Posts

hanifshootsphotos · May 24, 2013

I recently acquired the 50mm 1.2 its been a joy to shoot with, strangely enough it was produced in 2013 (UB date code) and it came with the new snazzy pinch lens cap...hubba hubba

jdramirez · May 24, 2013

Don Haines said:
I've got to say 100L for macro. There are some lenses that are such a pleasure to use that you don't know how you lived without it... And this is one. It was my first Lglass lens and the difference in quality and image over the kit lens was like night and day.

I love my 100L too, but it wasn't my first. I had a very solid 24-105, but it wasn't love the way the 100 is.

Dantana · May 24, 2013

neuroanatomist said:
munkymorgy said:

neuroanatomist said:

My solution is to use Arca Swiss type plates on body and lenses with tripod collars. I use Blackrapid straps, with a Kirk 1" clamp on the end, so I can easily connect it to body or lens, or remove it for tripod/monopod use.

Click to expand...

Is this the Kirk clamp you use ?
http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-kirk-1in-standard-quick-release-clamp/p1011194

Having not used Arca Swiss type plates before they do not look suitable for holding the camera upside down on a strap. The sliding that you have on the plate I thought would mean if not really tightened would work its way off the camera?

Click to expand...

That's the one. The clamp has good intrinsic resistance - it doesn't open up on it's own or with a casual brush against something, you've got to grab the knob and apply some force to loosen it. I attach it with the knob under the lens with a body plate, and away from my body with a lens plate, so nothing will brush it anyway. In 1.5 years of use, I've never had the clamp loosen up even slightly on it's own.

I've seen you reference this before Neuro, and now I know why. I picked up a Blackrapid Metro last week and used it during a 24 hour Relay For Life event. It was super comfortable. Having the ability to pop my camera right onto my tripod (which has an Arca-Swiss compatible plate) would make it just that much better.

By the way, the Metro seems like a great strap if your rig isn't too heavy. I shoot with mostly smaller lenses. I talked it over with the guy at my local Samy's between the Metro and the Curve, and he asked, "are you going to be walking around with a 70-200 2.8L II?" Since I can't afford heavy glass at the moment, decision made.

AcutancePhotography · May 24, 2013

Chuck Alaimo said:
That's why I stick to saying ---if you go FF - get the 24-105. then over the course of the year, check you shots and see what you shoot at the most...if your staying in the 24-35 range and wanting wider - then your in UWA territory. But if you find that your at 105 a lot and cropping, then you may want a 70-200... or, if you find all your shots at 50mm and want more control over DOF and OOF areas, snag a 50mm.

This is some of the wisest advice you will get. No one can really tell you "you need to get this lens" unless they know not only what you shoot but how and what effect you want. A lens that works for one photographer may not work for you. Only you, the photographer, can make that determination. Using a zoom lens like Chuck described is an excellent way to help you fine tune your lens collection.

Start your lens collection exactly like what you are doing now -- thinking about it and planning it.

With the priority on buying good glass (cheap glass is seldom a good investment) you want to make your lens-money efficiant in not only buying good glass but the right glass -- good glass is easy, finding the right glass takes time. I have spent a lot of money on many cheap glass in my time.

regretting all the time.

Good luck with this.

Don Haines · May 24, 2013

Try to convince a statistician that a sample depth of one makes a valid test. Now THAT would be entertaining!

BTW, many years ago I dropped a D30 from the top of a 220 foot tower and it landed on a concrete pad. It did not survive.

adhocphotographer · May 24, 2013

I havn't had a chance to try this yet, but i am looking forward to!

CanNotYet · May 24, 2013

So, since I've heard this term "microcontrast" now for a while, I thought I'd start a thread comparing and describing the EF mount lenses (Canon or 3rd party) with the best microcontrast.

As I understand it, this characteristic of a lens is essential for birders and pixel-peepers?

Please, educate me and others on the forum on this topic.

GMCPhotographics · May 24, 2013

rs said:
A 140-285/2.8 is pretty much a mythical 200-400/4 with a wider AoV and a 1.4x telecompressor built in. Use that as the basis of the price and availability, should Canon come to the conclusion that there is a market for such a lens.

With the 70-200 II and 300 II and most pros having two bodies, I'd have thought there's not much call for such a lens. Especially bearing in mind what the zoom would be likely to cost.

It would probably be more expensive and heavier than the current 300mm f2.8 L IS II...so is there a point in bringing such a lens to the market? Especially considering the failings of the Sigma 120-300 OS, it would need to be a true 300mm at the long end and keep that focal lenght through the focus range, a true f2.8 and have stellar AF and IQ. It would be bigger and heavier that the prime....so why not take a 70-200 f2.8 on one cam and the prime on another? It's not too difficult and a lot of press pros already do that.
A classic pro line up is either a 16-35/24-70/70-200 line up or a 24-70/70-200/300 line up. Each with a cam fitted, ready to shoot.

wickidwombat · May 24, 2013

cayenne said:
wickidwombat said:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/372016-REG/Impact_CT40MKIT_Master_Century_C_Stand.html

thats a c stand

polariser maybe needed if you get reflections on the glass you can eliminate by controlling the light
but i'd try set up without it first and use it if needed but you will lose a stop or so of light too not really an issue using my method though just your shutter speed will be longer

Click to expand...

Thank you!

Hey, do you have any recommendations for a decent polarizer, hopefully that won't break the bank?

I just picked up one of those refurb 600ex-rt's today...hoping it might make it here by the weekend for shooting.
I'm buying a fairly long (11ft) cable for it to shoot off camera as suggested....

Thank you,

cayenne

go with B+W or a high end hoya anything else dont waste your money for a CPL unfortunately either of those are not cheap

RGF · May 23, 2013

Wonder how many of canon 's patent make it to the market place vs simply are defensive and hold IP defensive space

Grumbaki · May 23, 2013

Something i didn't see in your OP is "I need it right now!"

Rebates come and go so this isn't the pressing issue.

Canon 2.8 II is top of the line and will stay so for a while. Might worth waiting a few months to grind the extra $$ and avoid yourself a switcharoo later...

LetTheRightLensIn · May 23, 2013

No, not the 6D for video. Too much aliasing and moire. If it is going to be a Canon, then the 1DX is definitely the best and the 5D3 the next best. The others won't do much for you.
[/quote]

VAF filter for 365 is still 700 less than 5D with same video quality.
[/quote]

With the ML hack the 5D3 is miles better than 6D+AA filter. 6D uses slow SD cards that can't support ML RAW so well.

wickidwombat · May 23, 2013

AlexB said:
Thank you guys for the replys

I feel I should clarify about me falling down the stairs and hitting my head before I go any further. It has really nothing to do with why I am downgrading my equipment, it was my vague attempt to open with a joke on why I am taking this path rather than upgrading my gear. It was an accident not related to photography at all, and it doesn't really belong in this post. I apologize, my sense of humar is rather, special. But I'm fine now, tank you for your concern.

I realise I was unclear in my original post as to why I am doing this. The short answer is cost. I will try to clarify a little further.

I can't justiify to myself owning all this expensive gear when I only use it for what it's worth 1-3 times a year. It is great having one of the best camera bodies and some of the finest glass available at my disposal, but I know I don't really need it for what I am shooting, so I am looking to get by with cheaper equipment.

Size and weight has never been an issue for me, so I am definetly staying with the DSLR platform.

As one of the most significant things I shoot is for a local music festival I was thinking to concentrate my new, cheaper collection, around this. I have sort of already decided on a 1D Mark III, so that part is alright. But I am not sure about which lenses to get. I do want low light capability, so primes are my first thought. I have never really used prmes before except for my 50mm nifty-fifty. I am mainly looking for advice regarding the more affordable Canon primes, not excluding the 135mm f/2L as it is not too expensive to buy used. But the likes of 24 1.4, 35 1.4, 50 1.2, 85 1.2 etc are all out of the question due to price.

I know that for concerts I want something wide, and I want something for tighter shots close or equal to 200mm on full frame (135mm f/2L with 1D3?). I am thinking of keeping the 24-105 so I have at least one lens that is weather sealed. But other then that I am pretty clueless on which of the Canon non-L lenses to aim for.

I hope I managed to elaborate a bit better on what my goal is.

Again, thank you for your help.

-AlexB

Sounds like my prevous advice will suit well
get the sigma 35 f1.4 for your fast wide concert option
in the APS-H the 24 f1.4L mkII would be awesome but also fails the cost test because its spendy

wickidwombat · May 23, 2013

neuroanatomist said:
wickidwombat said:

bonvoyage said:

Is it possible to stack up two extenders 1.4x Mk2 + 2x Mk2 on a canon 70-200mm f2.8 L IS lens with Canon 5d Mark iii ?
With the recent firmware update i reckon its possible to autofocus with the center point @ f8.

Click to expand...

not the genuine canons

Click to expand...

As stated above, the 'genuine Canon' TC's the OP lists can be stacked - they are the MkII versions. The 2xIII has two additional elements compared to the 2xII, and there's not enough space at the back of the rear element to accept the protrusion of the 1.4x TC.

Note that you can stack a 1.4xIII and a 2xII - the limitation is for the 2xIII.

ah woops i didnt know the mk2s could be I wonder why they killed that ability on the mk3

also I would expect having so many connecting interfaces in the optical line there is more room for off centered focus due to construction tolerances on each mounting point.

Overall I dont think stacked TC is very practical due to massive AF slowdown and quite a big IQ hit
maybe if you are shooting something totally static it might be ok but not if you intend tracking anything

Gary W. · May 23, 2013

Hey all,

Mine is.... Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD...

Gary W.

May 23, 2013

Canon service in the Uk can be pretty grim.

I actually bought a T2i for video because I couldn't depend on the 7D that I bought for video with UDMA cards until the firmware update fixed a problem Canon denied any knowledge of.

I also had a hire pool of 18 MV600 camcorders that broke with the same CCD fault, Canon denied an issue until the Sony CCD problem became widely acknowledged.

dgatwood · May 23, 2013

Re: EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II

x-vision said:
dgatwood said:

You know the quote "The best camera is the one you have with you?" Applies to flashes, too.

Click to expand...

Yes ... but it makes you lazy too :-*.
You end up using the on-board flash rather than an external flash, which you can bounce or use with a diffuser.

Maybe you do. I certainly don't. If I expect to need a flash, I bring one, and I use it—the on-board flash stinks on ice with most of my lenses because they're too long and it's too low.

But it is better than nothing for quick shots when I wasn't expecting to need a flash, which does happen once in a while.

florianbieler.de · May 23, 2013

That head shot was also processed in DxO which alters sharpness and bokeh.

niteclicks · May 23, 2013

bchernicff, hope you don't mind, I had to try this . Here I my first attempts . Now I'm thinking JELLO !

RGF · May 23, 2013

If you are a member of CPS, they loan equipments to gold and platinum members. May be hard to get when you need it,but worth considering

RGF · May 23, 2013

RGF said:
They offer 1Dx,but never seen a great white listed on the canon USA store - either refurbished or new

Correction - canon on-line shop lists the 400F2.8 II and 800. Strange collection. No 500 or 600

Click · May 23, 2013

RGF said:
As the card gets full, the camera would make noise like film rewinding. ;D ;D

Cool idea. ;D LOL

Quasimodo · May 23, 2013

scrappydog said:
I have not used the pinhole cap, but I have used the Holga lens for Canon.

Link: http://shop.holgadirect.com/products/holga-canon-camera-slr-lens-hl-c

It looks like a lens, but it is only a pinhole. I not noticed dust issues with it, but I do not shoot with it often. Although it will mount on both crop and full-frame cameras, the vignetting on full-frame is too extreme. It is best to only shoot a pinhole with a crop camera.

Here is a landscape shot I took with my Holga on my 60D:

Arlington Bridge, Washington, DC by scrappydoggy, on Flickr

Although the shots are in color, I generally prefer to convert to black and white. It's a liberating way to shoot because you do not rely on sharpness or technology. Composition is the critical factor.

Here is an article on shooting with a Holga: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/essays/vanRiper/010706.htm
Pros use them too: http://www.jeff-friesen.com/Holga.html
A good resource: http://www.pinholepossibilities.com/artists-who-make-pinhole-photographs.html

Have fun!

Beautiful picture! Thanks for the reading. I only have FF, but my wife has a 600D. I will definitely look at the links you sent.

Thanks,

G.

Viggo · May 23, 2013

I'm about to buy the 24-70 mk2, and wonder if people still experience copy-to-copy variation of significance? Or was this only the first sold?

Does anyone have some sharpness-results from Reikan Focal to share so we can compare different ones?

Thanks!

privatebydesign · May 23, 2013

"So let me get this straight..you are judging a fisheye's quality but how it can be de-fished???"

No, of course not. You are the one who said the full frame fisheye is a "low use one trick pony type of lens" I was just illustrating that it isn't, however the circular fisheye is. I was responding to your strawman and you then tried to turn that around to belittle my input. :

"Currently, the only Canon fisheye on sale is the zoom. The prime was discontinued shortly before it's release. So unless one buys one second hand, they are no longer available."

Actually the prime was available for a while after the zooms release, but did you read the OP's actual question? He stated this "The canon 8-15 is out of the range of what I want to spend. I was thinking on a second [hand] canon 15 2.8 or a sigma." Clearly you didn't.

With regards your Flicker feed and websites, I have nothing polite or pertinent to say.

As for the 85mm comment, again you are throwing up a strawman argument and you compound your error as you have obviously never shot high school basketball, if you had you would know the 85 f1.8 is practically de rigueur, my original comment was just that the biggest and highest spec lens is not necessarily the most appropriate for a specific task, something that would have been patently obvious had you tried to shoot that high school basketball with your 85 f1.2. Many people consider it to be the best lens available for the task, there certainly are not "loads of other lenses far better suited to that role".

Clearly, had you read the OP's opening comment, you would have realised your strong opinion about the 8-15 zoom is a nonstarter. Too much money and unrequested functionality, apart form those two fundamental criteria I think you nailed it. DOH!

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics