Posts

bluenoser1993 · Dec 18, 2019

Mt Spokane Photography said:
For portrait orientation, its better beyond comparison, of course. It feels like a mini 1D series tith the grip and two batteries. The grip fits tightly as well. The last time I bought a Canon grip was for my 5D MK I, and it had a lot of flex to it. Thats pretty much gone with this one, I have not put a large lens on it with a tripod, but I assume that it will still sag downward a bit. My 1D's did not sag noticeably. Of course, the tripod and head can cause the sag, but mine are heavy duty enough to even work with a supertele.

I’ve been waiting to buy this grip for a while, 3 kids in volleyball which results in a lot of time in portrait orientation. Trouble is, $600 in Canada and $250 in USA. I don’t understand the price difference, it makes no sense. I don’t like buying things without having my hands on it first, but the local Henry’s doesn’t stock it. In fact, Henry’s only has 2 in stock in their entire Canadian inventory. May just have to bite the bullet and order from B&H.

deleteme · Dec 18, 2019

Normalnorm said:
I am quoting the actual comment of Roger's. My point is that the reflex comment of internet punters is "It extends=deal breaker" or "It extends=non-pro lens". Never mind the many pro lenses that do exactly that.
Roger actually KNOWS. Most commenters do not.
I have been shooting for 40+ years as a working pro and the many lenses I have used all get minor amounts of dust but none more than others. And none to the extent that impairs IQ except the dust on the front or rear element that is independent of the lens design.

The comments denigrating extending lenses seem to come from every corner irrespective of the experience of the commenter. Thus I call it hearsay or better yet dogma.

Optics Patent · Dec 18, 2019

Tom W said:
I have mixed feelings about the "stretching" method. On the one hand, if you rarely use the wide end and just want to grab the occasional snapshot with it, then maybe it's acceptable. But it is a lossy method. How much is lost, I don't know. Simple distortion correction does eat up a little resolution too, but it's an acceptable amount of loss.

By my estimation about 9% might be lost linearly. Or about 17% of pixels. Virtually undetectable cropping that confers the effect of an undistorting lens of the promised focal length with correct composition in the viewfinder.

RF 24-240mm: No full frame cover at 24mm

That’s because you are relatively new to this game and you have admitted that earlier. Have merely expressed my opinion and di not want to engage in meaningless conversation. That’s all. For someone not wanting to engage in this conversation, you sure seem determined to have the last--albeit...

www.canonrumors.com

analoggrotto · Dec 17, 2019

Sporgon said:
I have found that changing lenses a lot, in all sorts of conditions, doesn't influence dust on the sensor. Maybe it would on cameras that don't have a closed shutter.

A little bug got into my prism box and died. My sensor is pretty dusty really, but its not awful.

Optics Patent · Dec 17, 2019

Famateur said:
Indeed. I think the new EF 400 and 600 L III lenses are a pretty solid statement (at $12 and $13K each, respectively) that EF isn't going to be obsolete any time soon.

As a likely imminent owner of the 400 III with only RF, I have a few thoughts and wishes:

The investment in R&D to develop the IIIs can easily be transferred to an RF variant.
They would overcome hesitation of RF owners like me by offering a dedicated adapter styled (colored) to match the lens and the R body (which the current adapters aren't - if should look like the tail end of an RF lens). For $12k I want to look like my lens goes with the camera.
A dedicated adapter line could be expanded to offer dedicated TC/RF adapters. Presently EF/RF TC/adapters would be welcome.
A new lens (III lightened variant of the 300mm?) could be sold with a removable RF adapter. My patent-pending aspect of this is to make the adapter removable only by an internal switch to prevent demating from the lens when on a camera. Another feature for the adapter would be some special control on the adapter that is useful only to R owners (like viewfinder brightness control, etc.)

mb66energy · Dec 17, 2019

I have some "functional" GAS because I see a lot of possible "functions" of lenses for some purposes.
So I have still my FD lenses from 4.0 17mm to 4.0 300mm including the bellows and the 2.8 35mm lens for the bellows. Since 25 years I dreamed of a FF sensor for F1new with a corresponding back.
20D was - after introducing the 2.8 60mm Macro a very good macro solution.
with more tele - 70-200 f/4
and some ultrawide - 10-22 f/>=3.5
two 40D to have a two body two lens solution for convenience
and some lenses preparing for FF, e.g. 100mm macro + 400mm f/5.6
then came video which I wanted (needed (to want)) with 600D, M
then cheapo steps into FF with 2nd Hand 5D
one year ago the M50 which is the best digital camera I ever had because of
- excellent reliability AF for static/slow moving objects + DPAF + EVF + compactness
- availability of the EF-M 32 which is dream lens (compact + excellent IQ + 1:4 closeup)
now trying the RP (@1100 EUR with RF35) which was an easy buy after understanding that
this could be my 2nd M50 body substitute, RP and M50 are more similar than M50 and 5D or so.
Now I am testing my FD lenses which can be adapted to the RP easily especially for their video
capabilities (mostly ergonomics) and I enjoy to have an f/1.8 stabilized wide angle lens with
1:2 macro capability.
Everything has its place in future photo and video projects so it is not really GAS for no reason,
but there is one REAL problem: I am planning, planning, planning, I shoud DO, DO, DO

Or it is some GAS where the victim tries to convince itself that it is no GAS ...

Click · Dec 17, 2019

Beautiful shot. Well done, Glenn.

Nelu · Dec 17, 2019

R1-7D said:
A fellow Calgarian! Did you buy your 600 late this last summer by any chance? There were two available that I know of in Calgary around that time, and I bought one.

I was warned by Joe Desjardin (wildlife photographer here in town) that the big lenses need time to adjust to big temperature changes. The front elements expand and contract.

If Joe is right, that might explain your different experiences from one day to the next.

Unfortunately, I haven’t had chance to try mine in the cold. Hopefully this upcoming weekend I’ll get chance.

Well hello there!
I bought mine in October and I know there were a couple for sale in this area; one on Kijiji, somewhere in NW, which I missed; I bought mine from someone from Southern Alberta but not Calgary.
As well all know very well here in Calgary, big temperature changes are what we have in Chinook conditions. Of course, they usually come with strong wind and...headaches for quite a few people. The weekend was pretty calm though, no wind, which was very unusual for Nose Hill.

Joe must be right because even if I microadjust the AF perfectly indoors (I got both FocalPoint and Lens Align but I prefer the latter one), the best setting doesn't work well in the backyard. Even more, while I was doing the AFMA outside, two weeks ago, at around -13C, the optimum value changed like 8 or 9 points while doing the measurements, until the lens reached the outside temperature.
Now I kind of know that the 5D Mark IV with the 600mm and the 1.4TC is front-focusing the colder it gets, so I had to add some positive values to the adjustments.
This weekend the measured values were -1 indoor and +5 outside. That might not seem much but when all you have is 3-4 cm DOF, it's a lot!
Not to mention that I want my focus to be on the animal eyes and those deer don't stand still for long!

Anyhow, I thought of sending the lens to Canon for cleaning and adjustments but I'm not sure that would solve anything; I'll think about it because it might be worth it, with the CPS membership...

Aussie shooter · Dec 17, 2019

cayenne said:
Anyone? Anyone?

Bueller?

Haha. Love the Ferris Bueller comment.
Cant help you with medium format stuff though

andrei1989 · Dec 17, 2019

Optics Patent said:
Ask and ye shall receive.

thanks for that
the uncorrected image looks distorted and has some vignetting but not like how it was shown in some videos
and if the end result is still 24mm...does it matter how it was achieved?

telescope equatorial mount. can i have my cookie now?

Wm · Dec 16, 2019

tron · Dec 16, 2019

In contrast, photographs taken with 1DxII show movement towards photographer (like "Juvenile falcon changing direction at high speed" and "Juvenile peregrine falcon screaming") and many show bird interactions on air.

Coincidence of course but all these prove that statements like Canon's AF is worse than Nikon's is tottally BS so the switch to Nikon seems to be made for totally different reasons.

Joules · Dec 15, 2019

Michael Clark said:
Aren't full frame sensors 36mm x 24mm? Is "image height" a half frame measurement without being designated as such? AoV is always designated as "Half AoV" or assumed to be full width.

My understanding is that image height should really be called image circle radius, because that's what it is. At 21.64 mm radius the FF sensor diagonal of 43,27 is being covered almost exactly.

analoggrotto · Dec 14, 2019

pwp said:
Why on earth would you turn it off?

To prove to myself that I never needed it, i just want the rest of that Canon RF goodness.

YuengLinger · Dec 14, 2019

koenkooi said:
That combo has the same issue as the new 600 and 400 lenses: IS is affected by first curtain shutter around 1/160s. I could get sharp images at 1/100 and 1/250, but 1/160s the shutter shock ruined the shot.
I default to EFCS, but I had rented the RF85 and didn't want the clipping effect at f/1.2 to I enabled full mechanical shutter. I forgot to turn it off when shooting butterflies.

I have the filter adapter, I love having a CPL for all my macro lenses, especially the MP-E where front filters will pick up the flashes. But it is very expensive since you also need to buy the clear filter separately to avoid the big hole in the side.

Please remind me, what is the clipping effect?

EDIT: Ok, koenkooi, I took a deep dive into learning about ECFS (Silent Shutter, in Canon speak) and now have a better understanding of the issues and limitations. And now I have my quick menus set up accordingly. Thank you for bringing it up!

navastronia · Dec 12, 2019

I like Jared's reviews because as much as his personality is a major part of it, his opinions are actually pretty no-nonsense and he doesn't seem afraid to say when he thinks that, for instance, a new version of a lens isn't worth upgrading to when you already have the previous version.

That being said, I do wish he would post comparison images of the same scene shot with, say, the EF 70-200 2.8 mk. III and the RF 70-200 2.8. That's what I would truly love to see, especially since he so often does give out his RAW files and is often one of the first US reviewers to get a copy of new gear.

AlanF · Dec 12, 2019

YuengLinger said:
I will say that Canon's repair service is the number one reason I remained with Canon when I was young enough to otherwise be tempted by some fleetingly sexy qualities of the competition. Now it is important, but so is confidence in results and being so thoroughly familiar with the gear.

If repairs became problematic, then even "investment" in lenses would not be a reason to stick.

One of my main reasons is that Canons are so well made they don't often require repair.

cayenne · Dec 11, 2019

Ok, I've got the camera in, and both the 80mm and 150mm lenses.

I'm gonna try to shoot a quick test roll today just of stuff around the house with both lenses and drop by the develop place and hope to see them this weekend, to make sure no light leaks, etc.

But may I gotta tell ya, the camera body was listed as 'bargain' and the lenses as 'excellent'....and this thing literally looks almost new out of box the whole thing!!

The film back was 'bargain' and the only thing I see is a bit of tarnish or chrome rubbed off the thing you use to open the back to take the film caddy (?) out for loading/unloading film....but other wise even that looks mint, almost no wear I can see.

The barn doors on the rear of the camera each have little lines, but I"ve come to find out this is normal for the later versions that had a coating put on them that does crack and apparently is pretty much normal.....

Anyway, will do some quick shots to get film in today or tomorrow...but will still go out and shoot this weekend even if I don't get them back in time to make sure.

But I do wanna do test shots to make sure no light leaks ,etc...while I still have return policy on....

(so excited).

Thanks all,

C

Mt Spokane Photography · Dec 10, 2019

It is supposed to work, but there are a lot of steps, its difficult to impossible. I've had it working, but today, it doesn't work.

Chaitanya · Dec 9, 2019

The Not Very Long Awaited Teardown of the Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS

Long ago, a visiting Canon engineer put a box on my workbench, grinned, and said: "You're going to like this." Then he pulled out a mock-up of the RF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS lens, and my jaw dropped. I've been doing this stuff for a long time. My jaw drops very infrequently. My only comment was...

www.lensrentals.com

Aussie shooter · Dec 9, 2019

Great image

SteveC · Dec 9, 2019

Joules said:
As long as it is cheaper to make them than to sell them, Canon will continue to sell them. Making money is a good point. We got a 90D because the M6 II can't properly replace it. And I think the higher end APS-C market is less likely to get updates because of Canon's desire to push people into FF - see lack of an M5 II and 7D III (Though these may be coming still, who knows).

I wouldn't be surprised if Canon were the very last Manufacturer to stop making entry level DSLR, even though they have basically the most popular crop mirrorless system which could replace it.

To be sure, you're talking about two different things here. In your first paragraph you're talking about distinctly non-entry-level cameras.

In the second you are indeed talking about entry level DSLRs, and your odds of being right are 50% as, if I recall correctly, there are only two DSLR manufacturers left, Canon and Nikon.

I personally wouldn't be surprised if, 5 years from now, Canon is no longer making Rebels (or maybe they'll start applying the name to mirrorless cameras), but is still making higher end DSLRs for those whose use cases can't get along with an EVF. DSLRs will be well on their way to being a "niche" product (and I don't mean that in a disparaging way--I mean it in the sense of "specialized").

cayenne · Dec 9, 2019

stevelee said:
It will definitely work, assuming the squeeze is constant across the frame. If you wan't to eyeball it, you can do a Free Transform of the whole frame and elongate on the side or shorten from the top to taste. (In latest PS versions, you will need to hold down the shift key to change the aspect ratio, unless you have changed the preference. (It works the other way for the Crop tool

ACR has an aspect ratio slider in the toolset that allows you to get rid of converging verticals and such. So if there is a similar slider in LR, that would be a way to do it.

Interesting suggestions.

Thank you!!

C

Ozarker · Dec 9, 2019

Click said:
Very nice portraits, CFB. . Lovely Bokeh.

Thanks Click. It was windy and cold, so rushed.

SaP34US · Dec 9, 2019

How much be able to 12 x16 or 20x30 enlarge a similar image taken said smartphone vs said camera (all thing as equal as possible)? How long would take there great problems quality of one?

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics