Posts

Skirball · Oct 24, 2013

Get her an iPhone. The dSLR is dead.

dstppy · Oct 24, 2013

If you've got the cash for FoCal, it's well worth it.

Run all your lenses through it, that's another way to get an idea if anything might be super wrong.

+1 for refurb over new btw.

lilmsmaggie · Oct 24, 2013

Mt Spokane Photography said:
We are going to see some big discounts in November on all but the big white lenses, probably even the D1 X.

+1 Now that's what I'm talk'n about

awinphoto · Oct 24, 2013

As a stockholder, as long as stocks go up in the long run, i'm happy =)

MonteGraham · Oct 24, 2013

neuroanatomist said:
Deliver how...full res digital files? 8x10" prints? The degree of enlargement affects how noise is perceived. Also, a lot depends on your NR method(s) in your RAW conversion workflow. Topaz DeNoise is excellent, DxO's new Optics Pro 9 with their PRIME algorithm is even better (but takes several minutes per image, so might not be ideal if you need to turn a large set of images around quickly).

The client wont receive digital files. They will order prints.

brianwallace21 · Oct 24, 2013

I concur with David's review - it really is that good in Liveview.

Etienne · Oct 24, 2013

Marsu42 said:
Etienne said:

"bootflag"... I don't even know what that means. I have an EOS-M, and might experiment with that first

Click to expand...

Sorry, I assumed you already had a look at the ml faq "How to install it": To run ml, you first need to run a tiny, special firmware update that just does only one thing - it sets a "bootflag" inside your camera, after that the Magic Lantern addon firmware is run from your sd/cf card (and only from there). So if you put in another card without ML, your camera is indistinguishable from before.

ML also provides a way to remove the bootflag again, so that Canon service is not able to tell that you were running ml at all - but this doesn't work on the 5d3 yet, they haven't come around to it. But there is no known case where Canon said running ML voids the warranty, so it doesn't matter, but it's fair to mention this point.

Thanks! It would be comforting to know that this flag could be reset

scottkinfw · Oct 24, 2013

Wow!

distant.star said:
.
This has been out two years, and I've never seen it!!

2D Photography Rube Goldberg Machine

Mt Spokane Photography · Oct 23, 2013

mrkim said:
Thank you for the clarification Mt. Spokane!

I will point out however that I did carefully go over the details of the rebate in regards to who would be eligible to claim the rebate and the details specifically state

"Offer good in the 50 United States, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, on products purchased by an end-user customer from Canon Authorized Dealer
only"

Click to expand...

This should mean that because I bought the lens from B and H (a Canon Authorized Dealer) and am using a US address to claim the rebate, that I fall under the requirements of the rebate

That should work.

takesome1 · Oct 23, 2013

AlanF said:
takesome1 said:

infared said:

Do anyone really have a consistent problem with this?????

Click to expand...

Unlike some people who only change their lenses in a sterile environment in a sealed room and always have a clean table close at hand I sometimes change lenses outside when the wind is blowing up a dust storm or it is raining. The only place to lay a lens down is on a tree stump or in the mud.
So occasionally I do get a dust particle or two on the sensor.

Click to expand...

You should carry around a portable HEPA laminar flow hood. Neuro has a sideline selling them.

Good one. :

dsc888 · Oct 23, 2013

bholliman said:
Vossie said:

I have both lenses. The 24-70 is certainly sharper, but the 50 is 2 stops faster (and much lighter). I use the 50 for dimly lit indoor portraits and in cases I want only want to carry a light setup (in which case I may just as well take the 40 pancake). Opinions about the 50 are quite mixed if you browse the internet, but I do like the look. The lens is quite soft, so I typically stop it down to 1.8 or 2.0.

Click to expand...

+1

I have both lenses and plan to keep both. I also use the 50 1.4 for indoor portraits and shots of the kids. Its certainly not as sharp as the 24-70, but you don't need razor sharpness for portraits. I can achieve better subject isolation with the 50 and the bokeh is very nice.

I completely agree with these 2 guys! I have both and the 50 1.4 is amazing by f2.0 and makes my 5D3 nice and light when I chase my kids around the house. The bokeh is more dreamy at f2.0 and it is actually slightly less sharp than the 24-70mm MkII at f2.8. Primes definitely have their place in your arsenal of lenses and they force you to "think" about the shot more. So try it out and see if it will get your creative juices flowing.

infared · Oct 23, 2013

Eldar said:
infared said:

Eldar said:

infared said:

That is my quote "as good or better"... I read a review BEFORE I bought my lens (I just looked for 20min and cannot find the review...but I did read it) and there were sample photos showing less color fringing with the 17mm TSE II with 1.4X compared to the 24mm TSE. I was in shock. In any event ...I have shot images with the 17mm TSE II alone and with the 1.4X on the lens. I am very critical about image quality...I have to say...unless you are a professional Architectural Photographer and use the lens daily...or desperately need the f/3.5 for some reason or the slight extra swing/tilt..I cannot see buying both lenses. The results are really SURPRISINGLY fantastic with the converter on. It is something I would never even considered doing until I read the article.
So, raise your eyebrows if you want ...but it is a great setup.

Click to expand...

I'm happy for you for you enthusiasm over your 17mm setup, you have good reason to. But the review you refer to must be against the old 24mm TS-E. The version II is optically nearly perfect. Extremely sharp and sharper than the 17mm, CA, flare, distortion and vignetting is very well controlled and color and contrast are absolute top notch. And so is the 17mm. The pixle peepers will probably give the 24mm the highest grades, but to me, the quality differences between the two are academic.

I had not tried the 17mm+1.4xIII combo before, but did yesterday. It works surprisingly well, but the results are not as good as those you get from the 24mm TS-E 3.5L II (the differences are more than academic here). I did not do a very thorough test of how much tilt & shift I got from one compared to the other, but it seemed the 24mm gave me more of both. I'm sure someone else in here has done the comparison.

Click to expand...

OK...this is getting interesting....I think that I stand corrected that The review I read MUST have been comparing the 17mm II+1.4X III combo to the OLD 24mmTSE
So Eldar, thanks for checking that out and giving a personal report (I would but have no 24mm!). Question...did you compare with the lenses stopped down to 6.3 or 8?
The reason I ask is because if you take a look at the DigitalPicture Lens Comparison Tool (only web comparison that I can find), the results look VERY close. (Like say in a 20" x24" print are we going to see a difference?)

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=487&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=3&LensComp=486&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

Any pics you can post?
I also apologize for my "perhaps" over enthusiasm.

Click to expand...

I just left on a business travel (currently sitting in an airport lounge), so it will be some time before I can post anything more than text.

In the TDP ISO chart comparison I think it´s clear that sharpness and contrast has taken a fair hit on the 17mm/1.4xIII combo. But the interesting question is of course what you would say looking at an actual image.

To compare with something else; Reuter published the statistics for the 100 best images of the year (2012). Which cameras, lenses, shutter speeds, ISO etc. was used. The most widely used lens was the 16-35mm f2.8L II. And it is beyond question that they have plenty of good images to choose from. If you compare the 17mm/1.4xIII combo to the 16-35 at 24mm f8, you´ll see that your combo is at least as good as the 16-35. So equipment wise you are positioned to produce image of the year quality with what you have.

That was my point..hit the sharpness and contrast a little with PS and who will know the difference. When I soot something with that rig it is always on a tripod and always stopped down..and when I see the real world results there is just no complaint from me! Thanks for the feedback...I am going to check out that comparison to the 16-35 II zoom on TDP!

Marsu42 · Oct 23, 2013

neuroanatomist said:
Sounds like you've got the Mirror Lockup (MLU) function turned on. First shutter press locks up the mirror, second one takes the picture. It times out after 30 s if you don't take the shot, and the mirror flips back down. Live View obviates MLU.

+1 ... and for getting help with ML, their own forum is a much better place: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/

J.R. · Oct 23, 2013

Drizzt321 said:

I see two possibilities -

1) The DR time-bomb will detonate; OR
2) The mirrrorless crowd will have a field day

Cheers ... J.R.

Alrik89 · Oct 23, 2013

skoobey said:
Alrik89 said:

skoobey said:

Is there a massive difference between f4 and 2.8 considering sharpness?

Click to expand...

You shoot stopped down, so why should sharpness at wide-open matter?

Click to expand...

I'm asking at f8 for two different lenses? I don't care about sharpness wide open.

It is not easy, to put the question right, isn't it?
And, wow, you already got an answer concerning sharpness with a stopped-down aperture:

Alrik89 said:

I'm totally constructive. Every lens delivers sharp pictures when stopping down, even crappy low-budget lenses. So, there is no significant difference in sharpness between the macro-IS and the macro-NonIS. Therefore it comes down to another crucial point: the image stabilization.

Click to expand...

Mt Spokane Photography · Oct 23, 2013

The Amazon price jumped back up. It was one of those one day deals.

Triggyman · Oct 22, 2013

neuroanatomist said:
I have the 'holy trinity' – 35L, 85L II, 135L. Well spaced, and a versatile collection of focal lengths. In your place, I think I would be looking at the 85/1.8 next. IMO, it's one of the best values in the Canon lineup in terms of IQ per dollar. The 100/2 is its close cousin in build an image quality, and also an excellent lens. Not sure what body you're using, but I found 85mm on APS-C to be excellent for tight portraits, but 100mm to be slightly too long, at least for indoor use.

Thanks for your advice. I got a 5DM3. Looks like when building up primes, one needs to plan carefully.

In my situation, I didn't plan ahead. I acquired my 1-year old 100mm 2.8L Macro about 6 months after the 24-105.

I just got the 35mm f/2 IS today, and I'm in love with it since it's my favorite focal length and I judged the focus is bang on for my camera body. So it's either the 50 or 85 next. One of those Focal lengths will be covered by the 24-105mm albeit at f/4.

alexanderferdinand said:
If you find an used 135L, check it.
I got mine for €800 (around $1000), and simply love it.
The 85/1,8 comes very close, much cheaper.
Sweet pain of choice, good luck!

Thanks, I will take a look at the 135L, but it's kind of close to the 100mm Macro. Wait, I don't have 135mm focal length...

Valvebounce · Oct 22, 2013

Hi folks.
Wow that poor little pony, don't they enforce weight limits, as in I went for a 2 hour trek in AZ when I was there and they put me on this thing like a cart horse, because of my weight, and I know I weigh less than her!

Also talk about a lame event, you want action look for a British gymkhana, 6 or 8 in the ring at the same time doing roughly the same thing, round the marker at each point and plant a flag , retrieve the flag etc all done at 2 or more times her speed! Now that gets busy and a bit exciting if you are in to things you have to feed but not with gasoline!

Edit

Jim Saunders said:
I take barrel racing to mean like this, rather a different thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8l_Cb7aRopc

Jim

On the other hand this looks more exciting, still think it needs at least 2 in there at the same time. ;D ;D

Cheers Graham.

Rienzphotoz said:
jdramirez said:

emag said:

Ok...I'll ask the one question no one else has.....

What's a 'flag racing' event?

I think you handled the situation well.

Click to expand...

think of a rodeo with barrel racing' that, but with a flag that you have to jam into a pot of dirt at the end of the run.

Click to expand...

I thought I knew what flag racing was (which obviously was incorrect ... I thought it was like drag racing) ... but your explanation has me confused ... now I don't know what is flag racing ... earlier, at least I thought I knew what it was and was blissfully ignorant ... after your explanation I did a youtube search and clicked on the first (below) video that google threw at me ... now I am a thoroughly confused person. ;D
Flag Racing

unfocused · Oct 22, 2013

I struggle with this too and I tend to err on the side of not bothering to charge because it's less of a hassle (if I charged what my time is worth based on my real job, no one could afford me).

Lately though, I've been getting enough requests that I need to address this. A few thoughts based on what I either have done or intend to do.

Whatever you charge, let them know that you are giving them a "friends or family discount" so they don't tell all their neighbors that they got their portraits shot for $XX dollars. Tell that that you would ordinarily charge about $XXX or whatever and that because they are friends you want to do this for them as a favor at a deep discount.

Get them to sign a model release as part of the deal. Explain that the tradeoff for the discount rate is that you want to be able to post pictures to your website to generate more business or use them in brochures, etc.

If they refer someone to you and you aren't comfortable charging the friends of a friend $500 or something like that, tell the new customer you are giving them a discount because your friend Joe sent them to you.

Have business cards printed up if you don't already. I like moo.com. Enclose a half dozen or so cards with the pictures or jump drive or whatever you give the people and ask them to share them if they like the pictures. Even if they don't, it will show them that you are serious and take their business seriously.

Finally, some food for thought: most of my career has been in government/politics. I know a very successful lobbyist and when friends ask him how he decides what to charge people he has a amazingly candid answer: "I check them out and decide what is the most I can possibly charge them that they will be willing to pay, and that's what I charge them."

Drizzt321 · Oct 22, 2013

If the 70-200 2.8 IS v2 comes below $1800 I might be forced to buy it on general principle. I can manage it, but I'd like to pay off my CC before I buy it. But at that price, new, that's just too good to pass up.

Cptn Rigo · Oct 22, 2013

Hi Everyone!

I pulled the trigger with the 24-70L 2.8 II, so I bought his 82mm UV filter... however... the 82mm Kaesemann polarizer is over 200 dlls!!!... auch...

I already have the 77mm Kaesemann polarizer.

Someone has tried to use a 77mm filter with the 24-70L II with an step down filter adapter?

How bad is the vignette?

Thanks Everyone!

Drizzt321 · Oct 22, 2013

bvukich said:
Zv said:

Jim Saunders said:

Zv said:

Jim Saunders said:

I appreciate the weight savings, but I'll take the latitude to run on alkalines if I need to do so. My $0.02. I wonder why the battery pack isn't shaped like the usual 4 AAs? That seems like a good idea sitting here.

Jim

Click to expand...

I use rechargeable Sanyo eneloops. I didn't think anyone used Alkaline anymore!

Click to expand...

I don't, I have rechargeables for all of mine; Still I appreciate being able to fall back to something if I somehow get sideways. This is part of why I have battery grips for both of my smaller bodies too.

Jim

Click to expand...

I know what you mean, it's like a safety net just incase you forget to insert the batteries the night before! (Always paranoid it's going to happen before a big shoot!).

I've never liked the idea of battery grips. I'd rather just chuck an extra battery in my bag. The 5D2 and 7D battery lp e6 last forever. I think I could get 500 + shots easily from one, maybe even 700. With 2 you could shoot a wedding. However, I guess it depends what kinda stuff you do like timelapse etc.

Number of times I've had to change the battery in one day of shooting is almost zero. Sometime all I need is 5D2, lens one battery and 32Gb memory card and I'm set for a walkabout.

Click to expand...

I like the battery grip not only for the extra battery (which is more than twice the shots, if you halve the drain on a battery the run time increases by more than double), but for ergonomics.

An LP-E6 does last a long time though; I shot a wedding on Saturday, gripped 5D3, 4606 shots over 11 hours, one battery was still at 45% the other was at 47%.

Yea, I didn't use to use the grip (5d2, then 5d3), but I recently got the grip for the 5d3 and it's well worth it for the ergonomics for portrait mode. Plus it'll help balance out the 70-200 2.8 IS v2 whenever I get around to getting it.

Rick6961 · Oct 22, 2013

loetleen said:
Just tried to reproduce it again, this time with a 580EXII. Same result, flash never fails. So, 5D MkIII with latest firmware and 600EX-RT or 580EX II no flash problems like you are experiencing.

Is your ISO set manually? Typically it seems to fail more at higher ISO's. Also, my flash is set to ETTL, camera is set to manual shutter as well as f-stop and the auto focus is ON. Take a picture (in a dimly lit room), Wait about 1-5 seconds after the green confirmation light goes out. This is when I experience the problem.

jdramirez · Oct 22, 2013

when hand holding, my first shot is for my finger depression, my second shot I expect to be stable.

Vossie · Oct 22, 2013

I use a b+w UV mrc f-pro filter on my 135L. I did not see any advantage for the more expensive xs-pro as the slightly thicker f-pro does not give vignetting in this focal range. I do use the more expensive xs-pro's on my wide angle lenses.

From time to time I use a LEE 3 stop ND filter on it, to be able to use it wide open in bright light.

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics