"Have you micro adjusted your body/lenses? Also, using FF lenses on a crop body means that you take a sharpness/detail hit, what lenses are you using?"

The sharpness-problem: I did no afma, because when analysing the problem I compared phase-detection af to liveview-af. In lifeview (=contrast-detection) and best conditions (magnify 10x, tripod, higher shutter speed, , raw-files, stills, clear air etc., 100-400II) no very good sharpness was possible. Here in the forum and elsewhere I´ve seen perfect clear pics with that cam/lens combi. What is wrong? Isn´t afma not necessary when using lifeview??
Thanks for your reply!

Coming back to the TO:
After using crop for long time, I´got used to it. The 7DII is very good compared to other crops I´ve used. If this combo would deliver superb-sharpness (like I´ve seen in some posts), I don´t feel like changing to FF, also for landscapes, events etc.

@Bennie

yes, mraw and sraw are 15bits instead of 14bits, and YUV instead of RGGB. YUV pictures has been introduced at the same time as Liveview (on 40D) and video on 5dm2. So the YUV mode of the sensor is used to: 1- create lower resolution files (using "out of sensor" data) and as input to mpeg engine.

question about RAW formats?
check this page: http://lclevy.free.fr/raw/
(a bit old, but might be useful)

my first name is Laurent ;-)

vscd said:

slclick said:

RGF said:

Expensive accessory - given that it will work only on 1 of my lenses and only need to do this once or twice in the life time of the lens.

Click to expand...

Expensive? In this hobby/craft/profession? A $49 item for a group of $799-$3399 lenses which go on $1100-$6000 bodies is a mere pittance. If $49 is what it takes to keep your glass operating in top form it's some of the wisest cash you can spend in photography.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it's expensive... but I can understand no to buy it for $49 just to keep the lens actual. What if you need a $49 gimmick to update your CanonBody? Right, you would say it's insane. This should be a service on a local Sigmadealer, nothing more. The adapter makes sens if you have more than one lens and some trouble with AF.

And why bodies >$1100? Is a lower APS-C body not worth an Artlens?

Click to expand...

Sorry about that my APS-C friend I just don't think about crop much. Yes, Im sure they are ok on a crop body.

It's the first Hass I like the look of.
But I'll wait for the Fuji.

Have already contacted Sigma UK to get my 85mm sent in for updating. Pity it's that lens that can't be sorted via the docking station. You just know the day it comes back they'll announce the Art version.

I've seen a similar situation with a Canon 100-400 Mark I. I don't think people pay attention to this because with the Canon AFMA process, people stick one or two values in and move along. Why would they test out what their 70-200 is doing at 85mm?

I think it's also the case that a couple years ago AFMA values of 0-4 were considered invisible. Nowadays, though, we have people with 50mp sensors cropping long lenses, so - for some people - it does matter.

Even if we find someone interested in this new package and even recognizing that the initial price (B&H's $2,049 for example) for the package will be discounted significantly as time goes on, wow the initial price makes no sense (unless that 32GB card is way more expensive than a similar 16GB card):

At B&H, you can now buy the 80D along with the new 18-135 USM version lens for $1,599 (which, BTW, includes an extra third party battery (Value - $35.00) and a nice shoulder bag (Value - $35.00) - two items not included in the "Video Creator" kit)

Add the $149 PZ-E1 Power Zoom Adaptor for $149.

Add the Rode VideoMic Go for $99. (Hmm, does the Video Creator kit provide a better Rode mic? I think not).

Total: $1,849.00

I can't figure out whether I am missing something here or whether the Video Creator kit is missing something given that the Video Creator kit will be selling (assuming someone is buying) for $2,049.00.

Re: CR in Rwanda With The EOS-1D X Mark II

clicstudio said:

mistercactus said:

Did the gorillas in Rwanda last october, with 5DSR, 7D2 and 5D2, here's a little selection:

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=18142910&size=lg

5DSR in these circumstances was just brilliant & produced images that are just out of this world. For me, there's no better body for the job. Paired it with 70-200 2.8 IS II most of the time. For gorillas, the crop 7D2 was great but too tight, better for distant elusive chimps & birds. The 5D2, while still producing good quality shots, just made me want to kill the guy who designed its AF. RIP, it died over there in the rain...

Click to expand...

Sorry to say and I don't mean disrespect... But those images can't even compare to Craig's. They look flat, over processed and there are a lot of flat highlights and lack of sharpness... Out of this world? Maybe out of this country... Nothing like the quality of the 1DX II... Again. Just my opinion as a viewer.

Click to expand...

That's a very ugly thing to say, flat? I never knew the 1D X 2 did 3D images I'll need to upgrade my monitor to see this effect he's talking about I always though that cameras capture 2D. I'll be damed. The guy looks like he didn't edit anything much if at all. That would be expected in the situation it was shot in.

What I see in many comments here and around internet that many people underestimate what does it mean and focus on current camera limitations and native lens selection.

From my point of view, this is major breakthrough and this marks beginning of the new era in photography.

Some of camera limitation (e.g. only CDAF available) is due to the limitation of the current sensor which is more than 1 years old. When Sony will release new generation of this sensor with PDAF support then this will be something great – it will be like Sony A7R2 but in MF format. Even now, current X1D could be great tool for landscapes and architecture using Canon TSE17, which should be enough image circle coverage for the whole X1D sensor.

Frankly speaking I am very positively excited about that and with high probability might buy second generation of X1D with the new Sony BSI stacked PDAF capable sensor with improved high ISO performance. There so many possibilities are opening with that, especially for low light street photography using appropriate lens.
E.g. if there would be one 35 f1.4 AF lens made for X1D this could open extreme possibilities.

Click said:

Very nice pictures, stochasticmotions.

Click to expand...

+1...I like the blue bird best

lion rock said:

Need large plate glass windows for natural light photography!
-r

Click to expand...

Maybe a plan for the more security conscious

Cheekysascha said:

I've been looking at the 85 1.2 ii lens a lot lately as I'm really getting into portraits and with what I've read the only bad parts about the 85mm is the slow focusing and the rear element sticks out which makes it easier to scratch when mounting, so I was thinking what could the new one improve besides that? And also to you owners of the 85mm what problems do you have with it? Anything you would want in a new one?


Also how much better is it then the 50mm 1.2 and the 70-200 2.8 is ii for portraits?

Click to expand...

The 50L is a disappointment in my opinion. Sure it's fast, but it's AF is sluggish and prone to miss focus. It's sharp but not razor sharp that all the other L primes are and it's tricky to use. The 85IIL has less dof of field to play with and that's sharp and it's easier to focus. So the 50L is a lens I've bought twice, used 4 copies of and they are all the same. Now i pass on it and go for either the 35L or 85L.

The 70-200 f2.8 LIS II is a great portrait lens but it was built for the press and sport (P/J) so it's out of focus rendering isn't as smooth. At 85mm, an f2.8 lens will render out of focus areas as sweet as an f1.2 lens. The 85L is able to gently compress and melt back grounds from just over 1m away from your subject. A 70-200 f2.8 needs a lot more distance because of the focal length. That puts you a lot further away and can disconnect you from your subject. Also the 200mm perspective is heavy on compression and will make your subject look different that with the 85's gentler compression.
As lenses go, they aren't really comparable, they both do what they do very well...but differently. I think the 135L and 70-200 f2.8 are more comparable. In terms of ease of use, the 70-200 f2.8 LIS II is a lot easier to handle (although heavier) due to deeper depth of field, faster AF and an IS unit. Plus the zoom helps with framing. With the 85L...your legs becomes the zoom and your working DOF is very frustrating...great when it's nailed...but disappointing when it's slightly off.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

Viewing the outside of a lens is no guarantee that it has not been damaged inside. With your symptoms, even a minimum fix is going to cost $250-$300, it will have to be disassembled, parts replaced, tested and recalibrated. Send it back.

Chances are it was dropped on the end, and some parts cracked so that each time it moves, there is excess friction, and possibly more damage. Dropping a lens on the end often leaves no sign of damage.

Click to expand...

Sure the labour costs are expensive, but the lens will only need calibrating if any of the optical elements or the rear mount is replaced. All the casings and housings come off really easily and don't require any post adjustments of the lens. Even the AF motor is easily swapped out without touching the optics.

I've replaced my old Spyder 3 system (no longer supported by Datacolor) with the Spyder5 Pro. The calibration is much warmer than with the old Spyder 3 system. I've tried it 5 times and get the same results. Since all of my images have been processed to the old calibration, which printed true colors, every image I've got in my Lightroom catalog looks like it's taken at late sunset.

Any others with this issue? I've contacted Datacolor and they seem to miss that all my previous processing is now out the window with the new calibrator. This is their response..."Since the Spyder5 is a completely new device which calibrates much more precisely compared to the much older Spyder3 calibrator, you simply can't compare the calibration results visually.
Give you eyes some time to get used to the new calibration with the Spyder5 - they are able to do a kind of automatic whitebalance.

However, if you still got issues, send us the profile you generated and photos (taken by a camera in manual mode with fixed white balance) showing the calibration on / off (from the SpyderProof showing the 16 images in the software - use short cut from the drop down menu lower left in the Spyder software). JPEG < 1 MB each.
Please also let us know the Spyder-hardware-serialnumber which you'll find on the sticker of your Spyder's USB plug (a photo as JPEG file is OK).

Last but not least, also send us a screenshot of your computer's start-up list (MSCONFIG). On Windows 10, you will find this via the task manager.
That way we could check and make sure you got no tools running which could "destroy" a correct calibration."

East Wind Photography said:

TeT said:

They make changing bags... Patterson I think is one maker. Somebody makes a thing that looks like a popup light box for changing lenses in also...

Click to expand...

It does seem pointless to purchase a light proof one for digital cameras. Would be easier to just use a clear plastic trash bag and maybe some rubber bands.

The concept is sound as long as it's not over engineered.

Click to expand...

If you spend your days around wind sea and sand... almost a requirement that you have something in place, I would think.

to what I could recall when I got my 5D2 at Adorama when It got announced - people started discussing about ISO (at least that when I got aware about it ) - and it was concluded that the ISO 100 of the camera was near ISO 80.

So people started testing/experimenting with this idea of ISO and its performance in regards to SNR.

That's when the concept of shooting at 80 / 160 / 320 / 640 .... etc - got started.

for which, I myself still used to this day with the 80D, 1DX and even my sony's.

Hi,

Could someone send me mraw and sraw samples from 1dx mark ii (using dropbox, google drive...) please ?
It is to document the CR2 format at
http://lclevy.free.fr/cr2

Thank you a lot

Laurent

Andyx01 said:

privatebydesign said:

That is pretty much all argumentum ad hominem.

Click to expand...

Well that was an offensive thing to say. I found it rather factual and to the point myself.

privatebydesign said:

The only 'correct'* 'color' is done on a neutral tone and that is best done automatically via the WB tool.

Click to expand...

So now there is a 'correct' color. And it is 'Neutral tone", "Best done automatically via WB tool."

This is all bad information and false. Please don't spread bad information.

privatebydesign said:

The only neutral tone in the image that is usable is the eye,

Click to expand...

You cannot be serious?

privatebydesign said:

putting the WB tool on the eye takes 1 second,

Click to expand...

It does? Sounds subjective.

privatebydesign said:

any other 'adjustments' to the WB, color and tint, are entirely subjective.

Click to expand...

Not true. WB is a crude method. Read up on Color Rite Passport.

privatebydesign said:

You were not here, you did not see the light I saw, your 'correction' is your subjective assessment of what you think it should look like on your monitor.

Click to expand...

Correct

privatebydesign said:

The rest of your drivel is just that, ad hominem drivel.

Click to expand...

Yeah I'm just puking garbage. I'm a bad person. That is slow to edit by your standards, posting bad criticism. You are right in every way. Enough is enough, what you have is all anyone needs. Thanks for clearing everything up.

privatebydesign said:

P.S. Thanks for the colorblindness tests, it seems I am good to make color assessments of my own images.

Click to expand...

Sure no problem. Not sure the two are mutually exclusive, but I'll leave you with your take away. You did an amazing job, with the best gear anyone could ever need. Good for you!

Don't listen to comments like mine or:

chauncey said:

Identifying camera and/or lenses based on internet display is, at least, an exercise in futility.
That said, based only on the screenshot crop, I would not print...lack of IQ.

Click to expand...

We are full of drivel, and are mean people.

-PC

Click to expand...

Why would you make the assumption that I haven't profiled my camera? Look through my history and you will see it is a core aspect of my replies.

Did I walk up to the owl and put a color checker in the frame with it? No I didn't, but I do have profiles for this camera with this lens and similar light.

But a custom profile will do nothing for the temp and tint, that is why there are so many different 'whites' on an X-Rite Passport, once you have the three channel tone curves in some kind of order the subjective bits are the temp and tint. Again, you were not here, you don't have a clue what the colors were.

Your 'corrections' are entirely incorrect with regards the scene as it was, they are your subjective version of what you believe it looked like on your screen, why is that such an upsetting thing to be told?

As for me being offensive. You told me I was color blind, I proved I wasn't, how exactly is that offensive to you?

chauncey said:

I'm beginning to think that we should have a Proctologist in attendance.

Click to expand...

Only if he is also a dentist ;D

dilbert said:

StudentOfLight said:

dilbert said:

ahsanford said:

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Nikon-D500-sensor-review-Performance-redefined

4 points lower score than last year's D7200.

Worse low light performance than their Rebel equivalent D5500.

Verdict: "Performance redefined."

Click to expand...

The way you've started this thread would lead one to believe that nothing else matters except low light performance? Not even autofocus? Plenty of people here tell me that autofocus is really important but you're making it seem not.

Summary: this topic leader is what I'd call "trolling" but what would a troll know?

Click to expand...

When I google internet troll:
"In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion,[3] often for their own amusement."

Adam does not hide who he is, so he puts his reputation on the line when he makes comments or other posts. He started this thread so he's not derailing any conversation and is sharing what has been published. How is that troll-like at all?

Click to expand...

Given the history of this site, this thread looks like it was deliberately started (to me) to provoke readers into an emotional response and that it is inflammatory in nature (i.e [1]). There are other ways the thread could have been started - especially better quote used.

Click to expand...

I got none of that?

Sek

JonAustin said:

siegsAR said:

bereninga said:

I hope they add a lock switch to prevent lens creep.

Click to expand...

Creeping is already fixed on the later released Mk1 but yeah I get you, my latest and only 24-105 F4 which was manufactured on early 2014 still has that problem.

Click to expand...

@siegsAR: While I don't refute your claim that Canon has fixed the 24-105L's zoom creep in later released copies, I wonder how much later, since you report creep in your early 2014 copy.

Zoom creep is one of my major complaints about this lens, probably because the only other lens I own with an extending barrel is the 100-400 II, and it has a zoom lock (a.k.a. "zoom touch adjustment ring").

I tried to eliminate (or at least reduce) the zoom creep in my first 24-105L (purchased new in 12/2005), by applying some of the "fixes" I found on the web, none of which worked. I sold that copy and bought a newer one in 9/2013 out of a 6D kit. Its zoom action was tight at first, but it eventually loosened up, and so its creep is nearly as bad as its predecessor's.

I will be watching for reviews of the 24-105L II with interest, and a zoom lock mechanism of some kind would be a significant inducement for me to buy, especially if the lens' optical performance is also improved.

Click to expand...

My copy was fine for years but has also started loosening up and creeping... A zoom lock to keep it in the wide angle position would help against the wear and tear due to the hood catching when taking the lens/camera combi out of the bag.

Hi guys,

Thanks for all of the input. Definitely helped me in my consideration. I think I will try out the new Canon 50mm 1.8 STM. Money is definitely tight right now, and it seems to have overall solid reviews, from slightly improved IQ to more reliable AF.

Thank you again, much appreciated.

Just made the leap. This might be my default lens with the others on hand as needed.
On a side note - the Think Tank Slim Changer is the PERFECT minimalist bag for the body(not a 7D)/pancake lens.

Sorry to reply to such an old post but just found this online and is very interesting and a great comparison. Last night I took 2 photos of the moon using a 400mm lens + 1.4 x extender. One on my 7D ii and the other on a full frame 1DS mk iii (Old I know). The 7D picture was considerably better - very surprised as images that I haven't cropped so heavily look a lot better on the 1D.

Really interesting to see your direct comparison

Whoops! Indeed I did! Thanks for pointing that out!

haggie said:

Last weekend I had the opportunity to try out both an EF 70-300 L and the 100-400L II during an air show. I met some people with these lenses there, and could try both lenses for about half an hour each on different planes...

Click to expand...

Comparisons side by side, in the real world always give more reliable answers. That being said, can not escape the reality:

Canon 100-400 L ii, is calling you, and not will be another one that will satisfy you without regrets.

Other lens brands?
Sigma and Tamron has some good optics, but fast and reliable focus is not its features. Perhaps the Sigma 120-300 F2.8, but the price is higher than the Canon 100-400 L ii ... :