Mt Spokane Photography said:

Reading Roger Cicala's teardown and the lightweight aluminum piece holding the two halves of the lens together along with the need to remove all that silicone in order to get to the damaged part was a red flag, I expect that drops and spills insurance will be expensive, just dropping one lightly may knock it out of alignment as that center bracket bends slightly. The lens is built like a tank in some regards, but other pieces seem fragile. The need to spend so many hours to take it apart and re-assemble it makes for expensive service costs. Nikon does the same thing, they use tons of glue.

Canon spends a lot of effort reducing the time and cost to assemble a lens, and it ends up meaning that disassembly and repairs tend to be easier and faster.

Click to expand...

That was the 70-200 f/2.8. Same awkward design as the older slower sibling 70-200/4 which was notorious for breaking in half: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3976992

the initial launch price of tamron and sigma lenses drops quite significantly after 2-3-4 months. for example i have the sigma 50-100 1.8 in the amazon wishlist since it was announced and from the 1305€ initial price it has dropped now to a steady 1024€. same with 150-600

The 70D inherits the 19 pt, all-crossed AF sensor from 7D. I have very very bad experience with the 7D AF sensor, so I am not at all surprised by your feedback. That's my personal experience and others may feel differently.

The 80D/77D and 7D2 AF sensors have 45 and 65 points respectively. I used the 80D and it performs fine.

Out of curiosity, ever tried dual pixel AF on 70D? Will it solve your struggles with AF?

asmundma said:

pixel8foto said:

This might not be news but some might find the video comparison useful.

I know the crop at 4k is a PITA at the wide end, but it can be mega useful at the long end.

Using one body and one lens - Canon 5D4 and 200-400/1.4x - gives an effective "reach" of a 200-1,904mm f/5.6 lens on the 5D4, assuming final output is at 1920x1080.

40,000 ISO comparison here: https://vimeo.com/206155690

Using a Sigma/Tamron 150-600 in place of the Canon 200-400 would give you 150-2,040mm for a fraction of the cost, with more range in a single zoom action but with a 1/3 stop loss (and inferior image stabilisation IMO).

Of course you can't zoom through the entire range in one shot. Still, very useful.

Click to expand...

Have you Ever filmed with that long mm, it will easily be too shaky.

Click to expand...

You mean like in the video linked above? Use a tripod!

Stewart K said:

Thanks for everyone's input, I really appreciate it!
I think that there must be some sort of additional demands on the battery moving all those rather larger parts around inside the 600 version 1, I will report accordingly once I get the lens.

Thanks again everyone 8)

Click to expand...

When I first had my 600 F4 L IS I had 5D and a 50D cameras - they didn't seem to give up the ghost driving this lens! Admittedly I was using 3rd party batteries which were far better than the Canon BP511 packs but your 5D3 should be just fine. A local photographer is using a 6D on one of these lenses and getting all the shots he wants, though he does carry a single spare pack - just in case.

That's great news - I'm really enjoying my 100D (SL1) both as a lightweight option for when I dont need the performance of full frame, and to give each of my full frame lenses and extra purpose in life.

+1 for 580ex II. That's a great workhorse flash, and you can probably get one used at a very reasonable price.

Neat... thanks!

I find that Yongnuo is kind of like Neewer. There are a couple of gems, and piles of garbage. ;D

As a comparable, I use a Neewer remote trigger that can be used for a shutter release or flash trigger that works amazingly well. I also have some Yongnuo LED panels for miniature photography, but they aren't good for much else.

Hi PBD.
Thank you for the detailed response, I was not aware of the additional positive aspects that the YN units have over the geniune Canon units.

I'm not too hung up on having the accessories, however I do believe that having them included speaks to the care of ownership. Also most of the units I have seen recently have not had anything other than the flash and I would not entertain a unit wihout the pouch and stand.

Cheers, Graham.

privatebydesign said:

First off, there is now a YN600EX-RT II, that is supposed to have enhanced triggering function, though I don't know what that means though it does list "radio transmission and reception for wireless triggering" as a feature. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1311157-REG/yongnuo_yn600ex_rt_ii_speedlite_for.html

Second of all, the original accessories that come with the Canon 600-EX-RT are not worth having! The gels and gel holder are a bad joke and the little bag for them just as useless, the only thing I'd insist on having in a secondhand unit is the actual soft case for the flash and preferably the little stand thing (though they break remarkably easily and shouldn't be relied on). The 600-EX-RT-II on the other hand has a very useful gel cover that doesn't fit the MkI.

Third, the main difference, I found, between the Yongnuo and Canon setups is the Yongnuo doesn't penalise pre 2012 bodies, that is Group mode works on pre 2012 bodies whereas it doesn't with Canon units. Also, for what it's worth, the Yongnuo does remote second curtain sync via radio, no Canon units do.

My YN-E3-RT came with a mini USB to N3 trigger cord. The YN-E3-RT didn't have the same port as the EX-E3-RT or 600-EX-RT it just had a mini USB so the Canon trigger cable SR-N3 didn't fit the Yongnuo. The Canon 600-EX-RT MkII dropped the pre 2012 trigger port all together.

I bought the Canon gear first and got the Yongnuo to supplement it and add the additional functionality. In a professional environment the Yongnuo units were not reliable enough for me so I sold them, I would happily use them in a more casual or non professional environment.

In summary, there are a lot of combinations and compromises in any choice across this gear. First off is determining the functions most important to you, then your camera body age, then price. For all bit the most fussy of pro uses the Yongnuo's represent incredible value for money though I do worry about the continued firmware support and wouldn't recommend them for people who regularly update their camera bodies. Now the MkII is out will the MkI ever get new firmware?

Click to expand...

There is a video series on youtube about product photography. I think it was produced by Creative Live. It is pretty good. It is worth the watch.

Like Graham, I can live with that. Actually, it's not uncommon for poses to change more than I imagined in 1/14 second.

Jack

As stated, the drop-in holder that comes with the supertele lenses is part of the optical design and should be left in place. It's a holder for gelatin filters, probably not something you're going to use all that often, if at all (I never have).

Choosing a camera body is a compromise a wise man once said....choosing Canon glass is just well, wise.

So, folks have a sack of great glass and want to use it on their wunder (non Canon) body. But have to use an adapter. Thus losing 'something'. Seems as if that something varies according to which particular combination of brands (adapter/lens/body) is being used.

All in all, seems as if shooting 100% Native would have been better in the long run, in most cases.

LDS said:

Zeidora said:

Not sure there is a good reason for it

Click to expand...

IMHO the reason behind it is that is more difficult to have two connections active at the same time, it would bring a bunch of issues about managing concurrent access to the same settings and images - and I guess the camera firmware is not designed to manage that.

The simplest way to avoid it, is to have one connection turn off the other. I agree that having to remove physically the wifi card is a nuisances - being able to select from the menu settings which connection to use would be better.

Click to expand...

Exactly! Either/or doesn't sound like rocket science to me.

ExodistPhotography said:

Forget streaming. I am going to go out on a limb here and say 99% of the 4k content that would be broadcast would almost never come from a DSLR anyway.. Most of the content recorded on DSLR in 4k would come from indie cinematographers, wedding, event, corporate or youtube-type video creators. Which would be put on DVD for sharing or uploaded to streaming solution like Youtube or Vimeo.

Click to expand...

I guess most young couples would have an hard time to play DVDs (or better, Blue-Ray) - they disappeared from most PCs and new household as well. Streaming 4K video still requires bandwidth - which may not be available everywhere.

While some big screen movies had scenes shoot with Canon DSLRs, it looks clear to me that Canon thinks if your main aim is to shoot video, you should do with one of its video cameras.

ExodistPhotography said:

Now as far as hardware. Almost any machine built in the past 5 years can render 4k video. days and plentiful.

Click to expand...

Playing is a bit different than editing - and also depends in what format you shoot and which one you deliver.

ajfotofilmagem said:

It seems to me much less distortion than the Samyang 14mm F2.8.

Click to expand...

I completely agree on that and certainly expect better with the 1.8. I do wonder whether Sigma did any lens corrections on their shots. Nah - no lens manufacturer does that!

My attitude is pretty simple.

1) Avoid being paranoid.
2) Don't worry too much.
3) Don't be attached to material possessions.
4) Don't escalate anything, ever.
5) Always acquiesce.

So far I've never had to be past step 2.

is there a way to get out a visible thread in viewfinder of my canon c300?

CanonFanBoy said:

You read the headline correctly... the Mark V.

Many of us have said that we will keep our 5D Mark III bodies and wait for the 5D Mark V if there is to be one.

Here are what I see as ten great things about the Mark V and it isn't even out or being talked about yet:

1. There is plenty of time to save the cash needed to make the upgrade.
2. It will probably clock 10 FPS.
3. Instead of plastic, carbon fiber will be used to cover the outside of the body except for where the grippy parts go (exotic looking).
4. When the battery door is opened there will be a whoosh sound and vapor caused by liquid nitrogen in the cooling pipes will come out. The liquid nitrogen will be used to cool the 16k video functionality and to keep a positive internal pressure compared to the outside world for dust protection.
5. Built in RF transmitter for flash.
6. Interchangeable focus screens able to be chosen at purchase. No sending the camera out to change the screen.
7. Articulating touch screen.
8. In camera IS for those non-IS lenses we own. In camera IS is disabled for the IS lenses we own or can be used if IS is disabled on the lens.
9. 100% sealed for underwater functionality with specifically designed lenses.
10. At the time of this release the 1DX Mark II will be an affordable alternative.

Click to expand...

I don't think so, lets see if a new LCD focus screen, support for cf 2, better touch screen, maybe just maybe finally true 4k (by that time 8k or the next best K will be standard), better weather sealing, NFC, better wireless transfer, 9fps, better Dual Pixel RAW,New sensor MP may look like what happened to the mk 3 jump from mark 2 , new digi 7, better iso, dynamic range should be top of the line, more focus points. canon don't change much im not expecting anything major just the areas that needs the improvement.

I hope not, we dont need another mount.

nailing focus at f1.2 is like catching lightning in a bottle... so I'm ok with a 5% hit rate and post production to remove the chromatic aberration.

Viggo said:

The thing I don't like is that the fall off between the sharp area and blur area is way to sharp, so the sharp subject looks almost like a cut out, compared to for example Zeiss where the transition is very smooth and creates a more 3D look with a lot of pop.

That and what you said, it's not as smooth and looks stopped down a bit.

Click to expand...

drmikeinpdx said:

DPReview seems to think that the sensor in the 77D is the same one found in the 80D. I have no idea if that's true. Guess we will have to wait until Canon allows people to publish their reviews.

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5322759563/buyers-guide-canon-eos-rebel-t7i-800d-vs-eos-77d-vs-eos-80d

"The Rebel T7i, EOS 77D and EOS 80D share the same 24MP APS-C CMOS sensor. This sensor sees a significant improvement in Raw dynamic range over previous Canon sensors, though still falls behind most competitors. The Rebel and 77D have Canon's latest Digic 7 processor, compared to the Digic 6 on the 80D. Canon claims that the Digic 7 provides a full-stop improvement in JPEG high ISO noise levels compared to Digic 6, though comparing the Digic 7-powered EOS M5 against the 80D seems to contradict that. Raw noise performance in low light should be similar between all models."

Click to expand...

normal liveview for canon DSLR's is I think 30hz - could be 60, but I think it's 30.

M5's sensor is running at 120hz for liveview.

I almost dont know who to reply to first and how.

Let me start by saying that I get, that canon is a big company with a lot of smart people and chances are, that they have good reason, for bringing out products in the order they do. However big companies with a lot of smart people do make mistakes. Som times they even go bankrupt. Anyone remember Kodak and Polaroid? Now I am not saying that Canon is going the way of the dodo.
I brought op the subject of camera release order because it struck me as odd and I wanted to hear peoples perspective. Also thought I saw a potential connection to the perceived nerfing of cameras, that som people expect is going on.

There has been a lot of great perspectives. So thanks I still dont know if I am entirely convinced canon is doing the right thing though.

If you rollout in reverse as you stated, everyone will sit on their money as they know a better rig is coming afterwards and it might be awesome and cheaper than they guessed. A wait-and-see customer base robs Canon of the first 6 months of full price buyers, when they presumably have the highest margins.

Click to expand...

Well I kinda think, that the current order of releases incentivizes sitting on your money. I for one, am sitting on my money to see if the 6d mark II is going to do everything that I need it to do, or if I will have to buy a 5d mark VI. You reversed the order and I would be able to buy a 6d II now, at full price, if it met my requirements. If it did not, I could be pretty confident, that the an upcoming 5d IV or higher end model would meet set requirements.
So only in the case where the 6d mark II does not meet my requirements will I have an incentive to sit on my money and wait. As is now. I know that the 5d mark IV lives up to my requirements, but I dont know abut the 6D Mark II. So I wait.

I dont think people are waiting to see if a higher end model is going to be better. They Know it is, but I guess you could argue that, som would wait and see if a higher end model is going to be so much better, that it is worth the ekstra money.
No matter the order, there are probably going to be people like me that, will sit on there money. I dont know witch order would minimize this problem the moste.
As I have pointed out. In the reversed order however, the tech difference between cameras of the same generation would presumably be bigger. This in turn makes the difference in price, better reflect the difference in tech.

This problem of people sitting on there money, really is a general problem of economics. Future products are always going to be both cheeper and better then current once. This I partly why central banks like to have som inflation in the money supply. If our money keeps loosing value, we will have a greater incentive to spend them quickly. But I digress

It also tells the highest paying customers that they get the hot new stuff last after all these enthusiasts get it on a less expensive product. (Could you imagine if a 6D2 dropped before the 1DX2 and it had the on-chip ADC hotness before the folks who pony up the big bucks got it?)

Click to expand...

Well actually that seems pretty natural to me. As I pointed out. When tech moves forward. It both becomes better an cheeper. There is no doubt in my mind that we will, at som point have a camera, that is priced like the 6d but is as capeble as a current 1DX2. In fact if camera generations were fare enough between, one would expect the lowest end model of the newest generation to be on pare with the highest end model, of the privies generation. What does not seem natural to me, is to have a cheeper camera of the same generation out perform a more expensive one, at least in som respects.

ahsanford said:

Yep. I like the fact that Sigma just pooped on the notion that a mirrorless rig could never come to market with a flange distance befitting a mirror (the horror!). There are famously two large camps of FF mirrorless mount proponents here at CR, and one of them would love to see a full EF mount. A 'lens tube'-style design like the recent Quattro rigs is one way to do it.

Click to expand...

The Foveon sensors in general do not play well at all with a short register distance, a short register body would have been a disaster.

I wouldn't mind a mirrorless 1DsIV