manually

Click to expand...

Agreed that using a yard stick will certainly not be more accurate, and a commercial tool like LensAlign will be as accurate...as best.

For my 1D X, I don't do the tethered MSC mode for FoCal. Instead, I just capture images of the target manually, load and them into FoCal for manual analysis. I do oversample - two shots at each even value from |20| to |12|, then three shots at every value from -10 to +10, for a total of 83 shots. I get great curve fits, and the optimal value is visually evident.

Not your traditional landscapes, but here is a few images taken from my 550D and my 18-200mm lens (as I am showing what can be done with basic entry level gear). The 2nd and third image are straight out of camera, no post processing.


5 by Fstop Army, on Flickr


3 by Fstop Army, on Flickr


2 by Fstop Army, on Flickr

Ive gone through this forum for a while now and have noticed some xlnt and brillant landscape photos. Just posting this out there (incase anyone else is interested in sharing or entering).

http://youtu.be/4Xn_QJDqOoM

Forgetting to insert the cardboard tab from a box of the film I used for my AE-1 that had the ISO/Din number on it. Well I seemed to be inadvertently turning the ISO knob and as the film usually stayed in the camera for a looooong time, I'd forget what ISO film I bought. So getting back to the "right" ISO was sometimes a hit or miss...

Seems to me like we're not far off from a line of 24-70's similar to the 70-200's. I wouldn't be surprised if there ends up being variants in combinations of f/2.8 and f/4 with and without IS.

Nikon sales are hurting, everyones P&S sales have tanked. DSLR sales are a bright spot.

Personally, I don't like the idea of buying into two lens systems, one for small bodies and another for DSLR's. Canon has felt the same way, and is really pushing sales of the SL-1. With their dual pixel sensors, expect large sensor P&S cameras that focus relatively quickly and have fixed lenses like the G1 X.

Nope, no typos there. $35k which has again went up since I just purchased the 300 f/2.8 from B&H. LoL

As to the choice between 100-400mm (current or a vII) OR getting the 70-300mm L, it really depends on how much of your shooting is going to really require 400mm. Obviously with most birds, the more mm the better - so it seems that a 100-400mm would be better.

BUT one must always consider the other factors, eg the 100-400mm L lens IS significantly heavier and bigger, and it makes a huge difference to me in that I can keep my 70-300mm L in my Lowepro shoulder bag with my 7D and 15-85mm attached (or the 70-300mm L attached to my 7D and the 15-85mm next to it).

If I owned a 100-400mm L, I wouldn't be taking that as often on my walks, drives, travels, etc, just because it's much longer and heavier. And I expect a vII of the 100-400mm L would be quite a bit more expensive (at least $2500 my guess). So having 300mm 'on tap' is better than 85mm!

So many 70-300mm L users love its portability and extremely good IQ. But it's really up to you what you'll want. I still think my earlier advice of getting rid of your 70-200mm f/4 nonIS and the 70-300mm nonL and replacing it with the 70-300mm L is a good strategy for you.

Then later down the track consider the Sigma 8-16mm if you really like ultrawide.

Regards

Paul

I seem to recall that there are about 3 Canon lenses that it does not work with. This is assuming that AFMA is set to adjust by lens.

I have Canon TC's, I bought the Kenko specifically to get more magnification from my 100L. It worked fine with 100-400L, and 70-200L plus several others I had.

Right now, I don't think there is a TC that will work completely with the 100L unless you turn the AFMA off. You can tape pins, but that's another level of complexity.

and no more street photographers need to cry about using long lenses exposes them too much

now I have moved to the southern hemisphere does anyone know if there are any meteor showers that we can see from here as I assume we cannot see perseisus from here?

chimpmitten said:

... The 50 1.8 hood might be an option for more extreme situations (mosh pits and the like). Can the lens cap be used while the hood is attached? I assume the hood can not be reversed like the bayonet types can be?

Click to expand...

I have the Vello ES62 hood (pretty much identical to the Canon version) for the 50 f/1.8 II and it does indeed work on the 40mm. Yes, the lens cap can be used while hood is attached. And yes, the hood can be reversed.

Mika said:

Sorry again about the delay, I was on a vacation trip.

I have not said that the MTF computed using the slanted edge method isn't useful. However, I have said that the MTF calculated with this method isn't scientifically accurate if you want absolute accuracy. The problem with the averaging is that it tends to lose information of the spot itself, while the average along two orthogonal directions is computed with sufficient sampling, pretty much nothing is said about what happens between the orthogonal directions.

For this reason, I don't believe it would be possible to reconstruct an accurate PSF with the slanted edge method and thus the measured MTF must be slightly invalid as well. You can think of this from the dimensional reduction point of view; it is generally not possible to recreate a 3D function from two 2D functions. Higher order aberrations do give rise for all sorts of interesting spot shapes and orientations with element decentering.

Click to expand...

We are getting here to more philosophical questions. In science, we use modeling. We make some a priori assumptions, ignore this and that, and then build a model which we analyze. That model is never perfect, and it can't be. We must be aware of its limitations. But saying - you can never have a perfect model, so why bother with science at all - is not the right thing.

Long time ago, Riemann suggested to model anisotropic phenomena by a quadratic form. The level curves (in 2D) of that form are ellipses. 2 measurements then are enough. In some sense, this is equivalent to taking a truncated Taylor expansion of a more complicated function.

Going back to photography - when the PSF is well concentrated, approximation by a quadratic form is OK. When it is not, you can see it, no need of sophisticated methods (like my 35L at f/1.4 in the corners, wide open). Those are some of the limitations in this case.

So when I say - you can get the the PSF from the MTF, I always assume some reasonable model in place. Also, I do not mean that you must use the DXO test, necessarily. If you are curious enough, you can rotate your target, and get get more directions.

It is relatively easy to think that there isn't differences between the behavior of rays when shifting from a wavelength range to another. I hear this argument quite often, and this may sound like blasphemy for some, but I disagree with that.

Click to expand...

In the good old times, DXO published MTF charts on each of the (RAW) RGB channels. They were different enough, indeed. Actually, sometimes, too much. They reported some kind of average, weighed heavily towards greens, if I remember well, because people want simple answers. If you dig deeper in that, the spectral decomposition of the light in the test would play a role, too, etc. In principle, the camera projects an infinitely dimensional color space to a 3D one, so full spectral information is lost anyway.

Danz said:

$369 seems a bit much! That's like 1/3 of the lens price!

michaeltruong said:

Er01 on EF 24-105m is the lens problem. I had the same issue. Shoot wide open >f22 will result in consistent Er01. Got the lens fixed from Canon for $369. The lens' diaphragm needed to be replaced.
Good luck.
-mt

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Definitely more than half of the price. :-\

Step out from home with your 860$ cash, gear, a bag for clothes and stuff, no car. Only come back when the cash is all spent on living expense wherever your pictures take you. Gonzo!

Hi all! I am selling my backup camera, a canon rebel t3i, for school finances and thought to put it here because i hate all the ebay and paypal fees. I do also have the kit lens, though i never used it because i have a few l lenses. Info on the camera, I bought it back during september of last year (2012) as a backup to my older rebel that i have now parted ways with so it is still relatively new. I can include a generic battery because I lost the original, battery charger, original canon strap, body cap, both lens caps and the 18-55 stabilizer kit lens. If anyone is interested, shoot me a pm. I am looking for about $440 but am willing to negotiate. Can meet up in person in Illinois somewhere or ship using paypal assuming you have history trading or purchasing through this forum. I believe it has 4,100 shutter clicks but am uncertain if it is the true number. Here is a shot i've taken with the body (different lenses)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/erikerodri/8566343379/#
there are a few more pictures i've taken with this body on my flickr if you want to see the camera in action. Feel free to message me

Re: 24-70 II cracked focusing ring.

Viggo said:

With old lenses off warranty I have done quite a few fixes like gluing af/mf switches, replaced mounts and screws, even fixed a crooked barrel. But this is an expensive and new lens, and I do not want to use the wrong glue so it never can be removed again and have Canon say, "Oh, its been tampered with, sorry no warranty".

Click to expand...

Just to be clear, they weren't saying to glue the rubber ring on. They were saying to put glue in the crack, let it dry, and then put it back on

Glad you were able to easily obtain a replacement band.

cayenne said:

Ugh...

I just wish ML could get a good, solid page set up in one spot, to tell you everything, step by step to set up and use the video RAW from the ML set up, to export for use by Davinci Resolve (which as of 9.15 version will take the RAW straight in)....

I've read through hundreds of pages of the forums, and as soon as I read one instruction set...that seems comprehensive, I read 2-3 more posts down, and someone says it blows up, and that you now have to get build #37 from server xyz, follow half the directions from post #222 from a month ago, and then download and replace this one file on the camera to get it to work....do the hokey pokey....etc.

It seems they are SOOOO close on the 5D3 to being more ready for primetime or at least an easier to install and use Beta version, I wish they'd concentrate on that, get that out the door for the masses to more easily use, and then concentrate on the other cameras that are next closer to being ready.

Then again...I'd like a pony.

Click to expand...

Finding out how to install the last version of ML on the 5D MKIII it's actually still quite hard.
Here is the last Alpha build:
https://bitbucket.org/hudson/magic-lantern/downloads
And here are the last updates:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B7QlH_BH2m32SnFObTh1dE1PNjQ&usp=sharing

To record RAW, you just have to activate "RAW Video" from the menu. From the same menu, you can change the settings. It's all very easy, if you've already used ML firmware. The only issue with ML in the MKIII is that, for safety resons, there's still no autoboot, so you have to boot the firmware everytime you turn on the camera. Apart from that, everything works fine even at 1920x1080 24fps.

As you wrote, Resolve can handle ML RAW, so there's no problem. On the other hand, if you prefere to create a proxy file, you ca use Rawanizer (freeware).
You can also extract the DNG's from the RAW files (with raw2dng, also freeware) open the DNG's with Camera RAW or something like that, make the adjustments you want on the first image, apply the adjustments on all the others DNG's, export everything in the format you prefere (I use TIFF) and import everything in Resolve for the final color grading.

In DC, the Calumet that is downtown (near Gallery Place metro stop) also rents gear. Consider picking up the 70-200 on rental for a day and try it out. Or rent both the 5D3 and the 70-200 and mix-match for a day before buying. You can reserve ahead of time to ensure they have the gear you want when you want it.

In NYC, B&H Photo has been an outstanding source of information and service is excellent.

Loaded question to reply here.
I am willing to skype with you on this and tell you all I know. Inbox me if interested.

meadowfresh said:

kaihp said:

Overall, I'm very happy with it. I has worked like a charm for all the things I've used it for (basically touristy photo outings). Since I carry a lot of small accessories, I would have appreciated more/smaller pockets internally to organize things. YMMV.

Click to expand...

Cheers makes me want the bag even more now. Have you ever used it as a carry on for a flight etc?

Click to expand...

Sure, that's how I got my gear between China and US - both ways
Also had it on a trip to Singapore recently - no problems here.

I wouldn't want to put lenses nor bodies through the wringer downstairs. If in doubt, take a look at United Breaks Guitars

Congrats...you'll love it.