I was asked about the ability to see a board this morning, which led me to discover than many members were not able to see all of our boards.

That is fixed now, so if you are seeing more boards, that's why.

justsomedude said:

Sporgon said:

Agree with what has been said so far in response to the comparison; this is not a valid test - unless you are aiming to show the 7DII is better.

1: As has been said, the 24-105L at 100mm and f4.5 does not have the same sharpness and contrast as the 70-200ii f2.8 at 100mm at f2.8.

2: You shot the 5DIII at ISO 3200 at 1/125 with a focal length of 100mm, so at best for critical sharpness you were probably dependant on the efficiency of the image stabilisation. You shot the 7DII at ISO 2500 at 1/250 at 100mm, so much less dependant on the IS.

3: You shot the 5DIII at f4.5, the 7DII at f2.8 in relatively dim light, so the 7DII had over twice the (volume) of light reaching the sensor than (the crop area of ) the 5DIII. ( Bearing in mind exposure is calculated on light density, not quantity).

These three points are why you obtained the result you did.

Click to expand...

1. I disagree that the 24-105 f/4.5L is any less sharp than the 70-200 f2.8L (Mark I) at 100mm. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=355&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=1&LensComp=103&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0

2 & 3. And yes, in my initial post I noted that I would have preferred to compare the same lenses side by side, with the same settings. This was more of an "after the fact" attempt to compare images, as I wasnt planning this review during the shoot. In a next step, I will definitely be comparing the same lenses with the same camera settings.

Thanks for the input! It definitely helps with future videos and reviews, so I can provide better data.

Click to expand...

Two apologise; just re read this and I see I didn't realise you were using the mki version of the 70-200/2.8 IS. Agreed, in the centre at these apertures the 24-105 is equal, possibly a tad better.

Also ignore my point 3, I think I must have been working on you having a longer focal length at f2.8. (The longer the lens the greater the volume of light that passes for a given aperture. So in this situation you would have been much better to use the 5DIII with the 70-200 @200, @f2.8, because although exposure remains the same, you would have had a much greater volume of light in your shot.)

I think we are really looking at point 2. 1/125 at 100 mm is risky for critical sharpness, 1/250 is much safer.

Dear Friends
Yes, These beautiful Thanksgiving Cactus in my Sun Room/ Solarium are full Bloom this morning. By Canon EOS 7D MK II, and Canon Lens EF 100 mm. F/ 2.8 L IS USM., Hand Held Shooting.
Enjoy.
Surapon

PS. Thousand Thanks to come to see this Album.

A few things I forgot to mention. The altitude was a non-issue since we live in Denver at 5200 feet. Only got a little winded hoofing it up to the little "house" way up top. Since my wife has some mobility limitations and used two walking sticks, we hired a private guide who could adjust to our pace. He was fantastic and gave oodles of historical information. He even knew how to use manual focus to take our inverted picture in the reflecting water mirror. His English skills were top notch. For 150 Soles ($50 US dollars) having a private guide was a bargain.

The buses ran every few minutes, as fast as they could load them. We stayed in Aguascalientes so an early bus was no problem. On the way back the bus let us off at the museum which had a good number of interesting artifacts. The botanic gardens, unfortunately, were a disappointment. The walk back to town was about 30 minutes.

dgatwood said:

If you get the chance, there's a bridge across between the north and south rims with an old bridge next to it that they've converted into a pedestrian bridge. Besides being able to say that you walked across the canyon, you might also get to shoot some pictures of whitewater rafters down below.

Click to expand...

No GC this trip, unfortunately, but we'll check it out next time we go. We're in Southern California, so it's easy to come back to this part of the country when it's warmer or when we have more time to spend.

- A

bebestylee said:

Many Thanks!

Click to expand...

Lookie here, it's only 4 posts below :-> ... http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=23764.0

Hi all.

I don't know how this math works, but I live in Kazakhstan and we have a Sigma 35/1.4 for $830 and Sigma 50/1.4 Art for $830. Seller is grey market, but that's not a problem.
Typically you get the lowest price in US on almost everything, and I cannot get how do those dealers sell Art primes for $830 and having profit from that.

I believe they get stuff from Japan and get really sweet price from currency exchanges. This means there are even better prices for Sigmas somewhere.

Any ideas?

And, btw, this prices are 100% legal, my friend bought both of this from them, and really happy.

Dear friend, Mr. brought1
Wow, Beautiful Picture of Mountain = Arts work/ Painting look, Great Job.
Here are the Mountain in Greece 3 years ago.
Enjoy.
Surapon

35mm on FF or equivalent 23mm on my Fujis.

.
Interesting tech piece on new polarizing material that transmits substantially more light...

http://www.rdmag.com/news/2014/11/novel-polarizing-filter-transits-more-light

and some more...

For those pixelpeepers and digital noise addicts amongst us:

http://www.clarkvision.com/reviews/evaluation-canon-7dii/index.html

Quite nice! They almost get into a trance like aura when receding into their haunting music. Unfortunately the only ones I have heard are the ones down at Circular Quay in Sydney. Haven't had the pleasure of visiting Katoomba but flown over it a hundred times on the way to Hong Kong and Shanghai.

Thanks for sharing! T

Hello All,
I've used my 7D for five years and other than the high ISO noise issue, I've been very happy with it's performance. In particular when shooting birds with my 400 f5.6.
I see from the specifications that the mk2 is mostly an incremental increase in performance, ie more Af points, more FPS, slight improvement in high ISO IQ etc.
For those of you who have made the jump from 7D to the mk2, could you enlighten me on the areas where you have noted a major improvement and areas which have fallen short of expectation. Please comment on IQ, handling, features and durability.
I'm about to buy mine and really hope it will be a change without reservation.

Thank you.

thanks for all of the input/suggestions.

I have the CapturePRO clips in hand now. Going to test them out this weekend, hopefully. We'll see how it goes.

Halfrack said:

Check out the WonderPana system - it has a CPL and isn't extremely expensive. The thing is that the WonderPana also has the adapter rings to get down to 77/82mm.

I'm also invested in the Lee 100mm stuff, and I think my general point is this kickstarter doesn't do a good job of telling me why I want their product.

Click to expand...

This new idea is wretched on a boatload of fronts -- there's no value proposition and no details, so we are left to speculate. Best I can tell, it's a price-undercut of the $400 SW150 holder with a push-on functionality (and I had to guess that from the video). I have no need for this.

The very next day, this link surfaced and broadly blew my original link's idea out of the water:

http://petapixel.com/2014/11/17/cheaper-filter-holder-nikon-14-24mm-f2-8-created-3d-printing/

It's another SW150 killer (price-wise), but clearly further along in the design and at a much more manageable cost.

- A

To answer my own question. I went to a professional photostore (mainly for professionals) and we tried to find a solution, but alas, seems Canon will not allow it in the software. I ended up buying six PW plus X, and a Sekonic chip for my 758 Cine, and it works like a charm

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:

Reviews in the pipeline: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART (next week), Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar T, Metz 64 AF-1 flash units, Vanguard ABEO Pro 283AT + GH-300T head, Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4, Canon 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 STM, and Zeiss 50mm f/2 Makro-Planar.

Click to expand...

Not much going on in your world is there . Just kidding of course and thanks for the nice review (as usual). It seems to match what Roger at LensRentals and others have said. Also, as an owner of the Canon TS-E 24 f/3.5 II, I had to chuckle a bit about the lens hood comments. The one Canon supplies serves little purpose other than to take up lots of room in your bag

The Sea&Sea is a nice little strobe - The targetting light's a bit useless though. I've combined it with a slightly smaller Epoque as fill with some success.

I've just bought a couple of LED video lights for an upcoming trip - these things nearly burnt the retinas off my eyeballs!

Nothing very new here, it's just an ALPA architecture camera (the same have been existing with MF film backs, for decades). They just added a digital MF back. If one want to call it mirrorless....

Basically, all view cameras are mirrorless, since the 19° century. The ALPA / Phase One combination is nevertheless a wonderful tool for architecture, for the ones who can afford it.

"Permission Denied

Sorry, there is no video here.
Either it was deleted or it never existed in the first place. Such are the mysteries of the Internet."

I like Vimeos verbage...

rrcphoto said:

lintoni said:

rs said:

Also the back focus of just 3.26mm means its not even EF-S, as that has a 44.0mm flange distance and a mirror box to clear.

This appears to be an EF-M lens.

Click to expand...

+1 I don't think it's a coincidence that this patent coincides with rumours of a new EOS-M.

Click to expand...

kind of moronic because there's already an exceptional 11-22mm EF-M out there.

Click to expand...

Moronic or not, read the patent. How can it mount onto a DSLR with that BF?

Please remember that just because there is a patent, it doesn't mean this lens will become a production reality.

Really good information here but seems to be too complex. I am happy cameras have very smart algoritms.

I would say get the Canon 135. Cheaper and very little discernible difference in performance (pixel-peepers need not apply).

GraFax said:

Decided I'm keeping the 7D2 so I unwrapped the new LP-E6n battery. At first my Watson Duo charger refused to recognize it but after charging for a bit on the LC-E6? I was able to get it going on the Watson. Anyway, man that thing is slow taking a charge. My canon LP-E6 has gone from 45-95% in the same amount of time as the LP-E6n has gone from 45-65%. Hope that improves with recharges.

Click to expand...

Let us know how that goes. I think it may also be the same issue as when the batt drains. The charger needs to learn the charge rate after several cycles. The new batts are higher capacity but not that much higher.