candc said:

I think I might get this lens as a take along/do it all canoe tripping and hiking lens on the 6d. Have you tried it on a crop camera? I wonder how it compares IQ wise compared to the 16-300? I know it has less range on the wide side but I would prefer it if the IQ is better on a crop body as well.

Click to expand...

I haven't posted my review of the 16-300mm yet, but I actually make that case. There are more optical compromises with the 16-300 and I still like the 28-300 better on a crop. Less loss of resolution and contrast on the long end. The biggest downside, of course, is that 28mm isn't particularly wide on a crop.

Here's a sample taken with the lens on a crop camera (300mm wide open). Crop body is an EOS M in this case, but I did the review primarily on a 60D.

jedy said:

..... it mentions Nikon cameras:
No focus motor
Won't autofocus with all lenses.......

Click to expand...

As Nikon has fallen off my radar, I no longer follow specs and details of current market offerings, I've no idea regarding the current state of these things.
- - -
I have, and have worn out both a D70 and a D80.
On the lens mount of these cameras is a screwdriver tip sort of affair connected to an in the camera focusing motor.
Some autofocus lenses of the era did not have their own autofocus motor(s), instead used the camera's built in motor. I have lenses of both types, in lens motors focused significantly faster, camera body focus seemed just as accurate once it finally arrived.
The next generation Nikons one step down in the marketplace omitted the in body focus motors, if a lens was to autofocus, it had to bring its own motors.
There was simply no way for a non-motorized lens to autofocus without camera drive.
Example; had I updated to the D90 generation but a step or two downmarket, my AF Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8D would not be able to autofocus.

In the photo below hot linked from dpreview, see the screwdriver tip looking tab at about 7:00? That's the in camera autofocus drive for lenses without their own motors.



Another downside of this so called 'feature', while this drive is engaged, the focus ring cannot be manually operated, autofocus must be physically disengaged on the camera body, no 'on the fly' manual focus possible.
- - -
I don't know if this is what snapsort was referring to, I looked briefly and did not find. I don't much care either, please, make no effort on my behalf to find and quote whatever passage(s).
I no longer care anything regarding anything and everything Nikon and at this point in my life, hope to maintain that indifference until my end.

I was using 1920x1080 @25 FPS

@sjschall : yes "little buffer icon on the LCD.. like a battery indicator"


ok this is card problem...
I tested another 4 GB Sandisk ultra 30MB/s class10 SD card. This card was supplied by canon with the camera. It recorded cool 08:25 mins of video till card was full and never showed the buffer icon.

After that I formatted the 16GB card with is program https://www.sdcard.org/downloads/formatter_4/ @Lightmaster and tried it. It stopped after ~2 and half mins and showed the buffer icon quite a few times.


Thinking what to do?
Should I contact Sandisk directly with the issue?

thanks all for your time

The Ds3 is obviously the bastard offspring of the Nintendo DS and the Sony Playstation 3. Or it might be the Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III. Maybe the OP can clarify...

Aglet said:

I define) so I can focus on a bird partly hidden by a branch.... Can't do that too readily with an SLR.

OTOH, a good friend is very satisfied with the performance from his 150-600m Tamron on his D7100; finds it quite sharp beyond 400mm but does get noticeably soft between 500 to 600mm.

So, even if CaNikon don't make such a lens at that price point, there are viable options.

Click to expand...

Exactly, the third party lens makers find and fill a gap that they see, and are able to provide customers who do not want to spend $5K or 10K on a near perfect lens, when one that is very good will do the job. Casual uses do not need ultra reliability, they can take care with their lenses and when treated carefully, the low end lenses will last. Still, I do buy old cameras, and when there is a old third party lens in with a camera along with Canon lenses, its almost a sure bet that the old Vivitar, or Sigma lens will not function. They usually have lube gone solid, and getting it out is very difficult. Some also have lube that has gone to liquid and is all over the aperture blades. In either case, its not worth fooling with. I take them apart and save the screws, I always seem to find a need to replace a tiny lost screw, my old 5D I bought this weekend needed 2 screws, and I had them.

IMG_0001 said:

Therefore, having multiple very short and likely less intense flashes during the exposure seems more efficient and must result in a more repeatable/consistent lighting than one long flash.

Click to expand...

And there is power regulation. Those little flashes can have a relatively wide range f power levels, making the output adjustable.
The long flash method works only at/near full power.

The energy cost is from keeping the output almost constant for the duration of the illumination, at least that is my understanding.

Click to expand...

Most of the cost comes from the shutter blades blocking a good portion of the light, and from a little oversight in the flash protocols. The camera doesn't tell the flash how long its sync speed actually is, so the HSS-flash has to be long enough for the slowest camera. You use that 1D4? Half of your speedlite's power went into compatibility with the 6D or 5Dx. (The FlexTT has a hack for the second part, if I remember correctly)

This is the kind of trickle down I like.

Will we see higher bitrates and choice of gop patterns in next rebels? Canon have the video dslr market... Sony are very interesting, and well priced....

Since you do a little off everything, I'd guess I'd lean you towards the 3rd option. But I personally would do either of the two options... go back to crop with the 70d and wait for the 5d mkiv... or more likely buy a discounted mkiii and a new lens.

Hot pixels are actually what convinced me to upgrade from a few lamps on a table to an actual light box for macro work.
On an 8 second exposure my 5DII lights up like a Christmas tree. I sincerely doubt any camera will give a faultless image with a long exposure.
Anything under 1 second seems to be fine.
This is actually one problem I can see having with Mirorless, when I'm shooting in live view for extended periods hot pixels are definitely worse. Again, that's only with long exposures, but in those situations you want your sensor cool for best performance.

Hi,
- I have tried with a 2s speed.. same.
- The ready light is almost aways on.
- I have no test button. But the "depth of field" button make nothing.
- I hear a very small "whine" but every 15s and only during 2-3s. Not the "dziiiiiii..." of a normal flash when it loads...

That makes also me thinking to a failed capacitor. As I have a small electronic background, I will try to open it.
(I know that a flash can contain high-voltage - I have already played with this principle some years ago when I was student)

Thank you all for your help.

WOW! I played w/ the 24 t-s last summer for starscapes and it worked OK. I understand (someone correct me if I am wrong) that 600/focal length= max shutter time for something w/o trails.

I took some fun star shots in the spring w/ the 40 2.8 of the Nasa launch facility and the glow from the canal lighting nearby, https://www.flickr.com/photos/77760916@N05/12030259025/

I look forward to some interesting foreground/star scape type shots coming up.

I expect the 7D MK II, if it is announced, will have a pop up flash (also expect it in $2300.00 neighborhood) and I like them though it won't be a deal breaker for me. I appreciate the suggestion of the 270 as a substitute and will probably buy one if necessary

surapon said:

Dear Friend, Mr.lastcoyote
I use LED Ring Light for my dear MP-E 65 mm., Since 4-5 years, and still love this LED Ring light, which can turn on Both Left side and Right side---Or just one side of the LED. Ring light , for the Shade and shadow to make the subject 3D. look. Yes, Super Cheap TOO = jUST $ 36 us dOLLARS---If you do not like , Just throw them away.

http://www.amazon.com/NEEWER%C2%AE-Macro-Ring-LED-Light/dp/B0031AQ302

Enjoy

Surapon

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=18917.0

Click to expand...

Thanks for reply Surapon.
Yes it seems to me most people use a continuous ring light for macro video, similar to the one you linked to.
I guess I need to literally try out the options to see what works best.

A co-worker has one of these as a retirement goal. I have no idea what he wants to do with it, but its his money.

Jim

jp121 said:

This place charges AUD$100 to submit a camera for inspection. They didn't charge me anything more for the repair.

Click to expand...

They wanted to charge me between 200 and 300 euro because the camera was out of warranty :'(

winglet said:

I heard that Nikon has the same camera but with 2 more stops of DR. It must be true because DxO says so and has all these graphs an' stuff.

I am writing a sharply-worded letter to Canon as we speak.

Click to expand...

Oh, where can I buy it?

I had exactly opposite path - bought SL1, which is nice cam, but went for M. I miss fast AF and viewfinder hugely, but I also gained few things. I believe I´m not going back to DSLR league. Ever. If they release EOS M3 with better sensor, faster AF and viewfinder, I´m instantly in...

unfocused said:

Personally, I've always thought this was one of the all-time greatest sports photos (says a lot more than any razor sharp action shot ever could in my opinion)

Click to expand...

Why, though? A sentimental attachment to the idea that "old, grainy and b&w" somehow has a meaning, a significance - a "truth" - in itself? (Nothing wrong with that, of course).

For me, I see in that image a great photo opportunity somewhat lost for the want of modern equipment to capture it.

Apologies if it's covered on page 2, it's sleepy time and I skipped it - but wanted to add...

My SL1/100D is set up for back-button focusing!

Have a rummage through the custom features, I don't recall the steps but it's in there

Also, 35/2, 50/1.8 (mk 1) and 100/2 are ace wee EF, fast primes on this little guy! (They look super-cool on it, too..) I've never been interested in the pancake, seems no better than shooting a fast compact from what I've seen, IMO.

Also, also - if people try supporting this camera primarily with their LEFT hand under its body/lens barrel, like someone who knows how to hold a camera, and just use your finger/thumb tips of your right hand to hit the dials and buttons there's no real problem with its handling

Also, also, also... I think I prefer framing with tiny viewfinders - and I primarily shoot a 5D3!

If there isn't, small battery-powered monitors are off-the-shelf accessories; the video-oriented ones typically have HDMI in and many can be ordered to run on common camera batteries. B&H has a lot of info on them.

Jim

mackguyver said:

JustMeOregon said:

Everyone that prints enough of their own photos these days will eventually discover Red River Paper.

http://www.redrivercatalog.com/

I'm responsible for the care & feeding of an Epson 4900 and I'm not at all shy about spending money on quality supplies. I print a lot and these guys offer top-notch quality and the best customer service in the business. Period.

Click to expand...

+1 on Red River - I always found it to be an excellent match for my Epson printers. I ditched the photo printer for many years (waiting for color profiling to catch up) but bit on the Pixma Pro 100 deal as well a year or so ago for my personal printing.

The best paper I've found for the Pixma is the Canon Pro Platinum paper. I'm more of a matte paper guy, but I have to say that the Pro Platinum produces some amazing glossy prints and comes close to the metallic prints in terms of depth & color saturation. Keep an eye on Canon USA's store for deals - last year I purchased several packs of the Pro Platinum 8x10 paper in a buy one, get four free deal with free shipping and extra paper (4x6 packs) for spending over $50. I spent $67 and got nearly $600 in free paper. Really. I have enough paper to last me many, many years now!

Now if they'd just do the same thing with the ink, I'd be all set, but I think there's some kind of conspiracy going on here ;D

Click to expand...

Ditto here. I didn't even have a printer yet (but I knew I'd be looking), and when that paper deal came along, I stocked up. Then I got the Pixma Pro-100 with the rebate and paper deal from Adorama in June. The rebate just arrived this week, so when all was said and done, I ended up with 250 sheets of Canon Pro Luster 8x10 paper (~ $175), 50 sheets of 13x19 Canon Semi-Gloss (~ $35) and the Printer (~ $389), a combined value of about $600, for a grand total of about $70.

So far, I'm loving the prints. Took some figuring to get the color management right between the printer driver and Lightroom, but I think I have it figured out now. Holding up a portrait of my daughter to my calibrated IPS display, I was giddy at the result.

The 70-300DO has two advantages: firstly it is very compact, and secondly it sells for less than half it's new price used. Agree with those that say it responds to unsharp mask. It's weak at the 70mm mark and that is where the 70-300 non L is actually very good - unlike the rest of that lens's range where the performance is quite dire.

Can't imagine anyone buying a DO new when it is the same price as the 70-300L.

Today I shot with both the 6D and the 7D now granted the 6D is newer and full frame but the IQ difference once I got the shots into Lightroom & then Photoshop are like night & day it really shows up how old the sensor & processor is in the 7D I had not shot with the two side by side before.

I also have an Olympus OM-D E-M10 which has a smaller 16MP sensor but obviously much newer than the 7D and again the IQ beats the 7D hands down especially regarding sharpness & definition, I use this camera if I want to travel light. (Yes the SL1 is small but not the lenses)

For Canon sake the 7D replacement must be at Photokina sensor wise they are being left behind by Sony who also supply Nikon & Olympus with CMOS sensors.

yorgasor said:

bobshut said:

So, if the soon to be released 7DII fails to come up to your expectation what's your Plan B?
(assuming you were planning to buy)

Click to expand...

I'll get so mad, sell all my gear and take up basket weaving. It's the only sane choice.

Click to expand...

Be sure to do it underwater. It's a more useful skill.

privatebydesign said:

But if nothing is capable of reproducing the "original" colours, which is true in very saturated flowers (not the camera or screen or printer ink), then all we can ever hope for is the best realistic interpretation and that has to include the detail, which we can accurately replicate if not the most saturated of the colours. If Perceptual is blocking up you have other issues.

Besides, colour is not as static a concept as we think, besides the "is red to me red to you?" unprovable conundrum, any reproduction is limited by what light is either shining on it, for a print, or out of it for a screen.

Best practice is to shoot with a color checker card and create your own profile, everything else is just guessing and we are notoriously unreliable at that, then post process for detail. It isn't difficult or time consuming, it just takes discipline.

Click to expand...

You are quite right about colors being a matter of perception. Between reflective & transmissive mediums and individual vision, it's impossible to produce perfect accuracy. I feel that color management has come a very long way and gotten to the point where we can get close, but for me I follow the 80/20 rule. For most of my work, I use a calibrated wide gamut monitor and AdobeRGB color space and adjust to taste. That gets me close and really only represents what I believe the colors to be. For color-critical work (I shoot art reproductions and products occasionally), I build a profile with my Passport ColorChecker and shoot under controlled lighting and work hard to produce accurate colors. Even then, the final product generally depends on who my client uses for printing or their website (typically an ad agency). If they have me print, I generally use Bay Photo or Aspen Creek, and use their latest profiles. In the end, I've never had a print come out perfectly, but it's always been so close that no one (other than me) has ever noticed.

On a side note, the biggest shock to me when I started using a wide gamut monitor was white balance. In the past, subtle differences (of say 100K) had never bothered me, but suddenly I became very sensitive to them.