I'm really not sure what to make of this. For example, comparing the three lenses tested in 'daylight' illumination, for the 40/2.8 the red and blue 'best focus' are adjacent and the green is an outlier, for the 24-70/2.8L II the blue and green are adjacent and the red is an outlier, and for the 85L all three are well-spaced. The 24-70 has the largest absolute spread, however, the 85L has the most axial CA of the three lenses, by far.

One thing that I'd be very interested in seeing, given FoCal's recommendations for lighting conditions during testing: is there a difference in FoCal's reported AFMA values for testing in 'daylight' (e.g. full sun, 5500K) vs. tungsten (2900-3200K) lighting.

Worth noting that Rich states, "...there’s not enough data to draw any serious conclusions."

I could see some TS lenses being applied here especially at the jumping venue

It wasn't only stills I did while in Norway, I also shot a bit of video.

It was entirely shot with the Otus 55mm 1.4 (in my case the ZE version).

https://vimeo.com/groups/229279/videos/86311252

I'm kinda in the same situation: the 550D was my first DSLR, and the 50/1.8 was the first lens i bought. Buying that lens is undoubtedly one of the best ways to spend 100€/$, but its "wow factor" is related to its very low price, and to the fact that it's usually the second lens anyone buys for its beginner kit. The shallow depth of field and increased light gathering capability are lightyears ahead of the kit lens, not to mention the increased sharpness at comparable apertures. The flimsy build quality is not a relevant flaw: amateurs like me treat their gear like sacred relics. Its flaws are in the focusing system: the AF is noisy, not very accurate nor very precise, and the MF gear is tiny and hard to use properly. IQ is still good on FF, but the unreliable AF made me look for something else (Sigma 35 <3 ).

Chien, enjoy the trip & thanks for the kind words!

I got the underwater case for an old point and shoot of mine and I'm very happy with it. If you are familiar with the controls of your s100, it should be fairly easy to operate. You can leave the case on at the beach out of the water and not worry about sand either. The raw capability will be helpful as well.

Im trying to talk myself out. That I dont need the X100S. This video does not help. ;D

East Wind Photography said:

Yes the in camera optimizations apply only to jpg and what you see on the screen. Does not manipulate raw images.

Click to expand...

The in-camera optimizations for the EOS M are applied to RAW images, but you can undo them in DPP, whereas you can't if you shoot jpg. Is it different for the 5DIII?

mrsfotografie said:

jdramirez said:

I'm going nuts. I can't wait for the new Sigma 50mm to come out and I wind up buying a 135L for around $650...

So now I don't know what I'm going to do... maybe sell my 85mm f/1.8... maybe just wait 2 years until the 50mm art is at a price I'm willing to jump in at so I'll have both the 85 and the 135L for my low light shots... maybe I'm just nuts and I need to find a different hobby.

It's like I'm the GM of a football team... but I don't have any clear direction. I assemble a great team... that can do it all... but all too often, my great players sit the bench...

That's not true... the mkiii and the 70-200 get a ton of work... but still... I need to sleep on it.

Click to expand...

I for the life of me can't follow why you got rid of the 100L macro... helped by the 5D3 even in low light it can do the job of the 85, 135 and does macro too unless you want extreme shallow DOF.

In the mean time I can recommend the Sigma 50 mm F/1.4 DG EX HSM ;D

Click to expand...

It was a mistake... but I bought it again... I haven't fixed my signature... but I did acknowledge that I missed the macro too damn much.

I don't understand how some people call the recent mirrorless Fuji cameras the "new Leica".
I mean all they did as a redesign was to release the x100s in black. Now look at the Hermès.

slclick said:

what is this thing called an 'extra' lens?

Click to expand...

I have no idea ... never heard of such a concept ;D

JonB8305 said:

J.R. said:

neuroanatomist said:

J.R. said:

BTW Neuro, why does LV silent shooting results in the lights not firing?

Click to expand...

In live view mirror is up and the shutter is open, so an electronic first curtain is used. I believe live view silent shooting complicates the timing of the shutter with the flash, but I'm not positive. My speculation aside, the manual does state that a non-Canon flash will not fire if live view silent shooting is set to Mode 1 or Mode 2 (p.189 of the 5D3 manual). It is set to Mode 1 by default.

Click to expand...

Thanks a ton for this.

Click to expand...

did it work?

Click to expand...

Was traveling ... Will try tomorrow and revert. Thanks

wsheldon said:

dgatwood said:

wsheldon said:

Note that it will take 20+ seconds to transfer each RAW file, so I find the option to shoot RAW+JPEG fine (which stores both on the SD) and only transmit JPEG over wireless to the laptop works best. Just a second or two delay and they show up. Good enough for real-time client preview.

Click to expand...

Seriously? 20 seconds to transfer a 25 MB file? That's barely 802.11b speeds. They ought to just about get that speed at close distances even with the Wi-Fi antenna unplugged.... I wonder if either Canon or the cell phone vendors are using some ancient, crufty firmware for their chipset that doesn't support 802.11g or 802.11n speeds in Ad-Hoc mode.

Click to expand...

To clarify, that's for Wifi tethered shooting vis EOS utility to LR on a laptop, so the 20 sec includes data transfer + LR's service noticing and importing the file + rendering a quick preview image for display. I believe the 6D does 802.11b/g/n, but the laptop only supported g IIRC so n may 2x faster.

I still think RAW+JPEG with JPEG transmitted is the way to go for best results, though.

Click to expand...

Ah. A lot of 802.11g chipsets won't do more than b speeds when talking to an ad hoc (IBSS) station, so if you aren't connecting to a shared base station, much of that may be your laptop's fault.

very sorry to hear that, wade.

good luck

Viggo said:

BL said:

the DOF is only apparent on fast primes. So for my 1.2 and 1.4 lenses, it makes an enormous difference.

At 2.8, I don't notice any difference in visible DOF between stock and high precision screens, so I'm not surprised it wasn't nearly as effective on the 17 TSE.

Click to expand...

You forget you can get supershallow dof with the TS-E, although dark VF, to see the focal plane when tilted max upwards and rotated was awesome.

Click to expand...

ah, yes, i stand corrected!

privatebydesign said:

Steven,

You are making far more work out of this than it is.

First, you cannot use ETTL, it just is not what ETTL is designed for. Second, taking just the small highlighted section illuminated by the hand held 600 has masses of exposure latitude because of the way you can adjust the exposure and then blend it. That is why nobody I know brackets the in hand flash, just know that you get the rough exposure you want of anything at a certain distance; I know f8 and 10 feet @ half power gives me a second story burst, at 20 feet it is a ground floor burst.

Myself, and everybody who I know that does this, just uses manual flash mode and pops away, if you don't have the remote viewing capability just keep varying your flash to subject distance, zoom setting, and angles.

But, because this question has been bugging me and you clearly don't want to go the ND filter gel route I have come up with a work around using just the 600's.

First, put the on camera unit (ST-E3-RT or 600-EX-RT) in Group mode, second, set each group to M and a different setting such that you would want to bracket, third, set the in hand flash to Group A, take the shot with the REL option. Then change the in hand flash to the next Group B, take a shot, then change the in hand flash to the next Group C, take the shot etc etc. This will give you five different exposures from the in hand flash.

Click to expand...

This a pure genius solution. It's so simple!

Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries

Marsu42 said:

Random Orbits said:

Except for the time that the lenses are bricked while Sigma creates the updated firmware.

Click to expand...

You should apply to Canon as an independent fud agent

I understand the necessity of pro shooting are different than for the rest of us, but 3rd party items don't just brick by looking at them, but only after camera fw updates. But *esp* as a pro you don't just update your fw on first day of the release and just before a shooting. You will evaluate what the changes are, and if necessary wait some, for example until 3rd party vendors updating their fw.

Click to expand...

Yeah, because people love losing functionality of their gear... not so much. In my industry it takes months to release new software because of safety and certification issues. Consumer electronics is different but it will still take time to reverse engineer and test the changes. And it doesn't have to come with a fw update; it could come with a new camera release. Of course, they never list incompatibility with extant 3rd party gear as features of a new camera. :

I've had a chance to use the 5D3 with the new S screen for a while now. I dont have a direct comparison or measurement on metering loss but I would have to say it's over by about 2/3 to 1 stop. For me this is not much of a problem as I generally expose to the right anyway. Where it gets tricky is when you are using strobes or have strong highlights...though knowing this you can just dial down a few clicks in those situations. I find I expose more to the right than rely on just metering alone so again this doesn't bother me personally.

The viewfinder is definitely and noticeably darker. If you had trouble seeing in low light before, then you may want to consider this before you purchase a replacement screen...at least the S screen.

The kit also came with shims to help align the screen with the focus point. However I did not need to use them. Manual AF came out exactly where it should be.

The screen replacement has made all of the difference when using my macro and thin DOF lenses like the 85 1.2 or 24 1.4. They dont recommend using this screen with lenses slower than F2.8. However even with the darker viewfinder, I was able to easily focus my 600 F4 manually whereas trying to do that with the factory screen was hit and miss. It is clearly easier to set focus than before.

As I mentioned before, the process was pretty quick and painless. A couple of things to note is to use a slightly magnetized screwdriver to trap the two screws, and to insert and remove the screws with the mirror pointing down at the table or work area. These two items will greatly reduce the risk of losing a screw inside of the camera.

Only one non-L, and a bit surprised that they have two 200/1.8 (not that they are not great!)

http://petapixel.com/2014/02/06/getty-images-sports-photographer-robert-cianflone-reporting-sochi/

I sometimes get to use my wifes Sigma 18-35 F1.8 and it is an absolute pleasure andI am saving to replace the Sigma 10-20 f3.5 that was stolen.
Otherwise I am happy with the 40mm pancake STM and have good results with the 70-200 f4IS for selecting interesting landscapes at a distance

wsheldon said:

Very nice setup. I've been following these threads as well, and decided to pull the trigger on a TVC-34L + TA-3-LB-HK leveling base to upgrade my 2-series Gitzo. Just got it yesterday - what a difference in stability! I'm 6'2" so it's also great to finally have a tripod I can use to shoot up with and lower one leg on uneven ground without having to crouch.

I decided to keep my Markins Q10 with screw clamp for now rather than spring for the BH-55, since I have a mix of plates and really like the smoothness and lower weight of the Q10 for the same or higher load rating as the BH-55. I can see trying one eventually, though, given the tremendous quality of the rest of the equipment.

Enjoy! (I know I will)

Click to expand...

Definitely try the BH-55 before you buy. I seriously doubt there is a better head on the planet than the Q10. I've never used the BH-55 head, but I do own a BH-40 that I picked up for my macro rig, as the one and only downside to the Markin's heads is they have a relatively weak panning lock. I can tell you that my Markins Q3 (half as strong as my Q10) absolutely blows the BH-40 away in both smoothness and strength (panning lock aside). So I don't know how much better the 55 is than the 40, but definitely try it first. No offense to all of you RRS fanatics 8).

Just posted on their website.

Nobody's considered that:
a) you have the Sigma 24-70 (which covers all of the prime lengths you are talking about)
b) you want something "small and light" for ease/stealth

When you want to go wider, you have the zoom. Ditch the 28. I think that 2.8 is fine at 24-28mm. How often do you need a super fast 50? Can you do with the 2.8 of the zoom? (if you're trying to simplify your life). That said, I understand it's a pretty big difference 1.4 to 2.8.

I've been tempted by the 35is. Looks lovely but haven't had a chance to try it. But I really think on the 6D you can get away with the 40 pancake and f2.8. I have one, got it for $129 new. It's tiny. For example, I have a little fanny pack (not a big slr one but a little north face hiking one that I put some extra foam padding in) and I can carry the 6D with the 40 and it doesn't stick out at all or look stupid. So very easy to carry around.

Here's an alternate suggestion:
Exercise some patience, save your money, and sell the 28, and use the 40 for as long as you can until you find you're frustrated by blurred images (because you didn't crank up the 6D's amazing high-iso) or you find that the quality just isn't there (which I'm betting you won't, especially on the street). I totally get the 35is advantages. It's tempting. But that 40 really is stellar. Do you really need to spend on the 35? See if you can do without it.

Liked it!

Re: Canon Congratulates the Team of Imaging Professionals Who Captured the Iconic Moments of the Big

Very funny that even Canon has to avoid using the term Superb Owl.