hammy said:

Bosman- i just bought the 85 1.2 L2 as well and i cant seem to get sharpness at 1.2. I can only get it sharp at 2.0. on my 1Dx.

Click to expand...

Did you AFMA it yet? Set it on a stand and take a picture of some still object... Sorry, since you did not give any details of what you shot this is what I could think of.

Act444 said:

All other lenses focus fine, though. (I have had occasional issues with backfocus on the 17-55mm 2.8, but I don't have that lens any more) I recently tested the new 24-70 2.8 II lens on it and there was no problem...

Click to expand...

AF issues like that are usually a combo of body and lens. FWIW, my 40/2.8 needs -1 AFMA on my 1D X.

i BACK DATED MY 7D WITH A LAST SECOND switch out of firmwares.

So I am assuming it should work with the 1 D X

So, if the 7D is capable of extrordinary resolution in perfect circumstances, does this also mean that the rumored high MP count FF camera(s) will also require perfect circumstances? Will cries of "soft" be heard when/if the rumored high MP camera hits store shelves in the near/not so near future?

Maybe the excellent high ISO performance of the 1DX is being "field tested" for the "1DXs"...

friedrice1212 said:

Thanks guys! One of my local stores offer 14-day satisfaction guarantee so, I will probably pull the trigger on the cheaper 85mm 1.8 first, then if I don't like it, get the sigma. Somehow, I'm pretty certain I'll like it though. Screw the bad reviews about CA. There are always more people saying bad things about things on the Internet than ones that say good things!

Click to expand...

Go for it - you'll be very pleased with it. Also, 14 days satisfaction guarantee is a real bonus

.
Thanks for the heads up.

B&H is my bellwether (and supplier of choice) so this gives me confidence that sometime before year's end, I'll see a $2800 price.

Same on 5D 3. Seems you can only change pictures in zoom after you press play.

Subevent said:

Well...I can always get the house only...but a grip is a must have!

Click to expand...

There are a lot of third party grips, if you search around you can probably find a few threads here. I think the one in highest regard is the Pixel, less than 100 usd on eBay and reasonably sturdy. Although I wouldn't want to depend on the tripod mount screw, which is why I bought the original, expensive Canon :-\

I would not go with the 6d. It just really lacks as a pro body. The 5D mark III will easily replace your 7D with almost as fast frame rate, better DR, better low light, FF, dual card slots, and better focusing. I don't think the 6D focusing system will serve you. There are some reviews of the 7D & 5D mk iii vs some nikon cameras as well as a preview of the 6D of why I don't think the camera will serve you best if you want to take a look: http://www.youtube.com/user/learningcameras

I'd go with the 5D mark III...wait for a deal to get it around $3000 though.

rpt said:

pierceography said:

sandymandy said:

I wanna see a photo where somebody got like 20+ Filters on his lens And then everytime a new "which filter to use" thread pops up, we just show this photo with the kind words "as many as u can get!"

Click to expand...

Boom.

Click to expand...

Ha ha ha ha ha!

Actually add a few more and you should be able to focus on the inside of the lens cap!

Click to expand...

Or pull shadow details out of the surface of the sun. Long exposure, of course. ;-)

I think if you turn off Auto-Align it won't crop. That being said, I have no memory of where I heard that.

The 24-105, IMO, is one of those lenses that gets a bad rep just because so much stuff is repeated second hand on the internet. The 'distortion' everyone talks about is there, but in most cases hardly noticeable and even then easily correctable with the excellent lens profiles availble in DPP and the Adobe products. 'Sharpness' is subjective, as what is sharp enough for one may not be for another. Pixel peepers are often disappointed with gear that others are making excellent large quality prints with, so I tend to consider that fact when discussing sharpness.

I 'upgraded' to the 24-105 recenty from a 28-70 F2.8. My old lens is in need of repair and I'm looking for a shop that still has parts. In the mean time, i did not want to pay the current prices for a 24-70 F2.8 because they were in high demand and expensive even used. The V II is way out of my range.

I thought at the time i would be 'settling' for the slower lens, but it only took about 5 minutes after I put it on the camera to ask myself how I lived without the 24-105 for so long! It is lighter and more versatile than the 2.8 lenses in the standard zoom range, and i find the IQ to be very similar. With the newer bodies having higher ISO performance, I hardly if ever miss the extra stop of light. Though, of course you can't recreate the F2.8 depth of field with an F4 lens at any ISO .

In summary, the 24-105 is an excellent lens, particularly considering is versatility and weight.

-Brian

Yeah i figure i gotta wait til i get FF to actually make good use of the Samyang so probably ill just get the 35mm f2 even im not too positive about it.

Considering the choice of bringing the 50mm f1.4 or not, perhaps it helps, if I list what gear I will bring for my next trip to Egypt:
1D-X, 5D Mark III
14mm f2.8
24mm f1.4
50mm f1.2
85mm f1.2

The only thing I would be missing with this setup is a tripod. It is a good thing to bring for night time shots outside of the usual temples and such, when you might want a rather small aperture. During my last visit to Egypt I managed to loan a tripod from a local photographer, so that helped me out, when I needed it.

This is about rumoured DXO results, not about actual measurements and official results, isn't it?

I have no idea how DXO's actual results will look like nor am I likely to spend my time checking DXO's website daily for any updates in that direction. Perhaps someone else frequenting CanonRumors might do, given that there are so many eager to discuss DXO, so I don't think we will be waiting for long, once official results appear.

pwp said:

At a function last night in a very dimly lit venue I struggled yet again with low-light AF. The 5D3 with 580EXII & 24-105 f/4is was OK except for the black AF points, which made it unprofessionally slow to always be sure of correct AF, but the 1D4 with 580EXII & 70-200 f/2.8isII was absolutely hopeless with a very large number of missed shots. Both bodies were on one-shot AF mode, keeping as often as practical on the cross-type AF points.

I'm actually considering picking up a couple of pre-owned 5D2 bodies just for these type of events. They have the handy red AF points and from memory are better than than the 5D3 for very low-light AF.

Any thoughts on this? What's the red-hot very low-light hero DSLR hardware?

-PW

Click to expand...

the 5dmk3 will actually achieve focus in many situations where a 5dmk2 simply will get nothing
did you have the 8 expanded points around you selected AF point? this makes a massive difference to low light focus, also the 16-35 L II has amazingly quick AF in very low light i dont think the 24-105 is particularly blazing in this regard, i find the 24-70 mk1 also very fast , 70-200 II no problem either with expanded AF points
granted the black points are annoying as hell though

nicku said:

I have read careful the thread... in the last page many people are discussing about the 1Dx performance; Yes, 1Dx is a very, very good camera... but i believe 90% of the forum readers consider the Canon flagship out of their reach or too expensive for their needs (including me).

I use the DSLR in light controlled situations , 95% under ISO 320, In studio, commercial, portraits and stock photography. In my work field size matters ( I mean MP )... high ISO performance , frame rate are not so important. What should i choose ?? 5D3 or D800?...

I believe Nikon answer to the majority of my needs.

If canon release the MP monster in 1D body ; than certainly the price tag will be around $9000. In this case what will stop many pros for getting a Pentax 645d Medium format instead of a Canon FF with same resolution?? The IQ will be incomparably.

Click to expand...

If you really believe Nikon D800 is the right tool for you then go ahead. It will be a great tool for you. You just have to ask yourself always, "Is it worth it?" (price, system cost of switching, overall camera comfort of use, build, reliability, etc...). If it's worth it, no statistics or tests should stop you from buying one though I'd say priorities in life always keeps me from buying what I want. It really doesn't matter what tool you used to capture that "moment" or picture you're after. What's important always is your end result. Don't be a pixel peeper like some here. Sometimes, I'm also prone to thinking that way but I try as much as possible to be a real artist which all photographers ideally should be.

5dM3 + 70-200 2.8LII Winning! ;D

I haven't done any gigs for pay for anyone, but unless I was specifically shooting for a publication or something like (e.g. staff photographer, work for hire) I would never give up copyright. I'd certainly be happy to sign an agreement where I could not use the works in certain circumstances without getting permissions first (e.g. the merchandising as above).

Now, if the artists (more likely managers/agents/label) were making work-for-hire arrangements, that would be different, although I certainly would like to retain rights for portfolio/self-promotion. Really, once you go the work-for-hire direction, you can put anything you want into the contracts. Nothing stopping the photographers from refusing though.

I got a reply email from Sigma today. They said the lens is out of production (and thus cannot be repaired) but I could trade it in for a credit towards a new Sigma lens. Of course I am smart enough now never to do that, having learned my lesson. I think I will get the 70-200 2.8 (non IS) Canon and use it with 1.4x extender when needed (which I already have).

Either the canon 100-400, because your 24-105 is ok for portraits, bokeh is decent.
Or, the 28-300 l, it is a really gOod lens, or so I hear, your covered for air shows, and air shooting, the 300 also helps.
But you may also want that extra reach. The 3.5 aperture good at the wide end will best your 24-105 though. But, if portraits are that important, pick up a 50mm 1.8/1.4 and/or sell the 24-105 for a 400mm 5.6 is. I know the 24-105 is good for walking around, but either way, you may need to compromise.

Other option, canon 70-200 2.8 is ii. get some extenders and a tamron 28-75 in place of the canon 24-105, the 28-75 is a remarkable lens, I borrowed it from a friend, and it is on par withe the canon 24-70 1 in terms of bokeh, but lacks a bit of sharpness.

I'd prefer option 2, for the versatility.

dlleno said:

jrista said:

PackLight said:

While we got sidetracked from the OP's origional question, to me the answer is that the OP would benifit more from the superior AF system of the 7D than a full frame 5D II, provided wildlife is the driving factor.

Click to expand...

Totally agree, with the added benefit that the 7D will produce more detailed photos on top of the better AF.

Click to expand...

provided distance limited wildlife is the driving factor, and where the OP as met the optimum conditions including glass, light, and support to take advantage of the 7D resolution.

Click to expand...

My argument about getting new L-series glass was to realize the maximum potential resolution the 7D has to offer, which was...what, 2.21x times more than the 5D II. Even without perfect glass, the 7D is still going to resolve more detail than the 5D II, just not necessarily 121% more.

sandymandy said:

Octavian said:

without worrying about scratching the front glass!

Click to expand...

Who is cleaning his L lens in such an akward way that there might be scratches? Sandpaper cleaning?

Click to expand...

You will be surprised to know that invisible crystals in dust could be very effective sandpapers without your knowledge. Best not to get into situation where you have to clean good optics. At the very least it takes too much effort and time to do it right, which is not always at hand.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

Avoid using the back lcd to try and guess at correct exposure. If you must, turn exposure simulation to the on position.
You might check to see that what your settings are for exposure simulation (pg 205 of your manual). The setting will make a big difference in the brightness you may see on the LCD. Changing the LCD brightness setting should only be done after understanding exposure simulation settings.

Click to expand...

prior to the time that i have 5d iii, i used to estimate exposure based on my experience (have my own cheat sheet which based on sunny 16 rules with little adjustment after number of times experienting with light. i have memorized all of them), point to subject, adjust meter of a subject using zones system, then shoot (no problems with my 7d and 30d) with a quick glance on lcd preview after snaping an image. guess that this time i have to take time and practice more on my new 5d iii. i personally do not like live view though since that is not a good way to learn (prefer more independent ways in shooting).

i am downloading manual right now... shame on me, i have not read its manual since i am recently busying with learning photoshop after working hours

many many thanks CRers...

the kit price has also come down nicely by about $500 as well