Posts

Don Haines · Dec 31, 2013

CarlTN said:
jrista said:

CarlTN said:

neuroanatomist said:

CarlTN said:

Isn't the new Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 almost as sharp as the beloved Canon version?

Click to expand...

Not from what I've seen. The new 24-70 VC comes somewhat close to the Canon 24-70 II, but there's a bigger IQ gap between the 70-200/2.8 lenses. I'd bet that the new Tamron at 600mm won't be as sharp as the current 100-400 at 400mm, and since you mention a $3K lens you must be referring to the pink unicorn 100-400 II, which if it becomes reality, I'd bet that lens at 400mm cropped would beat the Tamron at 600mm easily. Then there's the issue of AF speed, something Tamron lenses aren't known for...

Many people buy the 70-300 non-L over the 70-200/4L because the former is 100mm longer, has IS, and is a bit cheaper. If they cared about IQ, they'd be better off cropping images from the shorter lens with much better IQ.

I think the Tamron 150-600mm will be reasonably popular, because it'll be a cheap 600mm lens. But there's no free lunch, and the price of this one will be IQ.

Click to expand...

Time will tell. But no matter how "sharp" the new 100-400 is, you won't get more resolution from cropping an image shot at 400mm, as shot with the Tamron at 600mm.

Click to expand...

That isn't true at all. Depending on how good the quality of the Tamron is, it could very likely perform poorly enough that its 600mm end that the Canon at 400mm is as good or better. The lens' resolving power is ultimately determined by aberrations and aperture. At the very least, the wider f/5.6 aperture of the EF 400mm lens would give it a diffraction limited resolution (~123lp/mm MTF50) edge over the f/6.3 aperture (~104lp/mm MTF50) of the Tamron 600mm. At the very least, your losing about 15-16% due to diffraction with the 600mm lens. There are also going to be compromises in order to support the zoom range. For this lens to fit into it's cost bracket (i.e. reasonably cheaper than the Canon), you have to figure Tamron is cutting even more corners, so the optical performance of the lens is not going to be absolute top notch, which means your going to have some optical aberrations on top of the diffraction, too (i.e. it's best performing aperture, it's actual DLA, is likely going to be a stop beyond maximum, f/9.)

So, I wouldn't be quite so certain that a top notch L-series 100-400mm replacement that uses the latest Canon optical tech like antireflection nanocoating on internal elements, maybe a fluorite element or two, and Canon's new high grade manufacturing process couldn't hold it's own against a mid-range 150-600mm superzoom from Tamron. It is still certainly possible the Tamron at 600mm outperforms the Canon 100-400 at 400mm, and it might even be able to edge out a 100-400 II if/when it comes out...but I wouldn't suspect the margin to be more than very slim...not with a 150-600mm zoom lens...too many necessary compromises.

CarlTN said:

There's no way the Tamron would be that bad. If it were, nobody would buy it, and I doubt Tamron would build it. This isn't the 1990's anymore. And from what I've seen, the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 definitely is sharper than the difference in the price, compared to the Canon 70-200 f/2.8. 75% as sharp? More like 90%. 90% of the sharpness for 75% (or less) of the price.

Click to expand...

What are you basing those numbers on? Gut feeling? It would be nice to have some actual numbers or comparable MTF charts to back up those claims... I know the Tamron 70-200/2.8 is a good lens, but saying there is only a 10% margin in difference between a $1400 off-brand lens and a $2200 brand-optimized lens just needs more than a gut feeling for basis.

Click to expand...

You're just full of conjecture today, aren't you? Nothing you've said disputes anything I've said, it's just your opinion, period. Talk about gut feelings!

But I can state with absolute certainty that a 70-200F4 will out resolve a Sigma 120-400. That's a case of a zoom lens half as long picking out more detail, so I can certainly see a lens 2/3 as long doing the same.....

Granted, the new tamron will most definitely be sharper than a Sigma 120-400, but so will a new 100-400.... My gut feeling is that they will be close in resolving power, but who knows..... Either one could surprise us.... I would not want to make a prediction one way or another....

The rumored 400F5.6 is a different story..... It is already significantly sharper than the 100-400, particularly in the corners, and if it takes the same quality jump that any of the other long lenses took going from series 1 to series 2, it should have no problems outresolving the canon 100-400 II or the Tamron 150-600.

ejenner · Dec 30, 2013

It's not the best AFing lens in poor light either. Dim, indoors, it can struggle a bit.

In decent light (even dreary heavily overcast outdoors) I have used it fine with bees and the like - as long as you don't try to go from 20ft to 1ft instantly.

Mt Spokane Photography · Dec 30, 2013

The Canon MK III is definitely better. Tamron and Kenko are very good, they are the same TC. The sigma TC seems to be doing well when used on Sigma lenses.

It really depends on the lens you are using, Kenko / Tamron /Sigma will mount on some lenses that the Canon TC's will not mount on.

RGomezPhotos · Dec 29, 2013

Re: B&H Photo Still Has Some Deals Going On

Wow! Truly excellent deals.

dufflover · Dec 29, 2013

Bit more capable lens for the EF-M always good. Still waiting for that basic telephoto, though the new EF-S 55-250 STM might be it in their eyes. But yeah as usual the big question isn't about lenses or bodies but the whole availability and future plans thing.

Dec 29, 2013

I got mine from these people (shipped free to UK):
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Triopo-RS-3-Ball-Head-Load-20kg-Weight-only-250gram-/160472504953?pt=UK_Tripods_Monopods&hash=item255ce81a79

I believe they also ship to USA.

surapon · Dec 29, 2013

[email protected] said:
Sad, indeed... I feel your pain. Here's my solution. Awkward, but it works. Like me.

Thousand Thanks for the Great Tricks, Dear johnrudoff.
Surapon

scyrene · Dec 29, 2013

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
A couple of great images. That last one in particular is a stunner!

Aw, thanks!

Dec 29, 2013

Mt Spokane Photography said:
I'm hoping we will see a mirrorless Canon FF body that is the same larger size, uses the same EF lenses, but has no mirror to bang up and down. Its coming, but when??

When EVFs don't suck in comparison to OVFs.

tortion · Dec 29, 2013

I have just got an IXUS 135. I am trying image gateway it asking if the icon in the wifi menu is a cloud or a globe on the camera there is no icon in this menu. can anyone help.

Kiboko · Dec 29, 2013

Disappointed in this article because I immediately jumped to it on skim-reading "History: The Original Canon EOS 5......." I thought this was a forum item on my beautiful pristine and much prized as new thoroughly mint EOS 5 which LCE won't consider in P/E because it's simply "too old" and I could probably only sell for £40 on eBay for much the same reason! (bought it new just before they discontinued it as a replacement for my old one because I thought it was such a great camera, without the expense of the 3 or indeed the 1). It will no doubt become an antique in the future, a working pristine one at that!

ashmadux · Dec 28, 2013

I feel this guys pain. I haven't worked this hard to get consistent sharp pics since my 7d debacle.

Im on my second 6d body, and its performing much better then the junk canon first sent me. Its not 'there' yet though...i still feel like its not as sharp as its supposed to be, buti haven't AFMA yet. It is however showing much better baseline sharpness with my reference 24-105. Reminds me of my Eos M images with the 22/f2.

Im still looking for how these images will ultimately better than what my t2i can produce at iso 100. Ive seen plenty examples from others online, but as of yet i haven't experienced them with the 6d.

Here's some cropped, 1:1 eyes from my t2i. Can i realistically expect "better" from full frame?

dppaskewitz · Dec 28, 2013

Here is a thread reviewing the Rokinon (which convinced me to bite again after having the Bower version a year ago that I returned):

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=17252.0

Maximilian · Dec 28, 2013

sdsr said:
Maximilian said:

adebrophy said:

So, overall, I'd not be trading my 5dii for one, but...

Click to expand...

I am seriously considering this cute one as back up and travel DSLR.
I've read several tests about the fast AF and decent picture quality.
An despite the size it feels really comfortable in my hand.

Click to expand...

As far as I can tell, its image quality is as good as any other recent Canon APS-C body's, and it works very nicely with not-so-long primes; unless you need a fancier focus system (I've no idea how well it does with fast moving things, but mine works just fine on other subjects) or don't already have a FF body (and don't plan to), or find them too small to hold comfortably (I was pleasantly surprised), these cute little things seem rather appealing. Cheap, too - bought mine a couple of months ago for c. $450, including kit lens. I too like the touch screen (though nothing beats the combination of touch screen and EVF & masses of external controls provided by such cameras as the latest OM-D), though Canon's ergonomics are so good it's not the boon it would be for, say, Nikon.

Thank you for your feedback. Your experience is meeting the tests I've read and also my "hands on" feeling I got in the shop.
For me it is more about "do I really need it" and "is it reasonable to spend the money" (;

Dec 28, 2013

AAPhotog said:
Im on canonpricewatch, and cant figure out how to get notified when price reaches a certain point. I see how to get notified for every deal, but thats it

Go to the page for the specific lens (or whatever), click the Notify button, then enter your target price, etc., in the popup.

Mt Spokane Photography · Dec 28, 2013

I use a toothbrush with a weak soapy solution, lens cleaner works. If they have turned white from oxidation, they are exceedingly difficult to clean, since the outer layer must be rubbed away. In that case, spend $10 to replace it.
Get it from Canon, online resellers may just double the price

Don Haines · Dec 28, 2013

privatebydesign said:
Photographically I got a big sheet of metal painted white, and I am very happy with it! It is to put prints on with magnets and makes print viewing a pleasure.

I got one of those too. Mine has a special compartment to put film in for long term storage.

Don Haines · Dec 28, 2013

Re: May your bokeh be Merry and Bright

slclick said:
"Oh Sigma Tree, Oh Sigma tree....."

The picture is nice and the humor is even better!

dgatwood · Dec 28, 2013

CarlTN said:
I for one, would like a 30-120 zoom with constant f/0.9, autofocus, and image stabilization...with bokeh as smooth as Canon's 135 f/2! Would that be possible? The front element would be 130mm or so, and it would be heavy...but surely it's not physically impossible...

Only if by "physically impossible", you mean "physically impossible to carry".

Scott_McPhee · Dec 28, 2013

This is a better picture of the locator I am looking for:

Does anyone have one I can borrow, please?

CarlTN · Dec 28, 2013

Of course Leica's CEO would say mirrorless would take over...rangefinder cameras are mirrorless, and they're what Leica have been known for, for what, almost a century?

It's kind of like Apple saying whatever they make is going to take over. They're losing their luster, and now Samsung and others are taking over.

I would bet heavily on a professional camera body still having a reflex mirror 15 or 20 years from now, and especially still being as large as a 1-series body (perhaps a bit lighter, but the same physical size). The technique is just too established, and the physics are against an EVF ever totally replacing a mirror and pentaprism. Even if phase autofocus goes away, there will still be some sort of mirror and prism. But I'm not even sure phase autofocus will ever go away...not for stills photography anyway. It kind of has to for video.

MrFotoFool · Dec 28, 2013

Several months ago I bought the Canon 70-200 2point8 new - the original nonIS version. Bought it because it was a thousand bucks cheaper than the ISii version. Fantastic lens, no regrets whatsoever. I have read the ISii is sharper but mine is so sharp that I cannot imagine any average person being able to see the difference in real life photographs (as in NOT pictures of line charts). IS would be nice, but not absolutely necessary IMO due to the excellent high ISO range of modern cameras. (I use it on a 5D2). Of course I also use a tripod quite a bit. Often use it with the 1.4xii extender with equally good results.

CarlTN · Dec 27, 2013

Agree, Best Buy is only trying to compete with online retailers, period. The price will return to a higher level for the 6D within days or weeks, guaranteed.

I feel a 6D replacement would occur after a 5D3 replacement. The only reason it wouldn't, is if the 5D line is coming to an end. If so, they'll keep the 5D3 around a couple more years, while updating other lines (kind of like what they did with the 7D).

What seems more likely is a merging of the 6D and 70D into a full frame camera geared for the crowd who uses the 70D more than half the time for video. But then again, something totally different might replace or displace all of these lines in the future, you nevahhh noo...

CarlTN · Dec 27, 2013

To the administrator (or whoever may reply): How does Glenn Bartley compare to Arthur Morris, as birding photographers go? Would you care to elaborate on the mistakes you were making, where this e-book showed you the error of your ways?

RLPhoto · Dec 27, 2013

Kream said:
I think our mind is set on the Elichrome's. It comes out great in several reviews.
Was wondering tho, how large of softbox is recommended for full body work? The larges softbox the Elichrome store has in the Netherlands is a 50x130 cms (1.6f x 4.26ft). I doubting this will be large enough. Does anyone have any good recommendations on other, larger softboxes?

If you can get the soft box close that size should be all right. I use a 46" and 60" Octobox and it's fantastic. Like I mentioned earlier that the mods is what's most important and expensive... I'd love a deep octo from them btw.

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics