17 TSE and 100-400 II

P.S if you were dropping 5K, make sure I'm there to catch it!

This exact issue just happened to me last week.
Pretty sure it's the Flash Unit cause I have tried other 600ex-RT on the camera and all works fine. Have tried the problem 600ex-rt on another camera and same issue (can't get to ETTL mode).
I can set the 600ex-rt to ETTL but as soon as I 1/2 press the shutter on the camera, it will change back to TTL. If I use it the 600ex-rt in remove mode (slave), then I can use it in ETTL mode.

May have to send the 600ex-rt in for repair

yes and the price in Ireland is €4299, I found it for €3700 in a European country so will get it when I visit next month!!
Its the same thread as the first one after the announcement, Get over the price or take a trip to the US. Buy or don't buy the choice is yours. There are plenty of other countries in the EU more expensive than Germany's €4065.

AlanF said:

Sharlin said:

9VIII said:

I think the 150-600V2 is a good idea, not because it might be better than the original Tamron 150-600, but because it might finally be an upgrade to the best budget supertelephoto lens on the market.
Now that Brian finally has 7D2 samples on the Canon 400f5.6 (they were just put up this summer) we can see just how futile the first round of these new zoom lenses really are.

Click to expand...

How does it make sense to compare two lenses using different sensor sizes and pixel pitches? Yes, it's well known the Tamron is weak in the corners at 600mm... but it's 600mm and not 400mm! There are not many people trying to choose between a crop+400mm and a FF+600mm. They have the sensor size fixed and are trying to pick a lens to fit their purposes.

Plus of course the Tamron is a zoom and thus infinitely more valuable to most users than a 400mm (or a 640mm eqv) prime.

Click to expand...

Agreed. And it is just not true that "we can see just how futile the first round of these new zoom lenses really are." The Tamron and Sigma 150-600mms are very good lenses - and I do compare them with my very expensive top quality Canon primes and zooms.

Click to expand...

Ok, "futile" was the wrong word.

In practical terms they might have been better off using a smaller zoom range, something like a 200-400, but in the end they did produce a well rounded package, the concept just needs more polish before it will be relevant to everyone.

I should reiterate that this new Tamron lens sounds very exciting, those MTF charts show a lens that could actually make everything else in the segment obsolete.

I've found that during down time waiting in the forest I'll find a target and shoot it, for example a fallen log running away from me, having a small sharp stub or broken branch. It's pretty easy to see the result. It's also really quick to AFMA so just go +5, -5 with a target such as the stump and note what is happening.

Here is my shot with the 400 X1.4 a dried leaf split and placed perpendicular to me on my garden stucco wire fence. It seems no AFMA is needed. Sometimes I will deliberately set the lens to back focus slightly when it's tricky to get close enough to actually catch the eye of a bird.

The "three things" description of a camera is wrong. There is an image sensor, exposure sensor, autofocus sensor, all those buttons, etc.
The data from the sensor(s) is not just moved around. It goes through amplification, digital conversion, conversion to jpeg (if you want to save that, or preview the image), and is used to drive systems.
Hey, let's just let some strangers handle most of what this machine needs to do. That's a great idea.
I'm not against letting others have some access, even if I've never used it I think Magic Lantern is a good thing. But, the camera company needs to control the core functionality and deliver a fully functioning device on day one.

niels123 said:

Currently I have the 24-105 f/4L IS USM mk1 among other lenses, but I am quite disapointed about its image quality, especially compared to the 35 f/1.4L II (which I also have).

I consider upgrading to 24-70 f/2.8L II. Is it worth it? How much difference is there between 24-104 f/4L IS and 24-70 f/2.8L II?

I don't care about the IS, In case I need it I have the 16-35 f/4L IS and the Tamron 85 f/1.8 VC

Click to expand...

Yes, but wait until the 24-105 II hits. (but sell your mark I now)

zim said:

I remember that issue too.

Question though: Is AF assist even necessary now?, ok it's just centre point but -3ev there's more light at wedding receptions than that surely?
(I'm not a pro and only taken snaps at a reception so I really don't know, in case someone takes offence :-\ )

Click to expand...

In dim light, without enough contrast "targets," maybe the light is flat too, a reliable AF assist beam is invaluable. We aren't restricted to the center AF point with the 5DIII + 600ex-rt AF assist. Works great, very fast after the "old" issue was resolved.

Different lenses need more or less light to AF. And you might be standing in a circle of ample light, turn around and see a great expression, a moment out beyond the edges of that light, and the AF assist nails focus.

Why do you think so many event photographers complain about the ST-E3-RT not having AF assist? There are times when there is enough light for no flash, but not enough to grab focus consistently.

All this talk about AA filters...

Has anybody modified a 5D Mark III with a clear filter to eliminate the Anti Aliasing (AA) layer? Lifepixel offers this service.

For some reason, I cannot start my own thread about this matter, I am very curious if anybody has a modified vs unmodified comparison.

And I for one am rather happy about this new 5D model. The III was not a revolutionary step above the II because it didnt need to be, Canon knows what they are doing and people know what they are getting when the pay big money for Canon. It isn't specs, it never was. How bad were the complaints when the Mark III was released? I hope they were as bad as some of what I hear now.

If it works, then the price is well justified. I bought a car with a plastic radiator, so I waited for the warranty to expire and then I installed a pure metal one.

I'm getting really tired of looking at sample swatches on dpreview, and making heads from tails of all the different parameters affecting that sample alter.

GammyKnee said:

Actually you can get crude access to dehaze in LR6 standalone by downloading a free pack of presets:

http://owenbillcliffe.co.uk/lightroom-6-1-standalone-dehaze/

(a more direct link here: http://www.proloststore.com/products/dehaze)

Also, for any fellow UK people who are looking to buy the standalone version but having difficulty finding it (Adobe haven't made it easy):

http://owenbillcliffe.co.uk/lightroom-6-standalone-upgrade/

Click to expand...

Thanks for those links!
That's a nice enough workaround.

a bit off topic, but can someone explain how that dehaze actually works?

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II Images & Specifications

I use 16-35/2.8II a lot, this is my all time favorite lens 8), i use it exclusively for my nightscape pictures, on 5d/5dii resolution is enough at any aperture for 20*30cm picture and sometimes for 60*90cm spread, i am really interested in wide open porformance of the 16-35/2.8L III, could anyone send couple wide open (focused on infinity) raw files to my email?

My email: [email protected]

Also please check my instagram: https://www.instagram.com/andriy_sinchuk/

Mr. Milo said:

Back to the C700. It's a great FIRST step for Canon into competing with RED and ARRI.

Click to expand...

Mr Milo, I agree.

Arguably, it isn't their first step; the C300 and C300-2 have been quite a success and are being used on a lot of productions.

The most important factors in this market are support (hardware and workflow), image quality, and reliability. We know that Canon can do well in these categories, so there's a good chance that they will become a mainstay of motion picture rental houses.

I had the opportunity to test a 1DX MII this weekend. This is an unbelievable performing camera.
Compared to my trusty 1DS MIII it does everything better. The new sensor generation is a revelation,
AF performance with keeper rates of almost 100% are nothing out of the ordinary.
Image quality has an almost three-dimensional look which is easy discernible from other cameras.
My advice for people who are interested in this camera: try it out and you will never look back

It will perform fine. And since it has a hard stop at infinity it will be easier to use than other lenses. Shoot wide open.

Sporgon said:

But you don't actually have a D7200 or an A6300 do you ? So you're guessing that's what you want from the various on line files, right ?

Click to expand...

Well, I go not only by pics but also by reviewers findings which are very clear in this case. And those reviewers know MUCH MORE than me. ;D

pwp said:

Shrewd photographers who have the smarts, time & patience can pick up great deals on the secondhand market. I'm happy getting pre-owned glass, but always opt for brand new bodies.

Well almost always...There are a lot of very good 1DX bodies coming onto the market. It's occurred to me I can get a very low mileage 1DX and a brand new 5D Mk IV for less than a new 1DX MkII. Tempting!

-pw

Click to expand...

The 1DX mark II is a monster. Once you get your hands on it and shoot 200 raw images continuously at 14 FPS without hitting the buffer, you're never gonna wanna look back, even to a 1DX. It's ridiculous, my 5D Mark III can only shoot about 24 raw images before the buffer hits.But with the 1DX mark II I can see a play happening in a football game and capture 140 frames in 10 seconds of play without stopping, it feels like cheating-- it's too easy to get the shot my editors need!

New camera bodies are super important for working photojournalists for that sorta reason. That said, I'm not sure what Canon could really improve on for the next 1DX, because at this point we really do have an unlimited buffer with 14 fps, and all of my images get downsized to 2 megapixels for the newspaper anyway.

Also, I can confirm the 24-70mm f/2.8L II is a tank. I've dropped mine so many times.. Only damage was one time when the zoom ring got dented into the barrel which stopped it from zooming, but I put a flathead under the dent and bent it back out and kept shooting, so there's that.

I'll stick with the Canon 135mm f/2L.

travisdeland said:

I've got 2 of the 7D2 bodies, and all of those STM lenses as well. I make the comment because I know, based on threads, here, that there were quite a few in the video crowd hoping for 4K upgrades

Click to expand...

Yeah, I have a couple of 7D2's also. Unfortunately Canon won't add 4K video though...

neuroanatomist said:

9VIII said:

Aperture, Shutter Speed, ISO, Compensation Value... And I've always wanted a wheel for manual colour temperature adjustment on the spot.

Click to expand...

You forgot the mode dial, and the strength dial for the built in K-cup brewer.

Click to expand...

Right, we need a wheel with 10 Custom Function profiles, plus bigfoot mode, and as long as it's a 4K coffee machine it would probably be met with near universal applause.

jblake said:

StudentOfLight said:

I've attached a screenshot of LR comparison of the D810 (unedited) and 5D-IV (sharpened). Is the the AA filter ruining the 5D-IV image?

Click to expand...

I have applied the same sharpening to a D7200 and a 80D base ISO100 images with this same studio scene, and have achieved the same thing as you did with the 5D4; both images look to have the same sharpness as the D810.

Not sure what your point is here, I can replicate the same IQ/sharpness with crop camera's as well.

Click to expand...

At low ISO, there's very little practical difference between FF and APS-C for IQ, although FF allows you to achieve shallower DoF if you want it. Likewise, there's little practical between presence vs. absence of an AA filter, because AA-filtered images can have more sharpening applied.

PureClassA said:

Mt Spokane Photography said:

It might be useful in a studio on a tripod to control the camera and download images, I hate to use long usb cables, but they are so much faster than Wi-Fi, and my access point might be nearly out of range, being 15 feet away.

Click to expand...

I use a 15ft USB 2.0 cable for my 5D3 at least once per year for some 2500 shots over five days in a big studio set up. We really need it so we can sling images directly to LR and have instant previews on a large monitor for the dance instructors to make sure the student is executing the technique properly. There have been many occasions when I'm stretching the limits the cable to computer.

For $50 I will GLADLY invest in Wifi Card from Canon for my 5DSR because I use it the same way sometimes. I only wish the 5D3 could offer the same firmware capability. It's actually one of the few PROs for me to upgrade to a 5D4.

I just bought a 1DX2 instead though, but I'll be damned if I'm spending $600 on that crazy-ass adapter. I'm betting the cards get better than 15 ft provided you have a unobstructed line of sight to the computer. The signal probably doesn't go through walls well

Click to expand...

With a 1DX II, just use the gigabyte Network cable.

It would be hard for me to imagine downloading huge files from a 5DS over Wi-fit since the speed drops by distance, and at max range, its typically less than 10%.

I would not tether using LR. Canon Utilities blows it away, you get high resolution real time feed from the camera, you can view a live Histogram, getting instant feedback from changing the aperture, shutter speed or ISO, and can even magnify the area of interest to perfectly focus on the exact spot you want, get your shadows and lighting right, and then, you capture the image and it opens in LR or whatever program you have set for editing.

This is a huge time saver, its not necessary to take photo after photo, importing to LR to see if its right and then trying again. Why not teach students the best way to get the job done?

The MA-400 microphone adapter works with the C300 Mark II I believe and will also work with the upcoming XC15. But what do we know about it?

I searched around but there seems to be little info on this piece of important equipment.

Do we know how it powers the microphones? Can it run of electricity, does it pull power from the camera or does it have its own batteries? If it pulls from the camera can we plug in the camera without it pulling from batteries?

Does it have just two XLR inputs or more? Any other ports?

I saw one picture where it seems to have a touch pad on top, what is that for and does it swivel out as I would often not be able to see up there when shooting some videos?

I also wonder whether some of it such as the shotgun mic arm is detachable as I rarely use shotgun mics.

I currently use Tascam DR-60D for audio, and while not perfect it does a very, very good job. I am though thinking of upgrading to the DR-70D to get an extra XLR input which would be good for 3 or 4-person interviews / discussions.

So what do we know about the MA-400?

Thanks.

LordofTackle said:

First attempt with stacking. The spider was sitting on the wall for the whole afternoon so I finally decided to give it a try.
92 pictures @ f/2.8, ISO100
I'd appreciate some advice

Click to expand...

Looks great! It must have been patient to sit for that many exposures

My advice would be, save yourself some time and try stopping down to f/5.6 and then you'll need fewer shots. Otherwise, you're doing fine!

Pansottin said:

Thank you Zeidora for your help. Thank you all.
An additional question concerning Live View/x16 magnification for manual focusing:
with the new W-E1 Canon wifi card (I know it´s not yet available) will I have the screen of my camera with all the functions in my iPad? The resolution of the iPad will be an advantage or not for Live View use?
Your opinions please. Thanks.

Click to expand...

No idea. I asked CPS re capabilities, and they were clueless even whether remote shooting is going to be possible or not. As far as I can see Camranger has magnification option. I have the W-E1 on order, will see by November whether canon app delivers, otherwise get Camranger.

rrcphoto said:

tcmatthews said:

Hypothetical question would you rather have Dual Pixel AF or a HDMI 1.4 connection?

I ask because the chip Canon is using could be using all of the high speed digital IO lines that could support the 4K output for that.

Click to expand...

actually the current 4K in the DSLR's is a hack job.

the reason being is that the DSP's that are in DiGiC are not supporting anything over 1080p.

the video feed from the sensor, to DiGic and output as video is a 1080p stream.

how they get 4K is reading the sensor really fast, and buffering 8mp JPEG's. that's easy to do, and every little heavy lifting compute wise, as long as the sensor can handle being read that fast.

that's why it isn't coming out of the HDMI port, and that's why it's not h.264,etc.

for a while now, the theory was that TI does DiGiC for canon.. this is their best DSP.

whatcha all see there?

Click to expand...

Which suggests the Cinema range is using a different DSP, and therefore Canon could use it in a dSLR in future if they felt the need ?