Posts

Mt Spokane Photography · Dec 5, 2013

neuroanatomist said:
atm333 said:

I have narrowed down to the following in my budget:

Canon 70-200 f2.8 VRII IS
Canon 70-200 f2.8 non IS
Sigma 120-300 f2.8
Tamron 70-200 f2.8

Click to expand...

If you can afford the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, get it - it's really a no-compromise lens. Excellent for sports, fast AF, great IQ. The Sigma 120-300/2.8 OS is an interesting possibility, too…but as you say, the AF speed is likely to be an issue for you. The same will be true of the Tamron 70-200. The non-IS version of the Canon 70-200/2.8 is good…but the 70-200/2.8L IS II is likely the best telezoom available today. The only better choice than the 70-200/2.8L IS II would be the 300mm f/2.8L IS II - and that's way out of budget.

You can add a 1.4xIII to the 70-200 II, and the IQ will remain very good. AF will be slowed down, but I find the combo still quite fast, so it might work for you.

atm333 said:

My other lens choices for portraits/event - low light subjects are as follow:
Canon 24-70 f2.8 used
Canon 50 f.14
Tamron 24-70 f2.8
Sigma 85 f1.8

Click to expand...

From that list, I'd be inclinced to go with the Tamron 24-70/2.8. IQ is almost up to the level of the Canon 24-70/2.8L II. The VC won't really help for events (at least, events with people moving).

atm333 said:

DXOMark has some nice scores (27) on the the Tamron 24-70 and while I can't claim to understand fully their testing it seems like a decent compromise. The score of 28 on the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 makes me think third party lens might be a way to work out this purchase. I did get rather confused over the issue of the 5d recognizing third party lenses.

Click to expand...

Ignore DxOMark's Scores - they are actually based on 'performance in 150 lux illumination' (like a dimly lit warehouse), which is why the $100 50/1.8 scores higher than the $13,000 600/4 II. If you dig into the measurements, you can find useful info, but the top line Scores are worse than useless, IMO.

+1.

Exactly my thoughts. I have a near mint Nikon 200-400mm f/4 VR that I picked up for $2500 that would work well. I bought a used D300S and a cheap gimbal head just so I could play with it.
DXO rates it as a 12 with the D300S, and a 25 with a D800, so I am using the wrong body with it. That's a huge difference considering that the lens never changed. Its a good example of why the DXO score can badly mislead a person.

Grumbaki · Dec 5, 2013

dickgrafixstop said:
My mom's a great cook - it must be her stove.
My brother's a good writer - must be the typewriter.
My sister is a dancer - I blame the shoes.
Dad got a speeding ticket - must be the "fast" gas.
Little brother took a great picture - he's a photographer.

I'd push the envelop and insert a condom version of the answer. Possibly including the sister.

surapon · Dec 5, 2013

WPJ said:
surapon said:

bholliman said:

surapon said:

Yes, Plus I will buy EOS-M MK III the early of Year 2014, If They come with View Finder----Well, My 65 Years old Eyes do not like to look at the 3 Inches LCD screen.
Have a great Saturday , Sir.
Surapon

Click to expand...

Thanks, Dear WPJ.
May be I will look at The Shop at the Narita Airport in Japan in this January 2014, I might buy EOS-M MK II , the smaller one there.
Thank you, Sir.
Surapon

+1 My eyes are not that good either, looking forward to the addition of a EVF in the next version of the M.

Click to expand...

Thanks you, Sir, Dear bholliman ----No , Canon do not put Viewfinder on EOS-M MK II----No more EOS-M for me.
Thanks.
Surapon

Click to expand...

it is a cute,little camera...put the 40mm on it and it will daily fit in a jacket,pocket

Jack Douglas · Dec 5, 2013

You got it right Paul! Keep up the good work.

Jack

Random Orbits · Dec 5, 2013

East Wind Photography said:
Actually it was proven a while back (well...at the time it was proven) that Cyber monday really did not exist. It was just a continuation of the black friday sales and the sales generally continued through to Christmas. However over the years since then and with all of the hype and instant advertising we get, merchants have created cyber monday. It has become a self fulfilling prophesy. Though to be honest I dont see anything special about the Monday after thanksgiving. We can usually find deals just as good all the way through the end of the year. It's just another excuse for merchants to sucker us consumers into buying more than we would normally buy.

True, but that is what the media calls it, and it sticks. What special name does the Thursday before Christmas have? In typical media fashion, they cover the beginning and end of the event (i.e. Black Friday into Cyber Monday and Christmas Eve). If I remember correctly, the heaviest shopping days happen within a week or two of Christmas and depends on when Christmas falls relative to the weekend and the weather.

Personally, I saw that LensAuthority was having a Black Friday sale and picked up a lens at a good price.

dstppy · Dec 5, 2013

wellfedCanuck said:
Half Way To Nothing said:

wellfedCanuck said:

50...30... RETARD, RETARD!

Click to expand...

Ha ha, people not in the know will think you're being abusive! ;D

Click to expand...

Counting my big-'bus time, I've been hearing that call for 16 years.

If ever there was a look that said "Don't call me Shirley", that'd be it ;D

Marsu42 · Dec 5, 2013

unfocused said:
But, maybe I'm misunderstanding your post. Perhaps you mean that enthusiasts will convert to full frame.

Not all enthusiasts have unlimited deep pockets, and I guess ff lenses will keep being more expensive than aps-c, even though an aps-c lens has to be sharper to make use of the dense pixel sensor. So it's not only the cost of the ff sensor itself, but also the difference for example between a good aps-c uwa (~600) and a ff uwa (~1200) and it continues from there...

unfocused said:
On the other hand, if you are suggesting that the niche that was formerly filled by point and shoot cameras will be filled by small DSLRs, such as the SL1, I'm inclined to agree.

I'd tend to disagree, because p&s covers *exactly* what many people want - point and shoot. And additional complexity or bulk is not wanted, strange as it seems from a dslr enthusiast's perspective. Actually I really wonder about the success perspective of the sl1-type range, it's too dslr-like for p&s customers, but too dumbed down for everyone else and guarantees a cramp in the hand if not used by a child.

Skulker · Dec 5, 2013

scyrene said:
neuroanatomist said:

scyrene said:

I also find stacking the extenders can produce usable images if I can't get closer, although this is manual focus only and works best with support.

Click to expand...

Just a side note on this, you cannot stack the Canon 1.4xIII and 2xIII extenders together, unless you use a small (e.g. 12mm) extension tube between them. The MkII extenders can be stacked, and 1.4xIII can be mounted behind a 2xII.

Click to expand...

Interesting! I have a 1.4xIII and a 2xII. Does using an extension tube make any difference to function, e.g. losing infinity focus?

I've taken shots of the moon with stacked 1.4x and 2x converters separated with a 12mm extension and a 300mm f2.8. I used live view. But of course the moon is moving quite fast with that sort of magnification.

I think infinity focus may depend on the manufacture of the lens. Clearly it should theoretically loose infinity focus, and I haven't looked to see why it worked for me.

With a good stable tripod or rest this combination can work.

Scarpz13 · Dec 5, 2013

Ruined said:
Scarpz13 said:

Hi Everyone one… going to be fortunate enough to have a little commission/Christmas bonus money left over after taking care of all the gifts for the wife & kiddies, family and friends….

Haven't added to my lens collection since about this time last year; and will have around $1000 or so to spend. Considering the lenses I already have, my first inclination was to pick up a 100L Macro, since none of my lenses are macro. Then I considered the 135L because I don't have a long range prime, and like everyone, I like fast glass.

But as my kids are getting older and into dance recitals and indoor sports, plays, etc… the 135L might be good, but I am considering on of the new Tamron 2.8 zooms. I used to own a 17-50 Tammy for my 60D and found it was great… and I know Dustin from TWI has posted some great reviews here on the Tamron lenses.

I know everyone is going to say the Canon is better, but I'm not in place to spend 2K+ on a lens, at least not without taking away from more important things- I feel guilty enough as it is not spending all my extra money on the kids!

I appreciate any thoughts- and I am a bit concerned that I am more likely to get a "bad copy" of a Tamron, but I think it may be the best value right now. In Toronto they are on sale everywhere… $1000 or so for the 24-70 and $1300ish for the 70-200

thanks!

Click to expand...

I have heard the Tamron 24-70 is pretty darn good, but have heard much less good things about the 70-200. Given Canon's fantastic telephoto selection, I would recommend staying with Canon in this focal length range.

In any case, the Canon lenses do offer more reliable performance even though they may lack features and be more expensive at times.

I can vouch that the 100mm f/2.8L Macro is an amazing lens you might want to consider. If you have the slightest inclination towards Macro, it is the perfect lens to start with in that category; good working distance, excellent IQ, and much more compact than the 180mm macro. In addition, by flipping a switch it becomes a portrait lens w/ IS, plus some of the best edge-to-edge sharpness you have ever seen. So it is an extremely versatile lens that will let you take close ups (I use it for ring shots) as well as highly detailed portraits that ooze expression.

Another lens in this pricerange you may want to consider is the 70-200 f/4L IS or 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS. If you are not getting paid to take pictures, I'd actually advise to skip the 70-200 f/2.8 - it is just so darn heavy and huge that for a photographer doing things for fun it may actually dissuade you from usage! I have one, and it does give excellent results, but you really need to have a secondary lens to use that does not weigh a ton for non-pro events. So, before you go the 70-200 2.8 route, make sure you handle it in the store and that is a weight/size you are comfortable handling all the time, on hiking trips, outings, etc.

Regarding the 70-200 f/4L IS and 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS, I actually prefer the latter because I already have a 70-200 2.8 and the former is too close in focal length. The 70-200 f/4, while lighter, is too long for some venues - while the 70-300L's compact length allows you to get into certain places where the 70-200 f/4 would be banned. The extra reach on the 70-300 is nice, too, and unlike the non-L 70-300 lenses the 70-300L is extremely sharp throughout the whole range!

The 135L is a nice lens, but I believe we will see it trumped by a non-L IS prime in 2014 for half the price, much like we saw with the 35mm f/2 IS trumping the 35mm f/1.4L this year. Also consider with the 135mm focal length, Image Stabilization is very much desired due to the longer focal length - a lot of times you may need 1/100 or 1/60 shutter speed, and without IS you may be doomed to motion blur handheld with the 135L. Again, a non-L IS prime that will likely arrive next year will fix this for much less money while retaining the superior optics if the 35mm f/2 IS is any indication.

So my recommendations - 100L Macro or 70-300L.

Thanks Ruined!
I already have the 70-200 F4 IS, and I agree... the 2.8L IS is probably too big for what I need. the F4 is more than sufficient for taking photos of my kids playing outside at the park, etc... where most of my long range photos are taken.
I had been leaning towards the 100L Macro before your post, as I do prefer the IS it has over the 135L, and the versatility it brings to my kit (being able to do some macro work which I would like to try, and also a sharp portrait lens!)

thanks for taking the time to respond.

WPJ · Dec 5, 2013

I could but not at that distance, the pocket wizards work in the uhf ultra high frequency which is line of sight, being it was an open area it will travel further than if it was blocked by a building at that distance.

Methodical · Dec 5, 2013

POTN and Fred Miranda. I've only sold 2x tc on craiglist.

Ruined · Dec 5, 2013

Great shot. More proof you don't need the most razor sharp and expensive lens in the world to take stunning photos!

entlassen · Dec 5, 2013

I'm scouting around for newer products and might have found a decent compromise:
http://flashhavoc.com/yn-622n-tx-first-image-emerges/

It looks like Yongnuo is going to release a newer version of their old YN-622C sometime later this month or early next year. The unit is called the YN-622C-TX and acts only as a transmitter which interacts with the existing YN-622C transceivers. The link above does show "Remote Shutter Release" as one of its new features, which the old YN-622C doesn't have.

So it seems to me the setup would be:
YN-622C on camera hotshoe
Speedlight on YN-622C
YN-622C-TX acting as the transmitter remote
(Nothing connected to camera's 3-pin)

It seems this would resolve the following:
1) ETTL - Check
2) Camera hotshoe isn't taken up in such a way that you can't mount a flash - Check
3) No extra receiver needed for remote shutter - Check
4) No cord needed to connect receiver to camera pins - Check
5) Remote shutter release functionality - Check

This system still wouldn't leverage the RT radio functionality that's already built into one's 600EX-RT, but it seems like the cleanest one I've seen so far.

J.R. · Dec 4, 2013

jasonsim said:
I have both for the time being. I got the 600mm first because I thought everything was shifting to full frame and was looking to replace an 800mm. Like others have said, for birding, I think the 600mm II + 1.4x III is the best option. If the birds are stationary, then the 600mm II + 2x III will also work nicely (super sharp). This is not a lens you want to travel that far with though, since it is big volume wise. Also hiking around with it is cumbersome at least for me. So that is something to consider. I mainly use the 600mm II on a sturdy tripod and a full gimbal head.

The 500mm is lighter on paper, but in my hands it does not feel that much lighter. It is however, much smaller in volume. So would be much easier to take on a plain or even to hike around with. Still not sure I want to hike around with it much. If you think you might be sticking with a crop sensor body (7D, 70D and maybe the next 1.6x body) then I might suggest you strongly consider the 500mm. If not for the slight weight savings and size differences, then for the price difference. The 500mm + 1.4x on a 7D is more than enough focal length for birding.

I also have the 300mm f/2.8L IS II and would choose to use that, if I am going to be hiking around looking for subjects to photograph. I'd use it without hesitation with the 2x III. It is much lighter than either the 500mm and 600mm and it is super sharp even with the 2x III on it.

Don't know, if that helps you any. You might even consider a nice used 800mm f/5.6L IS that can be had for around $8500 these days.

Best of luck with your decision. If you decide on a 500mm II, I might have one for you .

Kind regards,
Jason S.

Thanks Jason, I would readily buy a used lens but given the fact that I'm in India, it is not an option. The superteles don't come up for resale all that many times. Buying from the US isn't such a great idea because imports attract a customs duty of 30%. A new super tell lens, in India, turns out to be the same if not cheaper.

Carrying the lens in the wild... I'd take a couple of sherpas for that instead of breaking my back with either supertele.

I'll go for the 600 next. The 300 should be here within a week.

BozillaNZ · Dec 4, 2013

24-70 II is the most satisfying lens to use after the 70-200 II. Every time I look at the photos taken by it I am amazed by the color rendition and smooth bokeh it gives (no need to mention sharpness, it is the sharpest lens I've used), at the same time offers good mobility. No IS might be a shame but it depends on your intended use.

Tripod landscape? This lens has it. f2.8 portait? Yes can be done. General workaround in day time? No problem.

Only ultra low light no flash situation and no moving people calls for IS.

Also regards to sigma F2 zoom, I don't think it would be feasible. Look at their 24-105 F4, it's already 880g. Their 18-35 F1.8 cropper is 810g. Canon's 24-70 II is lighter than both at 800g. Even if they somehow manages to come up a 24-70 F2, the weight alone would be a show stopper. Just look at how much weight gain a lens gets when it is merely 1 stop faster. And 1.5kg for a standard zoom? no thanks!

CarlTN · Dec 4, 2013

candyman said:
CarlTN said:

candyman said:

CarlTN said:

candyman said:

I paid 1179 euro (that is around 1605 US dollar). And that was discount! Now it is around 1350 euro.
If it would be about prices I prefer to live in the US. Live would be 25 to 50% cheaper.

Click to expand...

What country are you in?

Click to expand...

The Netherlands

Click to expand...

Ahh. Well at least you have plenty of beautiful women over there!

Click to expand...

You think so? Unfortunatley not enough in high-tech. So I don't have the pleasure during my 9 hour working day. While I travel about 3 hours a day by car, I am looking more at cars that pass me or I pass them to get a glimp of those beautiful women ;D

Haha, sounds like fun! I love cars too; at least they can't reject you, unless of course you don't have a key to open the door and fire up the engine! Well, the ladies I've seen were pictures on the web, and they didn't have any clothes on. I assume they're mostly around Amsterdam. I bet you could make decent money taking their pictures (because somebody sure does take their pictures)! I mentioned them because I've never seen one of these pictures of a lady from your country, that was not a perfect 10!! At least my idea of a perfect 10...They also seem like they would be nice people. The women in my country are mean all too often! Maybe it's all my fault? haha...no doubt I'm partly to blame.

cid · Dec 4, 2013

Paolo said:
Strange...I just tested it on chrome (both mac and pc) and it works fine. I will check again.
thanks again for the feedback.

you are welcome, I was just pointing that out because pictures are all very nice and this little issue is hurting the impression a bit

btw: right now I'm home @chrome 31.0.1650.57 @mac and the lagging is not issue anymore...

pelebel · Dec 4, 2013

The way you describe it, it reminds me when I've had sand in an IS lens. Had to send it to service, and it came back a lot better.

Random Orbits · Dec 4, 2013

entlassen said:
rs said:

I don't understand your aversion to a unit which sits with the camera and plugs into the remote port of the body?

Click to expand...

I'm just trying to figure out what my options are. As I mentioned previously, the competition (Nikon side) offer products that have neither of those disadvantages; they have RF solutions that don't need a wire, and they don't have a brick that needs to hog up the hot shoe, preventing you from mounting a flash unit. I'm a bit surprised that there are no similar products on the Canon side, and that all the 3rd party solutions I've seen exhibit both disadvantages. I mean I suppose you can have the brick off the hot shoe but dangling from the wire off the 3-pin port side, but that seems super ghetto and dangerous.

Have you thought about why Canon solutions use a cable? Canon's port is on the side; if you mounted something like the Nikon solution at the port, then it would interfere with the L-bracket. The wire allows you snake it through the L-bracket.

You could get a cold shoe that mounts to the L-bracket if you'd prefer not dangling it off the side but the Hahnel is not heavy at all.

spinworkxroy · Dec 4, 2013

Honestly, i'm a lazy portrait photographer..
I agree that you should first get your settings right in camera and not after.
However, i believe that you can make a sharp photo blur but not a blur photo sharp.
I prefer to get what i cannot edit in post production correct in the first place..hence the framing and the scene and the background etc.

I almost always shoot at f5.6-8 even if i have an f1.4 lens. I also seldom use multiple strobes to light up any scene. I just use at most 2 usually just 1 strobe to light up the entire scene so it is exposed correctly.

EVERYTHING else, i do in photoshop. I adjust lighting, add fake lights, add bokeh, add blur etc..that's what i usually do in post production..Granted i spend more time in post that i would if i set up the thing correctly in the first place, but more often than not, i only envision the image once i get home.

Here's an example of what i mean..I just set the scene, pose the model, ensure the entire photo is lit and exposed correctly, then change everything in photoshop

brad-man · Dec 3, 2013

Oops. My bad. The 2541 is a Mountaineer, not a Traveler. And definitely yes, the 2541EX will be quite a bit wider than the mountaineer. It's even wider than my 3542XLS, which is pretty damn large.

scrup · Dec 3, 2013

Did this sneak up on CR.

Surprised they couldn't see this coming 1 week out.

Time to get some more sources from the motherland.

jrista · Dec 3, 2013

Fleetie said:
Would it kill them to let us see it?

It may not yet have been processed to such a degree that it could be made public. Remember, ISON just transited the sun a couple days ago, and it only reached peak visibility on the 26th of November. Given that these guys are on the ISS, I figure it could be a while before they get the chance to do proper processing and put it up online.

KyleSTL · Dec 3, 2013

OK, looks like I'm going to get an sensor brush, a pack of green swabs and VDust Plus. Thanks for the help.

dcm · Dec 3, 2013

Forgot to mention that with a second similar light I easily get 12+ ev without putting them too close to the target. Depending on the lens (f1.4), this pushed the shutter speed to less than 1/4000. The extra light can be helpful with the aperture sharpness test to help overcome slow shutter speeds at small apertures (f22+).

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics