just fo the record....
sold sigma...got 35L ii ......


stunning.. i saw diff from sig 'a' lens....right away...on the camera..sceen

this lens and 100-400 ii ..are so good and great quality value....
not reachable ....easily by 3rd party...

i sooo wish for a 135 f2.. and maybe with i.s. .....at this level...
just...'swell and stretch' the 100L macro....

Click said:

jd7 said:

more Australian Open tennis

Click to expand...

I really like te first shot of this series. Well done.

Click to expand...

Thank you Click

scottkinfw said:

Pookie said:

Nice images here... love Kaneohe on Oahu and Makapuu is awesome but we ended up buying a place in Maui up country. Love the snorkeling/diving there, especially Honolua Bay... the best IMO. Both of my sons have Hawaiian names, that how much we dig the islands. Maui no ka oi !!!

BTW, isn't there another Maui guy here on the forum?

Question for the members here... going to dedicate a 5D3 to UW work. Any housing recommended?

Honu at Kahekili...

Click to expand...

Awesome shot Pookie.

Did you use a filter for this?

Sek

Click to expand...

Hi Sek, Thanks... no filter. I think this was either a D10 or D20. Prob a D10 first gen. Just recently put one of my 5D3's into a UW housing for surf and sea work. Will be in Maui for an extended vacation soon so I hope to really test it out. Love the D series UW Canon's but they can't compete with DSLR... for snorkeling they are fun though and not much of an investment. I def recommend them for light weight UW work. I have 3 of them for different family members when they head off for the beach. I've also pushed them way past the max depth when freediving almost every time I go out.

If this lens is similar to the previous Art primes, it will be optically excellent and have erratic auto focus. For me the Tamron 85mm f/1.8 VC for $200 less is a much better option. Assuming IQ will be similar, I'd rather have a lens that focuses reliably than f/1.4, VC is an added bonus.

Can we expext something new about a 85 1.2/1.8 this year? The 35 1.4 ii is out, so it is time fir a new high quality 85 prime.

scyrene said:

HaroldC3 said:

This is not a lens the M series needs right now with the excellent performing 11-22mm lens. Just like the 9-18mm 3.5-4.5 rumored lens from last month. Canon seems to be out of touch with reality at the moment. The macro lens they just released is not going to get people to buy into the M system any more (except for a few niche people who take specialty photographs). Release exciting lenses and maybe people will begin to get excited about this system.

Click to expand...

Care to suggest some 'exciting' lenses?

Click to expand...

I can't speak for Harold, but I would have found an EF-M 60mm f/2.8 IS macro to be very "exciting". Oh, to have a "pocketable" version of my beloved EF 100 f/2.8L IS for portraits and small stuff. I'm not dissing the new little 28, it just doesn't have enough versatility to excite me. (And yes, I know the 60 would be quite a bit larger than the 28).

The long rumored and waited for EF-M 35 f/1.8 IS is titallating as well 8)

my tamron 15-30 works 100% on 5d3...
my Tamron lens is one of the earliest ones..
on the 1dx2 the 15-30 did not do live view or video but worked great as slr mode...
I will get it back from its update tuesday may31st
...

we will see...

I may have had the perif setting on on 1dx2...not sure... but now we can know....

thats the nature of the 3rd part stuff ..at the moment...

I will add BACK to this thread...results...
...if it still here after I get my updated lens next week....

Snafoo said:

I have two AB800s, not Einsteins (alas), but my experience has been identical to yours - love the lights, love the Vagabond, hate the Cyber Commander. I suspect that Paul C designed the GUI himself but should have brought in someone with GUI design experience, because it definitely looks home-built. I would be more than willing to buy a new Commander if it had a more modern, user-friendly GUI.

Click to expand...

Maybe you are getting your wish. The CST's are now version II, and the CC itself is out of stock...

Thanks everyone!

99.9% of "rumors" you see on SAR worth zero. It's nothing but cheap clickbait and random junk. The guy who runs it is a fat troll and a total douche. So I wouldn't believe everything you see there. Considering the current 70-200 f/2.8 G II costs $3k, it would be logical to say the E mount version won't cost less.

Cheekysascha said:

I mainly do landscapes & some action stuff with athletes/friends but for that I have my 1DX so I'm looking at the 5DS to do my landscape work with/portraits, however looking at the whole no low pass filter vs with one of the two models I don't really know if there's a need for me to get the 5dsr over the 5ds

So i'm curious for those of you who had to choose between the S and SR which one did you end up going for? and what kind of photography are you using it for?


Also is there any reason for me to wait for the 5D4 if I already have a 1DX and 5D3 and don't shoot any video?

Click to expand...

I chose the 5Ds because it was about 10% cheaper, and I've seen enough moiré in test shots to make me wonder (see the DPR shots posted above). Also even if the -R is sharper (I'm neutral on the subject), it's not worth the extra money for me. I'm shooting wildlife and macro, but also a bit of landscape and other stuff.

Bird feathers have a lot of repeating, close, parallel filaments. I'd be surprised if there wasn't moiré in quite a few of them. As for 'you can't get back sharpness' - it seems people are divided on this, some claiming that AA filter 'softness' is attuned and judicious sharpening can indeed match the 'extra sharpness' of an AA-free (or AA-neutralised) sensor. Finally, as someone else said, even the 5Ds experiences moiré on occasion, as any camera can - I was surprised to see some already, only having had the camera a couple of weeks, in the roof tiles of a cityscape shot. But each to their own...

Well, good! No problems reported. Sure wish I knew how others work it.

dilbert said:

It is even more interesting to note that whilst you quote the dpreview article for the D810 review you clearly did not read the page that talks about why it took so long. Maybe you would like to explain why you didn't read or chose to ignore that part of the review?

Click to expand...

Two years for this...

"we realized that not only did we have to revisit some of our existing testing methods, but that to properly test a camera like this we had a responsibility to create entire new tests."

Sure...

Many websites use Imatest to measure resolution of lenses. They never state what lines/mm or cycles/mm the measurements are so we don't know whether they are reporting on contrast or resolution. Could someone please enlighten us.

xps said:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d500


DpReview scores incredible 91%!
What a score! I hope Canon will strike back!

On my browser, the compare-function does not work. But I think, in many categories, the D500 is superior to the 7DII

Click to expand...

Same old slow live view implementation.
"Autofocus is contrast-detection-based, and is prone to rapid and drastic attempts to refocus that leads to distracting unprofessional-looking footage"

Most of the pics posted for auto focus test are very soft / out of focus like 80d. But looks like they did a different AF test. I think a6300 nailed lot of these shots.
"In this instance, the rider started off too far back for us to be able to specify that the camera should focus on his face, so instead it's focused on his shirt, but the consistency between shots is excellent."

But most well rounded camera?. Not sure though without live view / video AF. It is definitely best crop camera in terms of IQ though.

I am still not sure why did 80d do bad in that same AF test. It should have focussed on something like bike/face/shirt like d500. I got similar results like d500 with my simple 70d test (bike/face/shirt in focus).

neuroanatomist said:

hne said:

Can you see an elephant while you're wearing glasses? The whole elephant at once through 30mm diameter lenses?

You can see an entrance pupil appearing 92mm in diameter through a 60mm front element if you depart from the thin lens assumption...

Click to expand...

Ironic that your analogy much more closely approximates a thin lens. It's not relevant, though, given the position of eyeglasses in relation to the biological optics.

In this case, scyrene is looking in the right place – 'focal length' is the distance from the image plane to the apparent position of the entrance pupil when the lens is focused at infinity. The design of the MP-E precludes infinity focus, so the 65mm focal length is a theoretical not a real measurement, i.e. the FL would be 65mm if the lens could focus at infinity. It can't, so the actual focal length is shorter. Ignoring rounding of the aperture value, f/2.8 with a 19.5mm front element would be a max FL of 55mm. In fact, the actual FL with the focus racked out as far as possible is probably even shorter. As an example, the FL of the 100/2.8 Macro is 100mm focused at infinity, but ~67mm at 1:1.

Click to expand...

How do you have measured the FL of the 100mm or do you have some source of people who measured the FL?

My internal conflict is: The EF 100 (non-IS) needs a 4 times increase of the exposure time between infinitity and 1:1 which is conformal to a lens(group) of 100mm FL over the whole focusing range. While the MP-E 65 is sth. like a zoom where zooming is used to focus.
I alway thought the EF 100 Macro and EF-S 60 Macro are lenses which shift principal planes optically to simulate the shifting of a 100mm lens (having a fixed lens arrangement).

Would be great to have some additional info about that - Best, Michael

jd7 said:

dlee13 said:

I own the current Sigma 85mm and for me to sell it for an Art version, it would have to be a substantial upgrade.

Click to expand...

Agree!

The lens I'd really like to see next from Sigma is a 135 f/2 Art - or ideally, a 135 f/2 Art OS.

Click to expand...

Count me in. I used the current version and I was impressed with the results. I have been awaiting long time for the 85A, but I doubt it will have OS using this very wide aperture.

I see camera wifi as general DSLR advancement even though I have no use for it. It should be cheap and easy to implement.

I definitely see where studio shooters want high speed wifi over the inconvenience of cable tethering.

For me, I want to process the photo properly or not at all. The intermediate/ half assed sharing via phone seems pointless though I recognize some people want it.

Nuno Santos said:

Hi guys,

Talking about professional FF, like the precious 1Dx, take a few minutes and read this article, I think is resuming what I always saw in the Full Frame mirrorless, and I thought that I was alone.

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sonys-full-frame-pro-mirrorless-fatal-mistake/

Cheers

Click to expand...

The 'rant heard round the world' -- I remember. Sator sent the interwebs into a tizzy with that one.

Mirrorless's size/weight savings only really pay dividends if you use slower glass, use APS-C, etc. Once you step up to FF, you aren't fooling anyone. Stuff will be big and heavy, and at that point, it's all about head to head performance against SLRs.

- A

CSD said:

PureClassA said:

FastRAW Viewer? Where can I find that? MAC capable?

Click to expand...

Yes:

http://www.fastrawviewer.com/

Another application worth looking at is Photomechanic which is heavily used by sports photographers and events.

http://www.camerabits.com/products/

Click to expand...

I had to step out so thanks for supplying the links. If you search, you'll find some other threads where I discuss my experience with PhotoMechanic. Short version is essentially that I didn't have a good experience with their staff so I didn't buy the product after evaluating it. That's when I found FastRAWViewer. It works BETTER for what I use it for (culling mostly), is updated often (every month or two) and is a fair price ($15). IMHO, Photomechanic is way overpriced for what it does ($150). Heck, it costs as much as Lightroom!

Mt Spokane Photography said:

I have yet to hear of a price increase from reliable sites who have close ties with retailers. For example, Canon Price Watch usually gives a one month or more warning when a price change is imminent.

Click to expand...

Same here. I rely on CPW as they seem to have a very good handle on prices. I would be very surprised if any of the recent or pending camera releases (1dX II/80D/5DIV) are affected. I would guess that if Canon is planning to raise prices, they have simply built any increase into the release price of new bodies.

Keep in mind as well that, as hard as Canon tries to enforce MAP pricing, they have been less than successful. In the end, the market sets the price.

The very best option is to put the filters on eBay and learn how to blend exposures. Saves you some space in your bag and saves you a lot of money.

Click to expand...

I often use the software approach, but as coastal landscape specialist I regularly encounter situations where the old fashion approach is either the more effective option or achieves a similar result quicker.

You can buy antistatic sprays designed for computer screens and spectacles.

Click to expand...

Has anybody tried this ? Were there any detrimental effects ?

I guess Ive been pretty lucky, my 6D has gotten pretty soaked on a number of occasions.

Shoot ISO400 color film for a while and then compare. If the 5DIII images still look soft, then you have a problem.

(I suspect pixel-peeping and over expectation are the issues)

My 7D2 has gone back to Canon, to be replaced.

I recently used my (original) 7D with the 70-200, and also the 1Dx with the 1.4x III. Very happy with both results, so it looks like the 1.4x was the right choice.

The 7D has shown competitive results with my new lens and is probably too old to get a decent return. I'll sell the 7D2 replacement when it arrives, and be 'down to a sensible' two-camera collection!