Posts

YellowJersey · Jan 28, 2017

CanonFanBoy said:
BeenThere said:

http://gippslandimages.com.au/blog/2016/12/samyang-14mm-f2-4-xp---lens-review

First real review I've seen. It has some astro star shots and compares this new lens with the older Sammy f/2.8.
This reviewer says the new 2.4 is better than the old 2.8 for astro, and has some test shots to back his claims. Have yet to see this lens listed at a U.S. retailer, but apparently for sale in Australia. There are some images on the Samyang site that also look impressive.

Click to expand...

It really is a sleek and pretty lens.

I did find this snippet to be a little strange: "The coma control is extremely good at f2.4, there is no coma, even in the corners its impressively controlled."

There is coma in the corners. Not bad, but it is there.

Nice looking lens for sure. Clean design that reminds me of Zeiss lenses.

No bad at all. Thinking about replacing my Tamron 15-30mm 2.8 with this. I love the Tamron, but it's just so heavy!

CANONisOK · Jan 28, 2017

neuroanatomist said:
I wonder if Bryan @ TDP will start reviewing RRS gear now?

Browsing TDP tonight and the following made me think of this thread and post.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Really-Right-Stuff-TVC-34L-Carbon-Fiber-Tripod.aspx
Coincidence?

Larsskv · Jan 28, 2017

That is one impressive peace of glass! This is the first lens from Nikon that I wish was available in Canon mount.

haggie · Jan 28, 2017

Thanks you all very much for the swift and clear answers, guys!

I did order my lens from a Canon Authorized Dealer.
Therefore I just wanted to be sure that my initial thought of returning it was not over-reacting.

But now I will return it with confidence and just get another copy.
Hopefully it will be gone then.

Thanks again for all answers!

Viggo · Jan 28, 2017

YuengLinger said:
Viggo said:

95% of my shots are wide open with fast lenses and no dof, but Ai Servo is no less accurate than One Shot.

However, the five Art lenses I had were all like what you describe; it's like it just chooses a random distance to focus on and you just better hope you're lucky enough to have your subject within the focused area, which was about 1 out of 10.

I track fast children and other insane objects and I get pretty much 8/10 in focus over all, most of the time it's a miss is soccer practice in iso 25600 light at f2 1/1000s and most of the misses are just me and not the gear.

Click to expand...

And you are no longer using the 50mm Art, iirc. :

Haha, nope, and never ever again will I use any Art lens 8)

Mt Spokane Photography · Jan 28, 2017

ajfotofilmagem said:
LP-E6 does not have enough power to power a 300 LED illuminator. Not even a 140 LED.
It would take a much larger battery, like those used in Sony / Panasonic camcorders.

With a Sony 8600 ma battery lasting a hour or a little more, a 1800mah battery should go for 12-15 minutes.

A big concern is the battery is not designed for the high current, and will overheat. A authentic Canon battery should shut down when overheated, a knock-off overheating could result in thermal runaway and meltdown or fire.

They give out special awards called "Darwin Awards" for people who try things like this.

rodrigoac · Jan 27, 2017

IglooEater said:
Maximilian said:

Chaitanya said:

... do people really buy Tamron lens over Canon's own 70-200mm lens.

Click to expand...

I don't know. I didn't buy Tamron yet. But If performance pre price is right, why not.
I am quite interested in their primes.
Right now I'm not in the market for a 70-200/2.8 but I like to see how competition pushes each other to higher limits.
Will be interesting, how this performs against the EF 70-200 IS II or the rumored Mark III.

Click to expand...

I know a lot of Nikon folks who have the Tamron over Nikon's own version, but I have yet to meet anyone with it mounted on a Canon. I considered it before purchasing the Canon II, but got a good deal on the Canon. ~1300usd

I have version 1 of this lens for Canon and I love it. I was using it with a 70D for photos and some videos, never had an issue with the focusing. I couldn't justify a $2,000 Canon lens at the time but I don't regret and now that I upgraded to a 5D Mk IV I am happier than ever. I started doing portraits and weddings last year and this lens is perfect for what I need.

JonAustin · Jan 27, 2017

neuroanatomist said:
As a scientist I read the primary literature, rather than getting my scientific information from the populist media.

(Gullible idiots will believe almost anything.)

Breathlessly awaiting your appearance at the March for Science.

ahsanford · Jan 27, 2017

tron said:
ahsanford said:

I'm sincerely curious to see the anti-vignetting crowd's satisfaction level with their shots after 4+ stop corrected corners at f/2.8. They might be fine with it. :

- A

Click to expand...

In landscapes there is not much chance that someone will shoot at f/2.8 so this is no issue. Or in cases where f/2.8 is used but with a low iso like 100. However, in many low light situations someone may probably crank up the iso. Adding 4 stops to an already high iso is an issue.
For example I shoot many landscape astro photos at iso 10000. Can you imagine correcting the corners?

Full disclosure: My 14 2.8 II has some vignetting but far from it (about 2 stops less than the new 16-35). Also I half-correct in post leaving about 1 to 1.5 stop vignette. But still a great difference than 16-35 III

In my quote above, I've added the emoji to perhaps better convey my tone. (I kind of knew the answer already.)

Regarding the 16mm f/2.8 vignetting:

Landscapers --> won't care

Outdoor/daylight sports, events, reportage --> won't care

Indoor sports, events reportage --> probably will be unhappy (esp. less well lit venues, gymnasium sports -- hoops, volleyball, etc.)

Astro --> they've already moved on; pushing an ISO 10000 shot 4+ stops is brutal

The main group (sports/reportage/events) is the one with the tough decision to make. If their assignments/events have good light or if 16mm f/2.8 doesn't come up that often (kind of hard to see that as that's kind of why you buy this lens), they should buy the 16-35 f/2.8L III and enjoy such a sharp instrument. For the indoor / poor light folks, I think that's a tough call.

- A

niels123 · Jan 27, 2017

BUMP!

Sort of related: what do the "IR people" on the forum use as filters? A filter directly on the sensor applied during modification? Screw filters (e.g. B+W or which brand)? Square filters (e.g. LEE or which brand)?

I have been told that the clip-in filters that I currently have cause reflections and of course I am always interested in hearing a better solution

DaveGershon · Jan 26, 2017

Thank you for sharing the guide.
Dave

tr573 · Jan 26, 2017

ajfotofilmagem said:
Pentax knows how to make a wrong advertisement.

good god what a terrible idea to shoot them with "artfully" placed mud on a white background. this would have looked a hundred times better if they just had the thing sitting in the mud outside

amorse · Jan 26, 2017

tron said:
amorse said:

To be honest, I've been on the fence over buying a 5Div for a while now. I am more curious to see if early reports of using DP Raw to increase dynamic range can be made usable and practical. I primarily do landscape photography, and I find myself getting clipped a lot even with ND graduated filters on a 6D.

I saw an article indicating that the DP Raw files actually contain two images, one generated by adding values from the left and right side of the pixels, and one from just one side of the pixels. The recorded values from the A and B pixel sides are added together to give a full exposure, but because the DP Raw also has info from only one pixel side, that side is under exposed by 1 stop, meaning that 1 stop can be recovered in the highlights.

I imagine that I'm in the minority of thinking this way, but if Canon/Adobe could use the DP Raw format to generate an extra stop (or more?) of recovery in the highlights I'd deal with the extra image size and buy a 5Div in a heart beat. Personally, I'd love to see that technology adapted to create single shot HDRs.

If anyone doesn't know which article to which I'm referring - http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2016/09/01/dual-pixel-raw-redux-forget-focus-tweaks-canons-new-tech-can-yield-an-addit

Click to expand...

You ask for too much (at least for the current generation). Canon has a dual amplification patent but they have not applied it to 5D4. But who knows maybe in a few years...

Well, I'd certainly call it a good sign for the future if they have a dual amplification patent! And to be fair, the 5Div already does have ~1.5 stops more DR than my 6D as it is, so the 5Div would be a huge step forward on this front already. But if the DP Raw files have been used to recover clipped highlights as they currently are, I don't see why processing software couldn't be updated to take advantage of this? Full disclosure, I can't claim to fully understand the technology - it just seems logical to me that if it can be done right now with some effort, why can't it be made more accessible to re-capture some detail in highlights using third party editing software on a computer (not in camera)?

This article claims to have used third party software to re-capture clipped highlights using a DP Raw as it is (it just doesn't seem practical yet) - http://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/canon-dual-pixel-mode-highlights-are-there

Ozarker · Jan 26, 2017

3.5 years later I can confirm that there is no mirror strike on the 5D III using the Helios 44-2 58mm f/2 lens when using the fotodiox M42 to EOS adapter v.2

There is no problem with infinity focus or any other problem either.

Excellent lens for the money. I just got four from the Ukraine for $100 including shipping.

They are manual focus and manual aperture.

Jopa · Jan 25, 2017

RayValdez360 said:
Maybe some people just want the best image quality or a certain look

It does have that certain look, and I'm trying to figure out what it is

That somewhat "3d look", right? I'm not sure 100%, but I think on FF it can be achieved by stopping down a fast lens to whatever equivalent the MF counterpart offers. Let's say we're taking one person's portrait, and wide open the DoF is shallow so the person's contour will be OOF (something like one eye in focus only). If the lens is stopped down to the point the whole contour is in focus, but everything else is still blurred nicely - here comes the 3d look. Drop a little bit of light to the person and the separation becomes even more pronounced. The sharpness (in-focus part), glass characteristics, and the aperture blades shape (oof-part) are also contribute to the look. The sensor itself is irrelevant I think...
It's probably easier to achieve better sharpness using a large sensor (less demands to the glass), but other than that I don't think it's going to be a helluva difference between the FF and .79x crop.

ethanz said:
Not that I would ever be in the market for something like this, but it only has FullHD video? Everyone lambasts Canon when they don't implement 4k 60p in every camera. Shouldn't a $6,500 camera with such a nice sensor be able to do 4K video?

Most likely the sensor is not capable to deliver 4k at acceptable performance cost. Remember, it was built by Sony in 2014 (I think). Anyway I don't think it will be a big deal for the potential buyers.

kat.hayes · Jan 25, 2017

Thanks everyone for the amazing info! I'm experimenting with placement and trying to incorporate it all.

1.) Based on my available space, if I am to use the continuous KNO lights, should I consider using one as the key and the other KNO as the fill? OR one for the key and a piece of foam core or a reflector for the fill? How would you approach this with KNO continuous lights?

2.) I have access to two 4-banks http://www.kinoflo.com/Products%20Button/Fixtures%20Remote/Select_DMX_4Bank/4Bank_DMX.html

and two Divas
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/258600-REG/Kino_Flo_DIV_400_120U_Diva_Lite_400_Universal_Fluorescent.html

Would you try to use the 4-bank or Diva for the key/fill? Would you also use the others to light the background? I am just using a solid white collapsible background.

Thanks again!

Mikehit · Jan 25, 2017

Ah....it seems I'm not a dumb as I thought. ;D

cayenne · Jan 24, 2017

Act444 said:
I took advantage of that refurb sale as well and agree (thanks for the heads up!! Been waiting for the price to be right for a while now ;D )

I've only had the chance to shoot in my living quarters but I have to say 11mm makes rooms look HUGE. I almost feel as if 14mm-16mm provides more of a natural perspective for larger areas. But 11mm will be great for those tight spaces and closets...

Now for a nice enough day to see how it does outside

Indeed.
One of my first shots, of course was to try out 11mm.

It elongated my already long, narrow kitchen that while it looked cool, really distorted reality on how it really did look.

I think, however, I'm going to really have fun exploring the 11mm or so range and try to come up with artistic uses for it...not so much for real estate, but just for fun artistic things.

I have shot a good number of concerts here in New Orleans, at JazzFest and Voodoo Fest...and when I'm close to stage in pits, I've used my old 14mm Rokinon to get some good classic long poses on artists...great for when the guitarist is hitting the effects pedals and you catch that elongated 60's type look.

I'm anxious to try this puppy out on stage shots like that...

And looking to find neat uses for it too...composition will be a challenge, but hey...isn't the challenge about half the fun of it?

Thanks again to all!!

C

Jack Douglas · Jan 24, 2017

Viggo said:
Jack Douglas said:

Again off the topic of the original post but here is what I've received from Canon Canada:

"Thank you for your suggestion. We have forwarded your comments and concerns to the appropriate Department for their information and review. The fact that you took the time to write to us is indeed appreciated. It is only through our customer's comments that we are able to provide quality products and services that our customers will be able to enjoy on a consistent basis."

Jack

Click to expand...

I think that is a great answer, hopefully they will do a firmware sooner rather than later, just because I LOVE added functions through firmware, I have a weird thing for firmwares, lol.

May I respectfully suggest that others do what I have done. Just carefully describe the shortcoming or fault clearly. My interaction was on the card switching issue only.

Jack

Jack Douglas · Jan 24, 2017

arbitrage, appreciate your observations and feedback.

Jack

ExodistPhotography · Jan 24, 2017

Re: Canon U.S.A. to Display Large Format Solutions for Fine Art Photography at West Coast Art & Fram

So we're to pay for them to advertise to us... :-\

Mikehit · Jan 24, 2017

The only reason I would consider buying a drone is to scout locations for landscape photography - climb a big hill to check the view? Nope send up a drone before expending the energy.

TWI by Dustin Abbott · Jan 24, 2017

JP4DESIGNZ said:
I'd love to see a full comparison between the Canon EF-M 18-150mm and the Tamron EF-M 18-200mm!

If I choose to purchase an M5 for myself I'll definitely do that comparison. At the moment, though, I've got to send everything back (I receive loaners from either manufacturers or retailers for my reviews).

AE-1Burnham · Jan 24, 2017

jebrady03 said:
AE-1Burnham said:

PERHAPS this is the first full-frame EF-M "L" lens, a double firsting of sorts...?!

Click to expand...

Not quite sure what it says about me but when I read this my brain didn't see the "r" in one of those words and I thought "wow... Getting really graphic with the voicing of our displeasure over price, aren't we?"

...in-line with some of the other not-hidden-innuendo in this thread I may have led you there jebrady. ;-)

neonlight · Jan 23, 2017

"The smaller pixels of APS-C are less forgiving"

Indeed.
I bought my 100-400 I two years before the II appeared. But I would not have been without it for two years, and it can turn in some good quality shots, perhaps needing slightly more favourable conditions.

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics