Posts

ChrisAnderson · Oct 11, 2012

I rented this lens for some work events and its performance absolutely blew me away (as did the weight!)
Definitely in my top tier, once I start making enough dough at this.

Tried to find a few bokeh-centric shots to add

Oct 11, 2012

Joining the Professional Photographers Association is an easy way to get $15,000 in gear insurance, non-scheduled.

There is a scheduled option for added cost also. http://www.ppa.com/

Aglet · Oct 10, 2012

That's a general problem of most lenses.

Nikon and possibly Zeiss?.. made a line of lenses called Noctor I think. These are specifically optimized for use AT NIGHT because they reduce this coma effect of regular lens designs especially when used wide open.

I'd seen a sample shot of a night scene with bright hilites done with the regular lens vs the noctor -
heck of a difference!

-

jthomson · Oct 10, 2012

The 10K price doesn't make much sense.

The Nikon 200-400 is $1000 less than the Nikon 500mm.

I can't see the Canon unit being more expensive than the Canon 500mm.
If it really is 10 K then the Nikon 200-400 plus a converter plus a camera would be less than the Canon lens.

I like the Idea of the 200-400 1.4x, but if it is more expensive and heavier than a 500mm then i don't think it will sell well.

xps · Oct 10, 2012

neuroanatomist said:
wickidwombat said:

seriously have a look at the sigma 85 f1.4
at f2 to f2.8 it is super sharp, blows away even the 70-200 mk2

Click to expand...

"Blows away"? Wombat, you been smoking powdered KR rolled in DxOMark papers again? :

I

That would bei THE idea! Someone should tell Canon to add a little bit of LE or angel dust into their rubber grips. The we would all be a little bit more happy and satisfied ba the product Canon sells.
It makes happy, believe.

The Canon 100mm 2.8 is an good lens (850€ L, non L half of it) . Sigma EX 1.4 85mm DG HSM too (1000€). Don´t forget about the Canon 2.8 60mm (450€)or the Sigma EX 2.8 50mm DG (360€).
Maybe you try one of the cheaper macros. So you get "two for one" (macro too).

If you take the Macros, the filter diameter is quite smaller. So the filters are cheaper - if you want to to do so.

Synomis192 · Oct 10, 2012

KyleSTL said:
I've only taken my 5D out in low light a few times since I bought it a few weeks ago. My camera shows banding at 3200, and some noise (with no obvious patterning) at 1600 and 800. The 800 and 1600 noise is pretty easily correctable in DPP (I always shoot raw), but the 3200 requires the slider to move further than I'm accustommed to and results in blurring of details easily visible at 50%. Overall, I'm very happy with my 5Dc. I did miss the extra 'reach' of my previous cameras (XT, XTi, 30D) when I went to a baseball game last week (front row, right field line, ~50 ft beyond 1st base), but I can always buy longer lenses in the future, or crop when necessary.

Glad to know that RAW files are handled well using PP. I still don't know how to use NR setting correctly though, is there a certain value that you use when you use NR levels?

Interestingly enough, I was reading your gear list on your sig, you have the same lenses. On a side note, how well does the 28-105mm f/3.5-5.6 work on a 5Dc. I think that's my go to EF lens for now once I upgrade that is.

Oct 10, 2012

christianronnel said:
Congrats on acquiring the 5D3! Have you tried your 35/1.4 on it yet?

Not on MY unit, but I was able to put it on a store demo unit about a week ago. To be quite honest I didn't really like the field of view on FF as much as I did on APS-C where I felt it was perfect (why I bought the lens in the first place). On FF it's a bit wide for me, prefer the FOV of 50mm. Problem is, I tried the 50 1.2 and it seemed to exhibit some backfocus at around 2.8 which I couldn't really seem to get rid of even after dialing in some AF correction quickly (and it screws up the other settings on top of that)...other than that I would certainly make the swap. I tried a used Sigma 50 1.4 which seemed great (apart from softness at 1.4), but I don't really wish to go 3rd party again and I would prefer a weather-sealed lens.

I was in the same situation as you when trying to find a FF zoom lens as sharp as my Sigma 17-50. I had both the 24-70 mk1 and 24-105. With the copies I tested, the 24-70 is sharper at f4 at all focal lengths so I ended up keeping it. One negative is that it is much larger and heavier than the 24-105. My suggestion, while you still have the 60D is to keep the 17-55 and for your 5D3, pick-up a 16-35 or another wide angle lens like 14L or 24L II first and supplement it with a 50/1.4 or 40mm (or your awesome 35L). The 16-35 will open up new creative outlets that you couldn't get before with the 60D and 24-105 or 17-55.

I guess I could do that but it's really too late on the 17-55. It's in auction on ebay (and there have been bids) so it's going to end up going to the highest bidder. I intend on getting the new 24-70 II as a replacement for use on the 5D3, as soon as my local store gets some good copies in.

I would be interested in seeing how wide 16 or 17mm is on FF...not much of a wide-angle shooter here, not really my style, but might be interesting to play around. After the 5D purchase and the 24-70 that's about it for my current funds though...so wouldn't be able to afford 16-35 or 14 (at least not right away)...perhaps a used 17-40 might be an option though- but I've heard it's not that good?

Basically, I'm only keeping the 60D for two main reasons: a) getting maximum reach out of my 70-200 2.8 and 70-300L for sports & events that call for it and b) for use with the 40mm 2.8 as a backup camera/2nd body. When I get more $ again I'll think about possibly trading in for a used 7D (much closer to the 5D3 in terms of operation it seems). The 5D3 will become my main camera with various lenses like the 24-105, 24-70 (when I get it), 70-200 and 70-300. I might trade in the 35 for a 50. that'll likely do it in terms of lenses unless I can find good deals on perhaps a 17-40 or something.

Btw, with the 24-70mk1, the 5d3's focusing points' usefulness really become apparent because you can't re-frame with that lens after focusing.

Why? Limited DOF?

hiplnsdrftr · Oct 10, 2012

It seems to me (and in line with Canon's typical behavior) the EOS-M is intended to be a mediocre offering that simultaneously (and halfheartedly) gets them into this market segment and gives Canon some idea of how well it sells without hurting dSLR sales.

Keep in mind these classic moves by Canon- killing the Pro1, removing RAW from the S80, killing the G line after the G6, reintroducing the G line minus RAW with the G7, removing HD video from the G10 etc. This is a very conservative and very cautious company. Obviously, very reluctant to infringe upon their dSLR sales in any way.

My guess is that there were some serious internal battles about launching the EOS-M. Obviously, some design concessions were made to assuage the dSLR department and their accountants.

I for one am looking forward to buying a Canon mirrorless camera once they make a serious attempt at it.

Studio1930 · Oct 10, 2012

And for pro users, don't forget a quick dust check. 8)

Oct 10, 2012

The talk about pre-1999 lenses is that for them, there's no option or ambiguity - you need to turn IS off. FWIW, my 600mm f/4L IS II manual has exactly the same statement about the IS as the 70-200 II. It doesn't mention the secondary IS mode that automatically senses a tripod being used and compensates for mirror slap, shutter vibrations, etc., at shutter speeds between 1/30th and 1 second. That info comes from Chuck Westfall, but AFAIK it only applies to the superteles, not lenses like the 70-200 II or 100L. So, that lens manual 'tip' sounds like a CYA statement from Canon (not the only one, either - the 600 II manual also indicates that I should send my lens to Canon to have them change the lens foot, as if I can't tighten four screws and use a bit of Loctite if necessary :

).

verysimplejason · Oct 10, 2012

skozachuk said:
If you are shooting landscapes why not to consider Samyang 14 2.8? sharpness and CA control is awesome even wide open!
[/quote

It has the same problem as Tokina 16-28. You can't put any filter. I consider it a must to be able to use filters when doing landscape photos most of the time.

dpedro · Oct 9, 2012

So don't get 24-70 2.8? You thinking 35L 85L 100 Macro and upgrade 70-200 to the IS 70-200. Keeping it all prime? If you have 35/85, do you get a 50 still?

Oct 9, 2012

verysimplejason said:
It's easier to lose your S95 from your pants pocket than when you put it inside a small belt bag.

FWIW for the S95/S100, the Lowepro Napoli 20 is the perfect size.

CHROME77 · Oct 9, 2012

i used these which i got from amazon. I was surprised by the quality seeing how cheap they were. I actually ALMOST bought the tube instead. I may go ahead and order the tube versions anyways since they have them for like 10 bucks.

i really wish i had some L glass. then maybe these would be way nicer. still not bad for a kit lens

Oct 9, 2012

I think I'm going to stick with the 6D + 105 as that will be the best all around purchase for now. The 24-70 is on the top of my list for next purchase, maybe the wait will bring it down a bit before I need to convince the wife that I need more glass.

Quackator · Oct 9, 2012

You may yawn, but he is right.

(Where'd you buy that degree from?)

RLPhoto · Oct 9, 2012

KurtStevens said:
I sold my 3 strobes with battery packs to fund purchase of flash units instead, but not sure what to get. I shoot weddings and portraits and would like a flash on a stand and another one for on camera use as well but only have 500-750 to spend on everything. Can anyone help me find a suitable setup to accomplish this? I have a little experience with the 430exII but I could never figure out how to get it to slave.

Any help would be amazing! Thank you.

3x 430 EX II's + cowboy tiggers.

Oct 9, 2012

I would still rather have the civic anyway. Fuel economy. Jd power survey. Resale value. And i just dont like american cars. Or muscle cars. My girlfriend came with me to the dealers when I bought my last car, she had a colour in mind, I had an mpg in mind. So I'm probably the wrong person to talk about cars with.

thepancakeman · Oct 9, 2012

ankorwatt said:
Razor2012 said:

Neuro you know you're popular when people join just to comment on your posts.

Click to expand...

He is not popular,mybe popular among ignorant people . Neuro writes so many inaccuracies and he is not listening to other people with knowledge.

You do realize of course that by this statement youare saying the majority of people on this forum are ignorant, because neuro is highly respected around here. Maybe you'd be happier on a different forum where you don't have to tolerate all us ignoramuses.

xps · Oct 9, 2012

Much thanks!!
The blog is interresting.
I know photozone, I sent there an lens for testing. And they did, a few years ago.
I knew The digital picture page, but did not recognise all the tests.

Are there any Germans (despite the photographer from Berlin that has never beEn to Garmisch ;-) ) that know Color foto? What du they think about their tests?

Albi86 · Oct 9, 2012

Apart from the 100/2, do you only rely on focus confirmation by the camera?

LetTheRightLensIn · Oct 9, 2012

mikiort said:
I don't believe that there is any particular reason for such HUGE firmware upgrade.
After all, firmware upgrades are supposed to address some bugs or any particular issues with the device and I haven't heard about any of such bugs or issues with the camera.

They sure could fix up video features they left out, although now with ML I guess we have some of them already and will soon have more. I don't think ML will be able to deliver crop mode video though and we will have to see whether it can fix AutoISO for stills or not.

Razor2012 · Oct 9, 2012

billatthemovies said:
I have a 70-200mm F4 IS on a 5D Mark II. It is a phenomenal lens and lighter than any of the 2.8s.

Now, having said that, I have been considering the 2.8 you are mulling over because my son plays hockey and not all the rinks are well lit. I purchased the F4 when the vast majority of my telephoto shots would be outside and my camera at the time was not FF.

I can't comment on the 70-200 F4 matchup with the 5DII, but on the otherhand, the 70-200 2.8II with the 5DIII is an awesome pair. With that combo I don't think you'd have a problem with indoor rinks at all.

Mt Spokane Photography · Oct 9, 2012

Lordmacedo said:
My canon 7d appeared with an error 30 and now 90% of the pictures appear too dark. Is there any solution?

Thanks

Stop using it and send it for repair. A bad shutter can come apart and cause more damage and double the repair bill.

Oct 9, 2012

Thanks for the feedback everyone.

I think I'm going to hold off until the end of October to early November for now. As for situations, it's really a bit of everything including general usage, sports, landscapes, music events and even some wedding work with my DJ Entertainment company. Video is also just as important for me. There will definitely be a fair amount of low light usage so that's why I'm pretty firm on low noise at high ISO, obviously not great on either camera. With the recent price drop on the 5D Mark II, I was thinking about this as an option but feel I will miss the fast AF, reach and speed.

Rumors of a new sensor have me holding on for a new release as well. If even legit, will it really improve the noise at high ISO. I love almost everything about the 7D and as tnargs mentioned, have no problem getting involved with a complex camera as I tend to think of myself as a technical complex type of person willing to learning the ins and outs of anything I commit to.

I really hope if they do release a 7D Mark II that it falls somewhere on or about $1700. By the time it gets announced I will be happy to spend that cash for a new product that hits almost all of my needs.

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics