Ha, well thanks for your opinion guess I can start saving or wait till the guy wants to let them go for less so if they do die it won't be such a loss.

Thats great thanks, i think the 430 is enough for me. I like the idea its smaller nad lighter too.

charlesa said:

It is hand holdable easily it seems... although more interested in samples on how it would compare to a 400 mm f/2.8 prime... and the price I believe will surpass the price of the supertelephoto primes themselves.

Click to expand...

I held it - I wouldn't want to handhold it for more than a few minutes - especially not when coupled to a ! series body

Thanks! Yes indeed he was from the SADF or even the 'new' SADF...I will have to ask him when I see him again

CustomizedMacs.com said:

Now, I see that the petal hood is bigger. Bigger is better? Not for cameras? The difference between the two is small. Unless you have your own opinion, which I want to hear. Convince me the regular one is better when the petal one is bigger and at the shortest sides is a few millimeters bigger.

Click to expand...

Even if you don't want to take a video of it, for your own understanding, please just fit the petal hood, make sure the lens is set to autofocus, and then half press the shutter to let the lens AF on different subjects. Try it without looking through the viewfinder, but looking at the camera - just as the people you're trying to impress will see it. If you find the rotation of the petal lens hood impressive, I'm pleased for you.

Please note that the videos you posted were not only through the lens, but there was no focusing there - just zooming.

And as for the depth of the hood, it should be as deep as possible without introducing vignetting. Canon are pretty clued up when it comes to optics - I'd guess they're a bit better at it than you and people that make cheap rubbish to sell on eBay, so personally I'd go with the Canon design.

mezzoutopia said:

I had my brand new 1DX since early Feb 13. I had also bought an extra original LPE4N batteries. Was out with my family to a Marine Aquarium for a weekend holiday and brought my 1DX along with only one fully charged LPE4N. Was at the Aquarium for about 4 hrs when my 1DX suddenly showed low batt and shut down. I took the batterries out for a while and reinserted and it still did not work. Last night, I put the battery into the charger and it showed more than 50% charge remaining. When I took it out after 2 mins in the charger and put it back into 1DX, it still have 64% remaining. Subsequently the 1DX shut down again after a few shutter clicks. I decided to swop to another LPE4N and everything is Ok now but I have not tried to shoot until the battery is around 60% level. I checked the "System Status Display" and there is no "Caution warning". Has this happened to anyone of you before? What do you think is the problem, the battery or the camera?

Click to expand...

I'd send both to Canon. Just in case there's something that doesn't work in the exact combination

I would keep an eye on ebay and when a lens that interests you comes up, low ball the bid, especially close to the end of bidding. Of course make sure that selling has good feedback. You should be able to find a deal if you are patient.

why not send out a link to a website that you can update frequently.

UV 0 i think ..uv for well uv and 0 is that it don't block visible light as a ND would...

You could just read the CR news, there is already a long thread. The poll makes no sense at all.

The best thing about the 6D to me is the Image quality and high ISO performance.

The best thing about the 6D for my wife is the ability to view my photos immediately while I'm shooting them and download/post the ones she likes on Facebook or text/email them to her friends right away. The images are resized to 1920x1200 so when you download it to your phone, it's < 1 sec per photo.

If I messed up an exposure or white balance, it has built in raw processing so I can fix it and it will spit out a Jpeg for her to download to her phone.

distant.star said:

.
Digic 6??????

You mean I've got a 5D3, and I'm now out of date!!!!

Oh, Canon, what have you done to us!!!!!!

Click to expand...

Afraid you may be right, the 5D3 can no longer take a decent picture, its useless, send it for scrap. Its a conspiratorial plot they don't know how to run a company. I'm off to Nikon.

jrista said:

hjulenissen said:

TheSuede said:

Deconvolution in the Bayer domain (before interpolation, "raw conversion") is actually counterproductive, and totally destructive to the underlying information.

The raw Bayer image is not continuous, it is sparsely sampled. This makes deconvolution impossible, even in continuous hue object areas containing "just" brightness changes. If the base signal is sparsely sampled and the underlying material is higher resolution than the sampling, you get an under-determined system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underdetermined_system). This is numerically unstable, and hence = impossible to deconvolve.

Click to expand...

There is no doubt that the CFA introduce uncertainty compared to sampling all colors at each site. I believe I was thinking about cases where we have some prior knowledge, or where an algorithm or photoshop-dude can make correct guesses afterwards. Perhaps what I am suggesting is that debayer and deconvolution ideally should be done jointly.

If the scene is achromatic, then "demosaic" should amount to something ala a global WB, filtering might destroy recoverable detail - the CFA in itself does not reduce the amount of spatial information compared to a filterless sensor. If the channels are nicely separated in the 2-d DFT, you want to follow those segments when deconvoluting?

-h

Click to expand...

On a per-pixel level, a bayer is only receiving 30-40% of the information a achromatic sensor is getting. That implies a LOSS of information is occuring due to the filtering of the CFA. You have spatial information, for the same number of samples over the same area...but the information in each sample is anemic compared to what you get with an achromatic sensor. That is the very reason we need to demosaic and interpolate information at all...that can't be a meaningless factor.

Click to expand...

Off topic, sorry but I just had to scratch the itch. We know the negatives (more processing, incompatibility with current standards, more focus should be spent on different sensor types), but every time I read something like this I can't help but think a RGBW array would be awesome.

jimjamesjimmy said:

Don Haines said:

I found that the tripod weight was more important than mirror lockup. I have a pair of tripods.... the old heavy one moves a lot less than the new lightweight one.... but hang a weight off of the lightweight tripod and it gets very steady. I have a eyelet in the bottom of the central collumn that I attach to the camera bag with a length of light rope.... makes the setup much more stable.

Click to expand...

surely if it was a bit windy your bag would be swaying all over the place? my tripods pretty sturdy and there was no hint of wind in my room or shake on my floor!

Click to expand...

The "trick" is to have the bag just touching the ground, or hung using a bungy cord. That way the tripod is pulled down to steady it and the bag cannot sway about.

I'm not buying another "fast" wide angle lens until a manufacturer can offer me near-zero coma and near-zero CA. My Sigma 35mm f/1.4 was a *horror* in this regard at f/1.4; the only useful portion of an astro image was perhaps 10% (at most) near the center. And if a lens can't shoot cleanly at f/1.4, I don't think they ought to advertise it as such. My Sigma 35mm was only useful at f/2.8 and above. At 1.4 it was a joke.

As consumers, we've been far too forgiving of these horribly distorted lens designs. Here's hoping the manufacturers are listening.

chauncey said:

I'm in the market for a new body with the criteria being superior low light capabilities, something my 1DsIII is somewhat lacking, and superior IQ.
Dynamic Range and bit depth also rank in the want column as well. I'm thinking that photomerge will overcome the need for high MP needed for large images.

Click to expand...

Noise is NOT primarily determined by pixel size as so many people falsely assume. It is primarily determined by technology and total sensor surface area. When you stitch images what you are basically doing is simulating a larger sensor surface area.

Low ISO noise has been a solved problem for a long time now, and no modern sensor produces noisy low ISO images when properly exposed. People who claim otherwise are zooming to 300% in PS OR using image viewers with horrible scaling algorithms (Apple's Preview is one) OR trying to lift shadows by 3-5 stops. Or all of the above. Suffice it to say, noise is going to be even less of an issue when you stitch multiple frames and thereby simulate a larger sensor.

Dynamic range OTOH is primarily driven by technology and pixel size, and stitching won't help this. Then again, if you're shooting a subject still enough for stitching, you're shooting a subject that's still enough for exposure blending / HDR.

FWIW - I find stitching 3 frames (camera orientation opposite of image orientation) to be relatively easy and practical. Anything more is a chore. Even the lowest Rebel can match a top notch MF film scan with a three frame stitch. It's rare to need or even see prints that big.

I'm thinking that a crop sensor that utilizes the "center sweet spot" of the lens coupled with reduced MP to allow more utilized light would be the answer.

Click to expand...

You're not taking technology into account. The current sensors in either format are the lowest noise sensors Canon has produced to date, and noise is being further squashed into oblivion for a given print size by the stitch. Though stitching doesn't help DR, the current sensors are also the highest DR sensors to date, again due to technology.

If DR is truly a concern then 1DX, 5D3, or 6D. If you're doing this for big landscape prints, be aware that the DR gains aren't a great benefit in practice. Generally if your landscape scene exceeds the sensor DR, it REALLY exceeds it, and you need to exposure blend/HDR. In which case any sensor will do.

Don't forget to buy a panoramic head.

You may also want to consider if the shift function on the T/S lenses better serves your needs.

Rienzphotoz said:

Artifex said:

jimjamesjimmy said:

Rienzphotoz said:

jimjamesjimmy said:

(though if sony had a FF i would be v interested in that , shame)

Click to expand...

Sony does have a FF camera ... Sony a99 Full-Frame DSLR

Click to expand...

sorry i meant pentax!!

Click to expand...

I don't want to get you even more torn out, but it seems that Pentax have confirm that they plan to make a FF camera.
Source: http://photorumors.com/2013/02/03/pentax-confirms-their-full-frame-dslr-camera-plans-again/

Click to expand...

Pentax Full Frame will be a very long wait ... from what I read in that article, they've been talking about it since 2009

Click to expand...

Yes, I see that! It's a shame Pentax doesn't have a FF body yet; heavier competition for a same market often mean better products and smaller price (though the oil market doesn't quite follow this logic). I would personally love to see a good quality, not to expensive Pentax FF body; since their camera current are backward compatible with lens from the film era, I can hope the same with a FF body.

We don't of course know what kind of standard this camera might be built to, it maybe of a higher quality than the Rebel line. Even if its not though I'm guessing Canon are banking on its compact nature to sell at a prenium, not really that unrealistic considering the prenium you pay for m43 bodies with DSLR like form factor and an EVF.

The other side I spose is lens size, the 40mm pancake is an option I spose but a bit long, a shorter EF-S pancake or a powered zoom would IMHO help such a camera alot.

neuroanatomist said:

Rienzphotoz said:

I actually got taken in by David Zeiser's good review of Tamron 28-300 VC (http://digitalprotalk.blogspot.com/2012/04/test-driving-new-tamron-28-300mm-vc.html) ... but now I'm thinking maybe he was paid to do that review

Click to expand...

As I stated when this link was posted above, if you actually ignore his words and look at the images which he describes as 'tack sharp' it's pretty clear that they aren't.

Click to expand...

When I originally posted the above link I was aware that the images will not be "tack sharp" and I was prepared to "live with it" for those occasions when I did not want/cannot carry more than one lens ... but what I was not prepared for was the horrible creaking noise and the image "jump" when AF & VC were being engaged ... it was plain annoying, so I got rid of it.

bseitz234 said:

Pardon the pun in the title, it's Friday afternoon and I'm getting goofy.

Adding to my wish list of things that are unlikely to happen, along with AF-point-linked spot metering, I'm wondering what the chances are of seeing higher frame rate video in the 7d2. Obviously this is not based on anything more than line items on CR1 spec lists about "improved video", and there are lots of ways to improve video.

But, given that the 7d is geared towards sports shooters, might Canon include the ability to shoot 1080/60 (or better?) This would be a better spec than the 5d3 and 1dx, but the GoPro3 can do it, and that's a much smaller, cheaper little device. Plus, I want it to happen, and therefore I've convinced myself it's possible.

Click to expand...

I really hope 7D2 will have 1080/60 fps AND 720/120 fps. I believe the speculated dual DIGIC 5 processors will have enough processing power for that.

redelses said:

Thanks for the responses! It's good to see what others experiences are in terms of upgrading or comparing 7D to 5Dii/iii. The crop vs ff is another discussion that can debate the advantages of both. My biggest concern is that my 7D may have had other issues based solely on the dramatic improvement in IQ and AF with the 5D, but that seems to be at least somewhat consistent with others.

Dylan777 said:

Congrat...on 5D III purchase. Do yourself a fav. skip the Tammy, get the Canon 24-70 f2.8 II. You will not regret it...contrast is much better. So much sharper at f2.8. Not to mention Tammy has reversed zoom

Click to expand...

The Canon 24-70 sounds much better than the Tammy based on others feedback, but is $600-800 more. If you had the choice... 5Dii and Canon 24-70, or 5Diii and Tam 24-70?

Click to expand...

5D II + Canon 24-70 for now, save up $ then get 5D III for better AF system.

Thanks

my sigma 85 is a 117xxxxx
no problems on any of my cameras

PhotographAdventure said:

bvukich said:

paul13walnut5 said:

Set your shooting aperture, depress the aperture preview button then de-couple your EF lens and twist it 1/3rd away from the lock.

Click to expand...

Good tip! Why didn't I ever think of that?

Click to expand...

Is this different than shooting full manual? Does decoupling save battery power?

Click to expand...

It will save battery power I suppose but thats not the main reason.

Even if you shoot on full manual the iris is stopping down each time, and it may not be exact every single time, so you get a slight exposure step, can be 1/10th of a stop, but this will be visible on your timelapse.

By de-coupling the lens with the aperture set as described the aperture is closed and thats it. It will be the same for each shot because it is effectively locked.

Another reason is that a 10s timelapse may be 250 or 300 shots. Thats 250 or 300 opening and closings on your aperture diaphragm and electronics that your lens could probably do without.

NB> If you use adapted manual lenses or zeiss cine or samyangs with a mechanical iris then this won't be an issue.

From the manual (page 313 of the English one):

When any of the following functions are set, the <!> icon can be displayed on the lower left in the viewfinder:

- When monochrome picture style is set
- When WB is corrected
- When ISO expansion is used
- When spot metering is set

Click to expand...

You can configure which settings trigger the ! icon (including none of them) in the custom function described on that page of the manual.