Posts

Random Orbits · Dec 6, 2018

Don Haines said:
Personally, about 99 percent of what I shoot is stills. That said, there is no way that I am going to buy a DSLR (and in particular a mirrorless DSLR) that can not shoot video, because I find it a very useful function. Kind of like flicker detection, once you have it, you are not going back.

Am I typical, or am I the exception to the rule? Sales numbers seem to suggest that I am typical, but none of us have access to real data on the subject so we are just guessing, but every indication leads towards people considering video as a “must have” function, and that leads towards the following conclusion: if you had a version of the camera without video features and a special sensor somehow optimized for stills, it would be a much smaller production run and therefore at a higher cost.

I too like the video function in the DSLR. When I want video, I mount one of them to a tripod. The second camera is a backup, and can take video with the same lenses that use with the first camera. That is the value. To get similar quality out of dedicated video gear, I'd have to spend thousands... It doesn't need the best video specs -- 2K is fine, 4K is fine. I usually just take HD/2K, and some people that want copies of the video STILL request them on DVDs...

dtgphoto · Dec 6, 2018

I use mine for landscape and Seascape exclusively. Love it

RayValdez360 · Dec 6, 2018

That list shows how video is very important according to almost everything on that list.. The funny thing to me is that imo the 24-70mm or both that and the 70-200mm might be the only items that is probably rented for photos more than video.

Mt Spokane Photography · Dec 5, 2018

Canon, of course, tells you to power off to change a lens, thats partly because a shutter closes with power off to keep dirt from the sensor, I've changed lenses with power on, but usually turn it off. I like the switch, its easy to operate, I have little if any dexterity in my fingers.

Viggo · Dec 5, 2018

Mt Spokane Photography said:
My top display is always on, the power it uses is incredibly tiny, a button battery could run it for months. I've never turned the ECO mode on, so I don't know about battery life difference, the CIPA ratings are the result of very tough testing, and will show the worst case difference.

Yeah, I can see what I wrote could be misunderstood.

It’s not that the Mode is always on, because no matter what and which setting the display shows “Av” for example 100% of the time.

What I mean is all the other info are there for MUCH longer with ECO mode on than off.

Mt Spokane Photography · Dec 5, 2018

canonmike said:
That may be Mt Spokane but this lens regularly brings around $500.00 used on Ebay with no warranty. I know because I wanted one and kept watching for 2 months but didn't want to pay that much for a used one. So, that being said, I'm sure there are a few out there that would pay $50.00 more for a Four year USA warranty. I already own this lens and paid $607.00 including the doc on a recent promo. Thx for your input.

I sold my 18-35 on ebay just 5 weeks ago for $635! After buying a R to replace my SL2, I knew that lens sales like this were on the way, so I sold it as quickly as possible after getting the R. (I did not need a APS-C lens).

$550 is a good buy without the dock, $595 is a good buy with the dock. If you buy lens plus dock separately, it will cost $610 during that sale, which still falls into my Good buy category.

I bought my lens used locally and had to buy the dock, so I kept it, I might buy another Sigma FF lens, but its looking less likely as I most likely will sell my 5D MK IV and start the migration to all RF lenses next year. A used dock is not worth much, so I'll hang on to it anyway and hope that there will be a adapter to the dock for any Sigma RF compatible lenses. That is possible, but the more I think about it, there will be little need, since the R focuses accurately without AF adjustment, so the dock would just be there for firmware updates.

Maximilian · Dec 5, 2018

According to this new CR thread
https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...he-full-frame-segment-according-to-bcn.36395/
the interpretation/translation is wrong.

jd7 · Dec 4, 2018

londonxt said:
Hi, I am afraid I haven't been able to compare with those lenses, but on my 5d ive been using the EF 24-70mm f2.8 MkII, EF 135mm 2f, Zeiss Milvus 50mm 1.4f and 40mm 2.8f pancake for a long time and the 35mm compares favourably in my view (stick my neck out and suggest sharper than the 24-70mm at 35), certainly better than the 40mm pancake but with similar portability (would love a native RF pancake)! Not that I have any charts to prove anything just going over my shots on Lightroom! Even the EF 50mm 1.4 with adapter, so much lighter and lovely sharpness, I`ll be more than happy to use that over the EF 24-70mm and Zeiss.

With regards to the EVF it became 2nd nature very quickly with no qualms in low light and outdoor scenarios as i don't do much quick panning shots, birds and people seemed to move across the view finder smoothly in most lighting conditions and you can sacrifice battery power for more EVF responsiveness if you need but I found I didnt need to. Love viewing photos in the EVF with all the information juxtaposed, very bright and clear and a good visibilty of DR so I stopped using the back screen for that. I turned off the auto-preview however as it is a bit disconcerting seeing your view of the world through the EVF suddenly freeze or change angle slightly when you take a shot! Was like a strange VR experiment. The EVF power up time after sleeping is definitely the big drawback for me as it frustrated me more than a few times and I missed shots. I havent played around with the Power Saving settings that much yet but while travelling I needed the power saving mode so left it as the default. Maybe after I bought the 2nd battery I could have disabled the power saving mode and for just casual street shooting nearer home i will be able to get away with it but I havent tested the impact on EVF startup times yet.

One thing I didnt mention but should is that the AF is pretty amazing when I think about it, because it covers the whole EVF and reacts so quickly even in low light (was doing a lot of dusk shooting) I sort of didnt notice it was there! The touch pad is vital here but the left side distance and centering default option currently left me frustrated as it stops it from being perfect (although it reminded me what a beautiful partnership it would have made with the much missed Eye Control Focus of the EOS 3). I played with the face focus briefly as its not something Ive really thought of using before but was impressed how it tracked the person and even objects, definitely a lot of potential there but its very new to me.

Thanks Londonxt. It's primarily the reports about the AF accuracy (at least for stationary and slow moving subjects), plus the new RF mount and particularly the new RF 24-105 and perhaps the RF 35, that have really got me interested in the EOS R. The slighter smaller size and lighter weight of the EOS R are nice too - and the sensor would be a step up over my 6DII - but those things wouldn't be enough on their own to make me pay up for an R. As for the RF 35, I'm not sure I could give up my 35 Art (and I wouldn't keep two 35mm primes) even if I had an R, but I'll certainly be keeping an eye on RF 35 samples and reviews if I do go with an R at some point.

hamoser · Dec 4, 2018

Antono Refa said:
Auto focus isn't all that useful on such a wide lens.

Does Sigma even make MF lenses?

tron · Dec 4, 2018

padam said:
They've just made the new 400 and 600, they might update the rest as well, but are not going to make yet more versions any time soon, these might even be the last versions as the product cycle can be very long.

After the optical formula has been decided they can move over to figure out how to reduce the weight even more I think this DO stuff is probably more expensive if we compare lenses at the exact same focal length and aperture, so that means even higher pricetag over the version III EF lenses. But it will take a fair few years as Nikon Z-mount super telephotos aren't even mentioned in their 3-year roadmap (but it is a possiblity that they come out earlier than Canon because they will skip updating their F-mount super teles altogether), the newest EF lenses will probably do more than fine for the time being.

They may stop at EF versions III (assuming they make version III for all big white teles) for all I care. Already the version II lenses have top IQ even with 5DsR plus teleconverters. The key is to make a lighter EF500mm f/4L IS III too and maybe I will upgrade my version II in a few years (assuming the weight loss is significant). Now DO lenses is a totally different matter. The 400 DO IS II is excellent but I wouldn't mind seeing it complemented with EF 500 and/or 600 DO versions

ajfotofilmagem · Dec 4, 2018

After years, here is the review that i waiting

BillB · Dec 4, 2018

tpatana said:
I'm really hoping EF is not dead yet. I have two needs:

Sports: Currently using 1DX, considering upgrade to 1DX2. If mirrorless wants to beat that, it needs to have same-ish AF tracking at minimum, same low-light performance and 10+fps. Hopefully 12-16fps. Dual cards too. I'd be ok with CF although I understand if it's CF+CFast, or further into future 2x Cfast. Neither of the current mirrorless bodies are not even remotely option for these. Also since I'm keying off on action, the EVF delay needs to be stupid low. I think 1DX shutter lag is 60ms? So if EVF has 30ms delay and the body has shutter lag of 30ms, then it'd be equal to 1DX. And typical day is 3k-5k clicks. 1DX can do it on one battery. If mirrorless takes 400-500 on one battery, that'd mean I need 10 batteries. No-go. (+need good ergonomics to hold with 70-200 for a full day)

Other stuff: Currently using 5D4. Mirrorless needs very good ISO100 performance (dynamic range, sharpness etc), enough pixels and probably no AA if possible. Other specs not as critical.

Yes, someday I'm sure mirrorless will be better than my current cameras. But the current mirrorless Canon offerings are pale comparison. So I don't like the plan to kill new EF lenses and concentrate on RF

There is a lot of speculation about whether Canon will release any new EF lenses and Canon has a plan to release a lot of RF lenses. At worst, Canon DSLR users are going to have to make do with the EF lens designs that are out there now. Not all bad, IMHO.

Mt Spokane Photography · Dec 3, 2018

The fine print: No one was going to participate1

SierraDon · Dec 3, 2018

Thank you!
I will keep using the ST-E3-RT and hope it continues to behave--
I may also look into the Yonguno equivalent, the yn-e3-rt. B&H has 2 versions- and the V2 is cheaper than the older one.
Any idea if the newer one is better than the V1? I Have looked on the web, but can't find much of a discussion of the differences--
Thanks!!

Don

Bredies · Dec 3, 2018

Mt Spokane Photography said:
Truthfully, the brand of camera makes so little difference that it really doesn't matter. All of them produce excellent photos. I have a 5D MK IV, but also bought a EOS R as a 2nd camera. For your use (and mine), its a very good camera. Canon is very conservative and does not let junk be released. It is not as good as a MK IV, but better than a 6D. I'm convinced that both Canon and Nikon are going all in on mirrorless, so for a camera you want to keep, consider one again. BTW, I thought the same thing, many years ago when I was your age.

The issue with DSLR's is that Autofocus accuracy can be off and is typically different at different distances. Inaccurate focus can be time consuming, and in some cases, you will need to do a AFMA.

While you can buy a Canon gray market camera and still get warranty service, or paid service, beware, a gray market Nikon is big trouble when it comes to getting service from Nikon USA. They won't touch it, even if you offer to pay, so buy it from a authorized dealer.

Same here in New Zealand.
I tend to agree about brands and hence not concerned about moving out of the shadows ...

eyeheartny · Dec 3, 2018

His critiques were really not critiques at all. He's "bored" by it? "Uninspired"? Cameras are tools, not significant others. Absurd. Also, he says it's similar to his 5D IV, so that should be a plus. And he kinda gives up the game at the end that the video is clickbait, since he says he'd like a higher res one with dual card slots. That's not a core critique of the offering itself, nor should it be a reason to give up on Canon after 18 years. This isn't a pro body, and since he's a working pro, he's got unreasonable expectations. But whatever. YouTube clickbaiters gotta get clicks somehow.

Ozarker · Dec 3, 2018

Thank you, Click.

docsmith · Dec 3, 2018

MrFotoFool said:
Why does a non-L make no sense? That is exactly what Nikon has (a non pro 200-500) that is reasonably priced and from what I know well received. What I really want, though, is a Canon mount (either from Canon or Sigma or Tamron) of the new Nikon 500 f/5.6 PF (their version of DO). Honestly if I had the money I would switch to Nikon just for the D850 body and this lens.

Fair enough. If Canon makes a non-L version that has great IQ, and good build. I will not complain whether or not it has a red ring on the front of it. If it is reasonably priced, even better.

And I should not infer that just because a lens is non-L that it isn't quality. It can be. Some are just ok, but many are great lenses.

My statement is more about what I want, which is an EF 200-600 lens that ranks in their highest quality, which is typically an L lens. My concern is that if it isn't an "L" it will be nerfed in some way shape or form. First the lens has to be released....then we find out how good it is.

Mt Spokane Photography · Dec 2, 2018

100% crop of a robin in our flower bed with my 28-300, and cropped shot of a bumble bee with my 35-350L

YuengLinger · Dec 2, 2018

After more thought, the Tamron likely has one or misaligned elements,
which either slipped past QC or resulted from being knocked around.
Packaging was pristine.

The key clue may be the behavior in Live View. I could get the lens to focus on the chosen center point using MF, but not using AF. It would consistently backfocus badly in Live View using AF.

From my understanding, misalignment can cause the symptoms I experienced.

But overall the lens was not compelling enough to try another copy. I do wish Canon would start adding IS to more fast primes.

Mt Spokane Photography · Dec 1, 2018

AlanF said:
Most of the lens galleries haven't had any activity for months or years.

I wonder if people even them, I think that the other galleries by subject get most of the activity.

keithcooper · Dec 1, 2018

Sean C said:
Darn, that's unfortunate.
You'll need at least a second light source then and treat the on lens light like you would fill from a ring light. That might actually work nicely for a diorama. Consider the on lens light as sky fill, then use the key as the sun. With a 1/4 CTO on the key I bet you could blend them for a nicely convincing look. It'd be worth exploring the concept anyway.

Yes, this stacked shot uses a bit of light from the LEDs to lighten up the chip pile

Viggo · Dec 1, 2018

YuengLinger said:
Have there already been firmware updates?

Nope! Think it’s february...

Kit Lens Jockey · Nov 30, 2018

Because Canon saw how great Sony has been doing by making their menus as confusing as possible, and decided they wanted a piece of the action.

AlanF · Nov 30, 2018

cervantes said:
Thanks! What you see on the pictures is pretty much all I got. I only spent two mornings and one afternoon shooting birds. My schedule wouldn't allow for more, unfortunately! I could have gone birding there for two weeks straight I think.

It's hard to believe that you didn't see much. The Algarve is really the best part for birding I think. I linked the amazing birding guide of the Algarve Tourism Board in my article. You can find so much info in there that you won't be needing a (human) guide.

I am afraid that the tourist boards of many areas list birding sights and give huge amounts of praise but when you get there it is a different matter altogether. Sometimes, it's because they don't take into account the decline in bird populations and sometimes they just sum together all the rare sightings as if they are commonplace. Believe me, I am an experienced birder and I had a good guide but I have a dismal photographic record of 10 days of birding.

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics