neuroanatomist said:

charlesa said:

Quite the price, the Canon counterpart is priced better true.

Click to expand...

sanj said:

My heart sinks. Canon may price their next 800 to match this...

Click to expand...

Back to the actual topic of this thread...

If/when Canon releases an updated 800mm 5/f.6L IS, it may very well be in the same price range as the Nikon 800/5.6, if not higher.

Consider the MkII versions of the 500/4 and 600/4 lenses. Look at the selling price of the MkI versions at the time the MkII's were announced, add in the price increase that Canon applied during the long delay between announcement and availability, and you see that the MkII lenses were a 45-50% increase in price. Based on the current 800/5.6 price, that gives a range of $19-20K for an 800/5.6 II.

And don't expect Canon to throw a TC into the deal...

Click to expand...

I bet higher, and made from titanium and carbon fibre...

Hey all, I read this on the other rumors site, and it got me intrigued to what canon might have on their test shelves!

The rumors for the d4x are :

Same body as the Nikon D4
36 MP sensor without AA filter, designed and made by Nikon, with some new improvements (moire in-camera reduction)
6 fps (11 fps is the maximum possible fps with the current shutter)
Few video improvements
Price should be few hundred dollars above the D4 (currently listed for $5996.95).
Announcement expected in fall of 2013

(scource: the other rumor site)

Could canon have something similarly planned for the 1dx-s?, or maybe a high mp body based on the 5dIII (Like a 5ds )

6 fps for that many pixels sounds really interesting, if they could include a crop mode ( like the d800) and boost the fps 50% like the d800 with grip in dx mode, it would give you 36mp 6fps and 14mp(1.6 crop) with 8-9 fps...

I hope canon is planning something like that, i would love a '2 in 1' camera with high fps ( and still hoping for better buffer sizes on the cameras, like 60 raw....)

Hi sorry ... forgot about this thread, yes I got it 10 days ago.
The image quality is very good, easily comparable to 24-70 f/2.8 (version 1 ... not the new one).
VC in Tamron 24-70 is more effective than the IS in Canon 70-200 L IS II ... I tested hand held shots at all shutter speeds from 1/40th of a second to 1 second ... I will post them tomorrow.
The only thing I don't like is the build quality, even the cheaper Canon L zooms have much better quality than the Tamron 24-70 VC ... having said that it is still the best built Tamron lens and it is nicely priced, giving value for money.
I'll post the VC vs IS comparison photos tomorrow, meanwhile check this video
Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Lens Review

Wow thanks for the amazing conversation. I would love to see some of your shots with the 50. Please post and share some please. I'm so interested in what others do with this lens.

Erik
www.solargravity.com

Image quality is affected by filters depending on the quality of the filter and on the surface area of the filter.

The larger the surface area of the filter, the greater the reduction in image quality. (You can see this with a softening filter--when your lens is stopped down, the effective diameter and surface area of the filter are reduced. When the surface area goes down, the image quality goes up, and hence there is less of a "softening" effect from the softening filter at smaller apertures (large f numbers).)

A filter with twice the diameter has four times the area. Large filters are bad in this way.

But ultimately, it is due to the expense--the larger the filter, the more expensive it is to make one the same quality as a smaller filter.

In fact, achieving that same level of filter quality isn't enough because even at the same level of filter quality the image quality will still be worse because of the larger area.

Sometimes stores seem to leave the rebate up for a day or two. Canon is not going to give them the rebate unless they cheat and change the date of sale that they submit to Canon. Stores must give the rebate to the customer up front, and then submit all of the purchases and dates to Canon and wait for a rebate. It ends up costing them $$ in interest.

I just ordered one. I played with it yesterday @ sony storeAGAIN. I doubt the next FF nex-9 will be smaller than current rx1, due to fixed lens. Can't wait, I'll post some pics once the camera arrived.

Impressive for such high iso

PaulFurlong said:

I just purchased Cannon 650D for videoing as my son said it’s the way I gotta go rather than video camera. I’m impressed with the contrast & colour, BUT I just discovered it only videos 29mins then turns off…
Does anyone know if there is any way around this as I needed it to record 1-1.5hrs continual?

Click to expand...

Sorry there is no way to make it actually record longer than that with stopping and starting again. There are camera hacks that auto restart the camera, but you still have a 1 second delay between shots.

The black card idea is interesting, but a studio still-life like this seems a perfect candidate to bracket exposures for a composite image. I don't (necessarily) mean feeding it to an HDR program, but more "old school" style, combining the parts of each image that are properly exposed. This would give you maximum flexibility to expose each part exactly as you like.

Click to expand...

this would not work as you would see still see the reflection of the card/box (whatever it is) on each side of the bottle and glass. the black card use is to eliminate that reflection all together in order to reveal the bottle itself more.

Do not really understand what you asking, but I so do not like the bounce boards being visible...

Click to expand...

this is what i'm talking about. this is a problem of Angle of Incidence = Angle of Reflectance compounded by the curved reflective surface of the bottle and glass. to minimize the effect (or size) of the "highlight" on the bottle you have to use a dark object to block that area that is being reflected.

Well done

donate it to a local college / community group for adult education or a photography club.

cheers

cute

ordinarily I'd turn the subject's body to the camera.... but in this case you want to see all the badges etc...

Update: Well my EOS software had the 135L lens already checked but I guess I never synced the camera. I selected a few more lens combos (1.4 III ext) and closed the software (no "sync" or "ok" button - weird) and now the camera says Data available for that lens. Now I need to check all of my other lenses on that body.

Thanks for the help.

neuroanatomist said:

pdirestajr said:

I haven't done a test, but wouldn't I have a shallower DOF if I used my 5DII with my 100mm macro with the same framing- ie: I'd have to be significantly closer with the 5D?

Click to expand...

Yes, at the same f/stop, the DoF would be shallower with FF. But when you consider diffraction (you can stop down the lens more on the FF sensor before diffraction costs you sharpness), there's no 'APS-C gives deeper DoF' benefit. Both formats can achieve the same deepest DoF for a given amount of diffraction, but the FF can achieve shallower DoF if desired. Just another benefit to the amazing FF sensor.

Click to expand...

+1 In addition, for the same DoF, infinity background blur (dependent on physical size of entrance pupil in an imaging setup) would be more with FF format as it allows larger entrance pupil. Could be little to significant depending on other parameter. In simple words, it can provide better subject isolation with right setup and object distance.

wickidwombat said:

For dynamic range, and highest possible IQ
as it was at iso 100 the sky can blow out really easily
I could have used Iso 400 and a faster shutter

Click to expand...

Indeed, I recently noticed that dr @iso100 is not much different from iso400, or iso800 for that matter. Not because Canon has great high iso dr, but low iso dr is so crappy vs. Nikon: http://www.sensorgen.info/

wickidwombat said:

also funnily enough back on topic, when going through the images of this shoot I didnt take a single shot wide open. I was using the 85 f1.4 on the 5Dmk3 and the 16-35 on the 5Dmk2 (my favourite combo) most shots i was at between f5.6 to f8

Click to expand...

Exactly, I noticed that, too (and it's in line with the book I mentioned in the op) - but I didn't write it because I'd fear to be flamed to a crisp

Oh no. Here we go again...

The more I think about it, the more the 24-70 f4 seems like a replacement for someone moving from a crop+17-40 to FF ... with a bit more range.... but the price kills the deal.

I almost bought the 5DmkIII this Christmas season, but decided I did not have the cash. I can only hope the prices go down in spring. I will have time to think about spending twice as much for the 1DX in the meantime. They seem to be in two different worlds, but I know I would spend a very happy retirement enjoying the 1DX if I can bring myself to pay for it. It would probably take me a few years to learn all it's tricks, and I would like learning something new each time I went out with it. The 5D would be great as well, and maybe that will be the one. Since I drive a modest Ford Ranger, and don't spend money on new cars, I think I can bring myself to splurge on the camera I want. And that exotic 8-15 fisheye just to be crazy.

It shouldn't do that obviously, If it is still happening, do a camera reset, remove the battery for 5 minutes or so, and try again. If it is still happening, since its a new lens, it is possibly related, and you might have to exchange it. While lenses do not store AFMA, they do store the AF calibration settings done at the factory or service center, and there could be a firmware issue or communication issue.

6D or 5D Mark III if you can afford it. I got my 5D3 for $2600. Keep on the lookout for deals. If you can afford it, keep your 7D and 17-55. You'll miss it if you sell it. If your 18-135 is the first edition, sell it or give it away. It's a piece of crap, for lack of a better description. Actually if there was a EF mount on a real piece of crap, it might take better photos. Obviously, you know that already, since you don't use it anymore.

Chosenbydestiny said:

I don't know how you can't see it. I saw it right away after borrowing a 100L and comparing it to my 135mm and 85mm lenses. Macro images look horrible for head and shoulder shots. I can even see it in full body portraits. Color wise, sharpness wise, they're over the top.

Click to expand...

Like privatebydesign, I seem to be in the humble "can't see it" group - could you please elaborate what exactly "over the top" concerning color/sharpness means?

hey, does the zoom ring actually go the same way as canon lenses?(the "correct" way I might add haha)

My photographic background and lightning system got ruined 2011 after hail broke the glass of my conservatory.

I would have bought at Manfrotto, al of the holders... would have cost 1600€.
So I bought it at Phottix and other Chines companies and saved more then 900€!!!!

sandymandy said:

no problem im often writing in gibberish so its hard to understand me

Click to expand...

I think you make a strong point, and what makes it even more important is that when you move away from a screen and go ahead and print it, it becomes quite noticeable. I have done that mistake myself (wanting to make it black'er than it originally was). Further there is a dilemma, because by doing it more black (skilfully or not) it is because you want to emphazise the subject. However by doing so, one also remove some depth in the shot... i.e. making a case for more details in the black/grey areas....