Posts

IsaacImage · May 4, 2016

TeT said:
Is the tape a personal preference or potential branding issues with your clients...? just curious...

Sometimes you shooting in places when you don't want to "bling" to much, and to much attention its not good.
And White Canon's Logo is very shiny

expatinasia · May 4, 2016

Have you tried contacting Canon directly? I buy my extra batteries directly from them and as it has just come out they may have some stock of both the old and new.

Luckshot · May 3, 2016

Serious question.

What’s the appeal of using a service like this? A tank & reels, changing bag, and some chemicals gets the film developed.

Is it the consistency of having a developing machine get the timing down to the second?
Are the chemicals getting hard to come by?
Is it getting the scans back too?

As for the scans, the medium (2048x3072) that’s included seems small, and going up to 4492x6774 adds $10 to the order. So it wouldn’t take too many of those to pay for a film scanner.

Granted, I haven’t developed film since 1996, but it wasn’t a huge deal then. That’s why I’m asking.

Besisika · May 3, 2016

I prefer unboxing, instead of sniff test (just joking ...) because I can't smell it from a distance.

ahsanford · May 3, 2016

Maximilian said:
dilbert said:

Maximilian said:

Wasn't there a rumor that the 5DS / R would get a minor update in ergonomics and built to use synergies with the 5D4?
But I don't believe that there will be a new sensor in less than one year after the 5D4 release.

Click to expand...

Why not? There's no competition between those two cameras.

Click to expand...

I hope you're right. But I don't believe in Canon on that point.

This happens all the time:

5D3 released with silent shutter --> 1DX users have to wait years for it to come in the 1DX II
7D2 released with anti-flicker mode, 70D comes out with DPAF, etc. --> 5D3 users have to wait years for it come in the 5D4 (or 5DS, I guess)

And yes, the 5D4 will have some new hotness the 5DS will not get. If I had to guess, it would probably a 'lite' version of the 1DX II AF system. But it might be something altogether unexpected. It happens.

Canon can't refresh all its lines so that every advancement is retroactively available to all users. There's only so much you can do with a firmware update.

- A

Jack Douglas · May 3, 2016

tpatana said:
I meant it might be you can refuse to take points and get extended 5 year warranty instead. Not sure on that though, my translator is rusty. Also I recall they had some discounts for foreigners at the b&m, so that's why I'd go check them instead of online order.

Looking like this will be no go since high pricing with no warranty (confirmed by Canon Canada) would be just too much to tolerate. Have a disappointed daughter. Thanks for your help.

Jack

mukul · May 3, 2016

IMHO Otus series 135mm or ~100 mm Macro

speezy · May 2, 2016

Not to bring up an old and debated topic again but..

Are people still having AF inconsistencies with wide aperture lenses using the center AF point with more recently purchased 70Ds, refurbs in particular? I read that it might not be as prevalent in more latter batches but havent seen much out there lately. I ask because the refurbs have gone down in price quite significantly and I'm considering buying, but I'd rather not have to deal with a potential issue.

Patrick S · May 2, 2016

Tested super35 image circle cine lenses on 1dx2 and you can shoot in 4k without vignetting, at least 15,5-47 mm T 2,8 L shows none
Cn-e 18-80 L IS would be ideal for 4k with equivalent zoom range of ~24-105mm and affordable with power zoom grip available and autofocus

TommyLee · May 2, 2016

nice camera...
I missed the 1 series...back now

shown with the 35L II which also rocks!

need a walkabout in lovely Portland weather

tom

bitm2007 · May 2, 2016

[quoteHi bitm.
Here's hoping you have sufficient cover (new for old) and they write off your camera and you get a MKIII or substantial lump towards a 1Dx!

or the old one repaired if that is what you prefer.
Good luck.

Cheers, Graham. ][/quote]

Hoping for the repair, as the cover isn't new for old. If it's a lump sum, it's going to be a tricky decision with the MKIV expected in August. Think i'd probable get a 6D as a stop gap, over a used 5D MkII or a MkIII, then get either the MKIV or the 6D II sometime next year. As a Landscape photographer I doubt I'd miss the additional features of the 5D series.

Dave Del Real · May 2, 2016

mistaspeedy said:
I disagree. I think there is zero chance of Canon giving 4K to the 7D mark II via a firmware update. I doubt the hardware is up to the task....

Oh the hardware is very capable and there's already memory strings found to show 4K video recording in the firmware. Canon just has to flip the switch. I hope they do.

Jack Douglas · May 2, 2016

JohnLofy, that's a very thorough reply with excellent points that will be helpful. Thanks very much!

The price here in Canada is roughly $CDN 8000, while $US 6000, which with our slightly improved present exchange rate, is around $CDN 7600.

Warranty on a camera this expensive is no small item and I will have to weigh it against my daughter's enthusiasm to have that camera to use for a very special trip (and my impatience to get it sooner than I planned). I'd send my 24-70 F4 with her.

So far I've only communicated with Yodobashi Camera. It seems that a much better deal would be possible from a Euro zone country but ..... that's life. Funny how world pricing works.

Jack

JumboShrimp · May 2, 2016

Lately, my anti-virus software tells me that it has blocked a malicious website "attack" when I log in to CR. Is this specific to my PC, or something new to CR? Anyone else having this issue? NB: Just curious, nothing more.

Good24 · May 1, 2016

I'm very happy with this lens. I used to shoot a Vivitar 20mm on my Canon T60 about a hundred years ago and the distortion in the corners was extreme. Not so with the Voigtlander. I took it to Italy in 2015 and used it mostly for landscapes, mostly at f/8. But you'll see the first one below was actually at f/3.5. A great little lens. I use it on the 5D3. With focus confirmation light I was able to get sharp images even with a foreground subject. For landscapes I set it at f/8 and crank the focus to infinity, no problem. I was also lucky in that I have an old 52mm thread Canon circular polarizing filter that I have un-retired to use on this lens (see second image below).

f/3.5, 1/4s, ISO 1600:

The Pantheon on Flickr

f/8, 1/250, ISO 200:

Colosseum on Flickr

f/8, 1/250, ISO 400:

Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II on Flickr

May 1, 2016

Re: Patent: 50-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO for EF-S & EF-M

Slap slap slap.

Valvebounce · May 1, 2016

Hi Nightscape.
I'm sorry that you misunderstood the point I was trying to make, it was not that others don't deserve a job (though sometimes I want to tell rude and lazy shop assistants how many other people would love their job, but that's a different forum) it was that these people already have that job and to remove it would be wrong.

Cheers, Graham.

nightscape123 said:
Valvebounce said:

Hi Etiene.
Yes the business world is global, but the people needing jobs are there, are you happy for me to pick some flimsy reason and remove your employment to another country?
I sure know that this happens enough already, for profit reasons, let's not add to the misery!

Cheers, Graham.

Etienne said:

The business world is global. How about don't build manufacturing plants in an earthquake zone?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Are you somehow implying that people in other parts of the world don't need jobs? What about the 12% unemployment rate in the EU? The 8% in the US? You can't even calculate the unemployment in Africa the middle east or india... There are lots of places that need jobs, I don't see why one place deserves jobs over any other. Seems like it would make sense to build a delicate manufacturing plant somewhere that wasn't named the RING OF FIRE.

rpt · Apr 30, 2016

s.smith said:
Great shots. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks

SalAlexander · Apr 30, 2016

I redid the reset process all over again: reinstalled the firmware, reset settings, remove battery and clock battery, format cards...
Had another wedding yesterday, and everything seemed to work perfectly. Hopefully it as just an isolated issue!

J.R. · Apr 30, 2016

Yes, CFast cards exceeding 128GB will work on the 1DX2 - refer page 75 of the manual.

retroreflection · Apr 29, 2016

It seems that you want this to be a path to higher frames per second.
Mirror lockup when high fps are desired fixes the mirror cycle limit, but data transmission and other bottlenecks are also serious hurdles. Pellicle mirrors hurt there, too. The loss of light increases exposure time, more scenarios would need exposures longer than the time available (1/fps - shutter reset time).

rfdesigner · Apr 29, 2016

mbigelowphotographer said:
I've been having MAJOR problems with the Yongnuo YN-622C and my 580EX IIs. I have two 580EX IIs and both of them have now gone out on me, multiple times. One of them has gone out at LEAST 5 times. I'm honestly starting to lose track now. I keep sending them back to Canon for repair.

Anyways, after reading an article that was posted by a company that was doing testing for this same problem with Pocketwizards, I figured that it was an inherent problem with the 580EX II and using it with off-camera high-speed sync, or off-camera ETTL. The thing is, I wasn't using them with HSS, nor was I "cranking" away on them.

So anyways, I decided that I would try out the YN-622C on-camera, with the 580EX II on top of it. No HSS. No fast shooting. So just a basic pass-through mode, both of them mounted on-camera. STILL went out on me -- after ONE shot!! The 580EX II is doing the same thing.....AGAIN. It seems to be firing the pre-flash at full power and then the ETTL exposure comes out completely dark. Then, in manual mode, it fires full power.

Every time Canon repairs them, they say that they are replacing the battery housing and battery door......? What the heck. How could the YN-622C be causing this problem?

I'm BEYOND frustrated with this. I'm ready to throw those flashes in the garbage disposal.

As far as I can tell from your description, you haven't isolated the canon flashes from the yongnuo trigger.. I would want to try them with a canon trigger.. if you can get them to blow with a canon trigger then it's a canon only problem.

One issue I can think of is that the yongnuo trigger might demand higher radio power levels from the slave flashes and this is causing problems (maybe due to poorer frequency accuracy, poorer RF filters, poorer firmware timing etc.... possibly causing excess peak currents, but I would hope the canon flashes are protected from this internally.

Any way I look at it, I'd like to exclude the non-canon trigger... at least for test purposes, can you borrow a canon one from somewhere.

Also maybe the flashes are getting cooked on something else, then blowing when going remote.. is your camera's hotshoe ok?

I trying to think how you are getting problems but others aren't.

tpatana · Apr 29, 2016

Any tips on where to shoot for birds/animals around Texas coast? Not too far south (Galveston-ish and up) on the coast, and preferably quite easy access with car (not too long walk from parking, getting old & lazy). I googled and found (too) many parks, I'm wondering if I could get one or two tips for the best locations.

j-nord · Apr 29, 2016

Little to do with Canon, more a reflection of the state of the global economy.

ahsanford · Apr 29, 2016

LDS said:
ahsanford said:

It's like Canon nailed the filter thread distance to the front element on the 16-35 f/4L IS and completely pooched it on the 24-70 f/4L IS. Very, very odd.

Click to expand...

Not odd. Look at the size of the front elements of both lenses and you'll understand why it happens.

Sometimes keeping a constant filter size for a group of lenses probably going to be used together may lead to some compromises.

In this case, it wouldn't be the size of the front element (77mm should work absolutely fine at 24mm on FF), it's something about the design of the threads.

I just pulled both lenses out. Turns out there isn't much of a difference in the two lenses' elevation/distance of the front filter ring to the front element -- it's about the same to my eye (I lack the height gauge to check that properly/safely). But interestingly, it appears that the filter threads on the 16-35 f/4L IS are far thinner / offer less turns of thread engagement. That would lead to a thinner filter ring than the 24-70 f/4L IS, which has at least two more turns to my eyes.

This very well may explain why that 16-35 is vignette free with a standard CPL and also impressively vignette free with a Lee 4x4 / 4x6 filter setup -- it appears this 16-35 was 'optimized' for the filtering crowd in a way the 24-70 f/4L IS was not.

- A

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics