Mr Bean said:

I find an easier, or, more accurate way to do focus for astro-pic's is to plug the 5D into the laptop. Then use live view on the laptop screen. It means I'm not bending my neck back and the image can be viewed larger. Sure, Jupiter works, but, Jupiter won't be around all year

Click to expand...

As much as I want to do that it is not usually possible for me. I live in a city with pretty bright lights and the only way to do the astro is to get out of town and into the wilderness. There I struggle with setting everything up and am also hampered with Mosquitos and moths that get attracted by the light of the laptop.

well_dunno said:

I have neither seen JR around for some time now. It seems he was last active November 6. Has anyone heard of him?

Click to expand...

Don't know about JR, but Brian seems to look in once in a while. Doesn't say much, kinda quiet and shy. I certainly wish him the best.

This is definitly fake, thepaint texture pattern is identical to the 35mm.

If you look at 50mm lenses though they are generally horrible for image quality. Take any 50mm lens from Nikon, Lecia, Zeiss, Sigma, and they perform as well as most primes perform at f/1.4 when they're set to f/2.5-f/2.8.

If this lens was f/2.0 or f/1.8 it wouldn't matter as long as it was as sharp at f/2.0 as current lenses are at f/2.8.

I would really love to see a 50mm IS with round aperture blades and a focus on extreme image quality across the focal range, it would be amazing.

holga 120N

When is this thing coming?

I want to buy the new Sigma 35, but I will hold off untill this USB-puck is available. I've had lots of focus issues with Sigma in the past, so I want to be ready for it this time. ;D

I notice the speedlite is bent (i.e. not upright) in the camera bag ... is that ok to transport like that? I ask coz about 2 years ago the technician at the Canon store here told me that it is not supposed to be stored/transported that way and that it should always be transported in the upright position ... is that true? has any of you been transporting your lens that way (as shown in the below pic)? and has it caused any problems to the flash head joints etc?

I have a pair of EF bodies....lol if you're interested

NWPhil said:

Zlatko said:

NWPhil said:

hate to say it, but maybe the 14-24 will be a F/4 instead of 2.8.

Click to expand...

I'm guessing a high quality f/4 version would be more attractive generally. Lower price, smaller size & weight. The ultra-wide range of 14-24 is very cool, but how many of us really need it to be f/2.8 and want to pay extra for it to be f/2.8 and want to carry the a big bulbous design that f/2.8 requires? I'm sure some people want it to be f/2.8, but I'm guessing many would be as happy or even much happier with with an f/4 version.

Click to expand...

I would be happier with the price and range, but 2.8 helps a bit in nightscapes. For daytime shots, not so much; after all general rule for it, places the apt in the f5.6-f11 range.
With that in mind, what about a 1.4 or 1.8 UWA prime? a 16mm focal would be fine with me ;D

Click to expand...

An F/4 UWA - great. I'd go for such a lens. Even for nightscapes, as I often stop it down to f/8. Results with the 28 f/2.8 and the forementioned settings are pretty fine.


Z96A2899bMasterKLEIN by Peter Hauri, on Flickr


So, I would prefer a 14-24 f/4 over a 2.8 as the price tag would be much nicer...
For inhouse low light photography I re-discovered my 50 f/1.4 after my recent upgrade to FF.

Recently I was shooting my cat at ISO 51200 in an almost dark bedroom at 6:30 a.m. Canon 5D3, Canon EF 50 F/1.4 @ F/1.6, 1/40 sec. While a small amount of ambiental light fingered into the room I manually focussed at the animals ears which I saw better than it's eyes, therefore the face is slightly out of focus. Photograph above: no NR applied. Photograph below: NR value in both Luminance Noise & Chromniance Noise: 14 out of 20 in Canon's free software Digital Photo Professional. This goes way beyond my wildest enthusiast amateur dreams! Watch it in full mode, although due to reduction in post for webupload the difference is less obvious. But the pic without NR looks as grainy as back in the filmdays...But that's quite awesome at these ISOs!


Shooting my Cat at ISO 51k by Peter Hauri, on Flickr

My wife has excellent results from her PowerShot SX150 IS, which is very compact. Of course with the very small sensor, the noise performance becomes an issue at higher ISO sensitivities.

A problem for me is that it has no viewfinder of any sort, but the chimp panel is quite nice.

Doug Kerr

Thank you guys

I used to find some lens extender combination would be better with IS turned off when I had my 7D.

But normally I leave it on all the time and don't seem to have a problem.

That is impressive. Probably not the primary application of a tripod for most users, but I can imagine that it feels good to know that this tripod will not any blur to the pictures, and most likely will last a long time.

Wild said:

Woody said:

Wild said:

Canon could have easily churned out a mirrorless with a 5d mark ii-like sensor in it with a similar body style to the EOS-M, and kept it priced competitively.

Click to expand...

Pricing a camera with a FF sensor competitively is pretty hard. Just look at the fixed lens Sony RX1 as a guide. Want a cheaper FF camera? You've already got the D600 and 6D.

Canon is in the business of money making. I'm sure their marketing staff must have done their homework and concluded APS-C is the way of the future. The sensors are cheaper to produce and the accompanying lenses are also smaller. Until manufacturers find a cheaper means to produce FF sensors, they'll always be reserved for a niche market.

Click to expand...

I understand that full-frame isn't cheap. I also realize aps-c is at a really good place price/performance-wise. I just think that Canon could have easily leap-frogged the competition with a cheap-body full frame mirrorless (to help keep costs lower.

When Microsoft's Xbox came out back in 2006 (I think), it was as powerful as some $2000 gaming computers, and they sold it for $400. They knew they were going to sell a lot of them, and the games that went along with it, so they kept the price low enough for it to take off. A full-frame mirrorless, priced aggressively, and banking on lens sales to maintain larger profits, could do exceptionally well for Canon. Seeing as they're probably the only company on this planet that could pull something like that off, it's disappointing to have them play it safe in the market with a smaller sensor, and remove a reason for them to make Full-frame mirrorless lenses.

I guess I'm in the minority, but I just think full-frame should be more readily available to the masses (I know somebody's going to say film is cheap). If somebody told me each aps-c sensor costs 50 bucks to make, but a full-frame sensor costs like $1000, then I'm completely wrong and I take everything back ;D

Click to expand...

You're making a faulty assumption here, Microsoft will make the bulk of their money selling games. Maybe 10-20 games per sold console. Canon would not be able to sell lots of lenses to go with these cheap full frame cameras, most ppeople would settle for the kit lens like they probably do with the rebels.

He's right about one thing - the 50 F/1,2L is soft as shite!
That and the funky focus shifting - seriously????

ET

Feb. 2nd ends

Gunda7879 said:

For those who might be interested in 6D, B&H Photo are selling the 6D with Kit Lens (24-105mm F4L) with 32GB memory card for $2499. Not sure for how long it'll last.

URL: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/892354-REG/

Click to expand...

I had a 7D that did the same thing and it was the image processor. Canon replace it and it was fine

Whether the eventual update on the 135L is f/2 or f/1.8 I don't really care. What would be handy is the standardization to the 77mm filter thread size plus IS. Maybe I'm not as steady as I used to be, but after using my most used lens, the 70-200 f/2.8IIis I really notice the subtle trembles with the 135 f/2 and need to be more conscious of shutter speed if I'm hand holding. Another useful option would be a tripod/monopod collar.

In any case, the current lens continues to astound me. I was late getting the 135 f/2, it was not until last year I made room in my bag for one. Out of the box it was a shocker, needing a constant +9 AFMA on all my bodies. Thank goodness for AFMA.

Another highly unethical, possibly unhealthy alternative to IS would be the use of beta-blockers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_blocker as used by some athletes. Since they promote lower heart rates and reduce tremors, beta blockers have been used in professional sports where high accuracy is required, including archery, shooting, golf and snooker. Photographers too?

Beta blockers are banned by the International Olympic Committee. A recent, high-profile transgression took place in the 2008 Summer Olympics, where 50 metre pistol silver medallist and 10 metre air pistol bronze medallist Kim Jong-su tested positive for propranolol and was stripped of his medal. For similar reasons, beta blockers have also been used by stutterers and surgeons. How slow can you hand hold a 135 f/2?

-PW

@TrumpetPower

Good stuff, in defense of the humble bit of 'white' paper, its something that fits in the kit bag quite easily, and is less imperfect than awb etc. paper will at least get you close enough that fixes in post are minor.

I'll try the styrofoam cup sometime.

I have the qpcards & a calumet grey white black card in my kit bag, but accept that even this is s bit cumbersome for many, especially given canons old fashion manusl wbbprocedure.
With live view it should take one button.

I look forward to working my way through your link, everyday is a school day and all that.

Cheers

ahab1372 said:

While 300 is more than 200 (obviously), it doesn't feel that much longer in the field. If you need more reach, I recommend looking also at the 100-400 or 400 prime. Depending on what you shoot, even that might not feel long enough, but it will get you closer.

Click to expand...

Or, if you are weight conscious (hiking, travel, etc) and don't want to deal with the 100-400, you can go my path, I got the 200mm f/2.8 and I'll add a 2x TC when I want 400mm f/5.6.

I lose IS, but since I shoot mostly action and things on the move, it's not much of a loss for me. If you need IS, then the 100-400 is a good suggestion

Looks like a wrong forum.

What I agree with though is the excitement, which I haven't felt about Canon quite some time.

EvilTed said:

Wow!

I can't wait to get my hands on this camera and the same specs in the new X-Pro2.

http://www.flixelpix.com/featured/hands-on-the-x100s/

ET

Click to expand...

Samyang announced on their Facebook page that the new 10mm f/2.8 ED AS UMC CS lens will be postponed till the end of 2013 due to changes in optical calculation.

neuroanatomist said:

caruser said:

Any update on this subject?

Click to expand...

It's not supported at this point, although the only problem it causes is with metering (physically, it fits). Chuck Westfall told me that it's apparently something Canon could fix in firmware, if they choose to.

Click to expand...

Hm, thanks for the info, I'll try to let them know that some people would like this.

(And I'll let them know that it took me about 2 hours to install EOS Utility on my Mac, using tools like dtruss to skip the stage that always got stuck - Canon's Mac software is still as crappy as ever).

Freelancer said:

Wildfire said:

Marsu42 said:

keep in mind that the 6d shots are softer

Click to expand...

What? Where did you get that from?

I've never shot a 5D3 but the 6D shots are just as sharp as my 5D2 shots... why would there be a difference in sharpness between any of the full frame sensors?

Click to expand...

no.

actually the 5D MK2 has the highest spatial resolution of the three cameras.
a lot of reviews confirm this.

but you have to shoot testcharts to see it or pixelpeep pictures of the same motive to notice it.
yet it IS visible.

the reason is a marginal lower MP number of the 6D (but that is really marginal) another reason is the difference in the AA filter.

i guess the 6D has a stronger AA filter then the other two cameras.
if that´s the case it is a shame that there is so much moire in 6D videos.

anyway, not all FF sensors are equal...

Click to expand...

Im kind of a pixel peeper myself, but almost by accident. I am viewing my shots at 24" on a 1920x1200 monitor, and judging them. My wife wanted a 8.5x11 print of a tiger lilly I shot last summer, and on my PC I thought, ehh, its not real sharp but W/E and had a print of it made. at 8.5x11 in our hallway it looks super-sharp, and gets alot of comments. Maybe a 2' print in a restaurant on a wall, 1' from someones face it may look soft. SOOO many amazing shots have come from 12 MP 5d classics, and alot even cropped. Just a little point on pixel peeping I guess, Rant over haha

I've found the 35mm focal length on a FF camera to be too wide for most of my indoor photography. Its great for group shots, but unflattering for shots of individuals as you are forced to get close for good framing.

Last weekend I used both my 35L and 50 1.4 on my 6D for pictures at a party and later at a large family event. Despite the 50 1.4 being inferior to the 35L optically, I generally liked the majority of the 50mm shots better, especially of individuals.

I found myself wishing I had an 85, 100 or 135mm prime for better shots of individuals. I'm considering selling my 35L and using the money to apply toward a prime in the 85-135 focal length range to use for shooting indoor events and portraits along with the 50 1.4.

On the 5D3 comment, I more meant that ISO 6400 would be much cleaner without horizantal bands.

I haven't done enough macro to try focus bracketing... I'm not a huge fan of using a tripod except in extreme cases such as astrophotography/timelapse. I know macro and hand-holding don't really go together, but that's my style. If I get more serious about macro work, I'd probably invest in a macro flash.