Posts

rs · Jul 25, 2013

ankorwatt said:
describe the 7dmk2 please, so we know what we are talking about and price

Faster, stronger, and enough DR to make you hang out in Nikon forums mentioning DR every time someone posts about anything.

Or to put it another way, no-one knows. Its all speculation at this point. But I'm hoping for the DR bit, if for no reason other than a bit less shadow noise in this forum.

cayenne · Jul 25, 2013

Very nice!!

And...a nice change of pace, from the "bad picture rant" thread I've been on elsewhere on the forums....!!

C

cid · Jul 25, 2013

another two - hope you enjoy them :

http://500px.com/photo/41371690

http://500px.com/photo/41372494

http://500px.com/c_i_d

sdsr · Jul 25, 2013

Before buying the M + 22mm (and being very impressed by how accurate its focus is when you use the zoom thingy on the monitor for small objects) I thought I would never want a camera without a viewfinder and a fixed focal length (I realize it's not fixed on the M, but for me it is for now), especially one that's relatively wide. But as long as they're fairly inexpensive relative to the price of a lens by itself, it occurs to me - as it has to others - that they're a good alternative to carrying around another lens: if I have to carry another lens around, I might as well carry another camera if it's small enough and save myself the trouble of changing lenses. (If this M + 22 deal had been available when I bought the Olympus 17mm f/1.8 for my OM-D, I would have bought the M + 22 instead and saved myself $200!)

Two or three would probably suit me in addition to the M + 22 - 50mm equiv. & 70mm equiv, and maybe 24mm equiv for occasional use (more if a small longer lens were feasible). If just one, I guess 50mm equiv.

RGF · Jul 25, 2013

Mt Spokane Photography said:
Canon has been running nearly continuous rebates for two years. I bought a refurb 70-200mm 2.8 MK II when they had their 15% off sale which put it at just under $1700. Its perfect, and I've been pleased with it.

You have to be very quick to find it in stock and at 15% off. I waited 6 months before I snagged one.

http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/lenses-flashes/refurbished-lenses-speedlites/ef-70-200mm-f-28l-is-ii-usm-refurbished

You can sign up with canon price watch and if you carry a smart phone with you, it should not be too hard to grab a refurb when they are available. Unfortunately there are not refurbs of the great white (300 F2.8 and up).

RGF · Jul 25, 2013

Does any one else think it is *interest* that one of the pixel dimensions is 8192, a power of 2. I have never seen that in any camera before. :

Looks like someone made up a rumor without even thinking about it carefully.

mrsfotografie · Jul 25, 2013

paul13walnut5 said:
Health to use your 400D, I loved mine.

It's a great little camera. I got mine after I already had my 5D2 and 7D, just to use when I needed something light and portable. It really holds its own, even though it's a relatively old body by now. I replaced it a few months back with a Sony NEX-6 and finally put the 400D (and the 55-250) up for sale last week. They're both in the hands of happy new owners now.

drjlo · Jul 25, 2013

linus said:
Adorama canceled my order for the $299 EOS M and 22mm lens (which was placed in early July and apparently couldn't be fulfilled).

I feel very lucky I ordered from B&H and not Adorama when EOS-M/22mm was already backordered. It looks like B&H decided to bite the bullet and honor the backorders with EOS-M/22mm/90EX kit (currently on sale for $399 at B&H) instead of cancelling them.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=16074.0

Menace · Jul 25, 2013

Do you have access to Chrome or IE? Might be worth trying a different browser.

Mt Spokane Photography · Jul 25, 2013

I think that most users on the forum would not even consider using the camera to crop a photo. DPP comes with your camera, its a better tool for cropping. Many use Adobe Lightroom which will easily crop your image to a desired format such as 4 X6, or 5 X 7, for example. You can set custom sizes as well.

Some cameras allow you to set a different format size before you capture the image, and then the image is cropped to that size when opened in DPP (Canon editing software)

I also believe you can crop in the print menu, and the image will be cropped when you print directly from the camera. Not very useful unless you must print directly from the camera as part of your work flow.

FranzJoseph · Jul 25, 2013

Few Pic's from the Red Bull Grand Prix at Laguna Seca.

jrista · Jul 24, 2013

I can't find anything from ChipWorks that doesn't cost a hefty penny. I did find this article that determined the DIGIC 4 was a 65nm part:

http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20090218/165866/

Additionally, the DIGIC 3, a very old part at this point, was manufactured on a 130nm process:

http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20090218/165867/

Canon has been using far smaller and more efficient manufacturing processes for their DIGIC chips for quite some time. The 500nm process is just an oddball thing that has apparently permanently attached itself to Canon's in-house CIS products. Aside from some assumptions about it being less costly and still effective (from a "consumers are still quite happy to buy their products" standpoint), I don't think anyone really knows why they are still using such an inefficient manufacturing process.

I would be willing to bet DIGIC 5 and 6 are manufactured on at least a 32nm process. I am not sure if they have moved to 22nm...that is fairly cutting edge at the moment, and extremely costly, so I am a bit doubtful. I don't suspect we'll see anything at 22nm or 14nm in any Canon CMOS device for quite some time.

Drizzt321 · Jul 24, 2013

So, looks like someone else is experimenting with an alternative color filter array. Specifically, RC,CB 2x2 array. C being clear, so having no filter over it instead of a green filter, while still having R and B with standard filters.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7149/aptina-announces-ar1331cp-13-mp-cmos-with-clarity-plus-we-take-a-look

Drizzt321 · Jul 24, 2013

Komodor said:
These days eos m price is going deeper. İf you living in use eos m price is almost 350 us dollars i think its great opportunity.
Other hand is Eos 1100D this camera is relly cheap. And gives you great images same as 600-550-650-60D series...
I will try to buy 1100d and battery life is better than the eos m....

The challenge is right now there's no port for an intervalometer on the EOS-M, so you either need a phone/tablet/laptop to connect via USB to control it, or wait for Magic Lantern to be ported up to the v2.0.2 firmware. That seems like it'll happen in a couple of weeks, ans 1% (looks like the primary port guy) has gotten real busy and will pick back up work on it when he returns.

AcutancePhotography · Jul 24, 2013

Daniel Flather said:
Ever pinch your finger in a Manfrotto flip lock? Extra points if you've done it in -25°c temperatures!!1!

One of my older Manfrotto tripods not only had the vicious flip locks, but the edges of the fliplock had this very sharp plastic flashing. Crikey, they could not have made it more dangerious unless they put metal teeth on it.

Not keeping your finger out of the way is a mistake you make ONCE with some of the older Manfrottos. Yikes that hurt!

My newer one still has the flip locks but the edges are at least more rounded.

jrista · Jul 24, 2013

chasinglight said:
jrista said:

I'd say that is a good practice. If you are anything like me, you will know when your gear is holding you back. I also have the 100-400. I think the 7D is a fine camera, produces great IQ in most circumstances (which for my bird photography is usually in good to evening light, ISO 200 - 1600), and has great features that support bird photography. The 100-400, when properly tuned with AFMA, produces acceptably sharp images most of the time. It should be noted that at 400mm, f/7.1 tends to be the sharpest, while f/5.6 will be visibly soft. Before getting my new lens, I shot at f/7.1 almost exclusively, sometimes stopping down to f/8 and rarely opening up to f/6.3.

I would tune your lens for your copy of the 7D, and start shooting at f/7.1. You should see individual barbs of each feather (a feather is a central shaft, on either side of which is a vane of barbes, which are interconnected via barbules off each barb...you will RARELY see barbules in a photo, but in an acceptably sharp photo, you should see barbs.) There are three things that will soften the barbs of a birds feathers...distance too great, missfocus, bird motion or camera shake. Distance is usually the biggest problem early on. Depending on the type of bird, either learning the right behavior to exhibit that gets you close, or camouflaging yourself to hide in plain side, are was of solving that problem.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice (all of it, not just what I quoted). I have seen my copy of the 100-400 produce much sharper images than this (such as the one below; AFMA 0). I think actually took this shot of the eastern screech owl at f/7.1. I think I actually started to notice more inconsistency after I used Focal to AFMA the lens a few months ago; this produced a -3. I performed Focal a few times today getting -3, 3, and 1. So I decided to go back to 0 and see how that works out.... could be that I was just trying to over sharpen the knife and instead made it dull...

Are you using the older version of FoCal, or the newer version released a month ago (from the white, rather than black, site)? I had problems with the older FoCal...it definitely was inconsistent, which is why I tried the AF confirmation dot technique (which seemed to be fairly consistent, just wrong.) I've found that the newer FoCal, which supposedly has some rewritten core code, seems to be much more consistent. When I ran it on my 7D+600mm, it consistently gives me a +1 for a 30 foot distance, and 0 for a 60 foot distance. I've repeated the tests multiple times, and I get the same AFMA each time for those distances (which usually covers the range of distances my subjects tend to be at, with the exception of songbirds...but closer than 30 feet the lens always seems to resolve more than enough detail.)

If you haven't updated to the most recent version of FoCal, I would give it a whirl, see if you get more consistent results. Also, remember to use good light...test chart outside in direct sunlight is usually best.

Krob78 · Jul 24, 2013

Sporgon said:
unfocused said:

Sporgon said:

I disagree here...

Click to expand...

I disagree that you disagree.

Seriously, I think we are saying the same thing. 5DIII targeted to a professional market to fit a specific need. D800 targeted to...whom? I've never been sure.

The 5DIII may be $500 more camera, but that's because it has features that make it worth that to a specific market.

Click to expand...

Agreed

I think the 7Dii will follow the same path. Many sports 'pros' use the 7D as a much more affordable 1D -whatever. My guess is the next one will be basically an APS-c 1Dx.

My guess is the next one will be basically an APS-c 1Dx.

How great would that be?? A brand new Canon 7Dx! I think I'll preorder mine tonight! 8)

Skulker · Jul 24, 2013

drjlo said:
Skulker said:

drjlo said:

My copy of 24-70 f/2.8 II needs -9 at wide end and 0 at tele end on my 5D III. My Canon 70-200 f/2.8 II needs 0 at either end, and my 100L also needs 0. Some of my fast primes including 35L, 50L, 85L II range between -1 and -3.

A brand new Canon 17-40 f/4L I just borrowed needed -6 at wide and 0 at tele.

-9 seems a tad too much for a $2100 lens, so I'm just wondering what 24-70 f/2.8 II owners have experienced with AFMA (and 5D III)? Is it worth sending in the lens to Canon while still under warranty for calibration?

Is my copy of 5D III partly at fault here, as the body seems to need Minus AFMA on lenses, never positive. The body is out of warranty, but should I send in both the 24-70 II and body to Canon for calibration together (does Canon even calibrate a specific lens+body combo?).

Any help would be appreciated.

Click to expand...

As long as you can get it setup what does it matter. Some people seem to get so worked up about the number and dream up reasons to be unhappy.

Click to expand...

A lot of the concern is due to future resale value, ease of sale given full disclosure, etc.

So you,re worried that someone else will be worried that a lens camera combo will be outside limits. Not much chance of that coming true due to manufacturing tolerances. I for one am very glad AFMA is on my camera.

BozillaNZ · Jul 24, 2013

Yes it is UniWB. It basically give the camera WB adjust coefficients of 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, which means WB is NOT applied at all.

Then you use flattest tonal curve by choosing Neutral picture style, then dial down the contrast to lowest, sharpness to lowest (to remove sharpening halo)

Then the histogram will be a lot better resembling what the RAW records.

Of course the output JPG will be garbage, all green and stuff. But if you enable highlight blink, you gets RAW blinks too!

There will still be a bit of discrepancies between UniWB histogram/blinkies and the real RAW data but at least it's a lot closer.

Oh, while you are at it, don't forget to shoot a white card in the scene to restore WB in post.

Jul 23, 2013

weixing said:
Anyway, I found a website that had publish some UV filters test result with transmission and absorption curve:
https://ww2.chemistry.gatech.edu/~nmakarov3/INTERESTS/Photo_Filters/index.htm

Interesting to see the EF 50mm 1.4 lens also block UV light...

IIRC, Lenstip also tested transmission of many UV filters with a spectrophotometer.

It's interesting that the 50/1.4 blocks some UV, but not surprising. Standard microscope objective lenses don't transmit UV all that well, so for applications with UV fluorophores, we use objectives specifically designed for better transmission down to ~340 nm.

RGF · Jul 23, 2013

Powder Portraits said:
Something is up with the CPS points. 30D is still 1point, but 40D, 50D, EOS 1D Mark II N, EOS-1D MARK II, EOS-1D and other are listed as 0 points. Here's the kicker the EF 200-400mm f/4L USM Extender 1.4x is also listed as 0 !

For some reason the 200-400 dropped from 12 pts to 0 pts. Not sure why - I asked CPS about this but did not get a satisfactory reply

greendiary · Jul 23, 2013

AcutancePhotography said:
When you click on the "know more" did it come up with any "small print" mumbo jumbo?

Nope nothing showed up but I called up my local canon dealer after I got the mail and he said the 600ex-rt was free with the 24-70 kit and it was valid till last month.

Now I called up Canon edge global customer care support and they told me that the offer is still live and its available with both 24- 105 and 24-70 kit with a limited stock and its been kept covert for canon edge members only.

I got confused after hearing that so I wrote a letter to Canon asia and I am expecting a call from their office soon. Will let you guys know as I receive the confirmation from their office.

alan_k · Jul 23, 2013

mrsfotografie said:
birtembuk said:

mrsfotografie said:

This is really starting to get ridiculous, who needs a 1200 mm equivalent in a body that's impossible to hold still??

Superzoom compacts have moved away from usefulness to marketing gimmick IMHO.

Click to expand...

Got one here to complement 5D3 and 60D. As Mt Spokane says, not very ergonomic but light, inconspicuous, pure fun. I use it 95% of the time at 1200mm handheld.

Click to expand...

My girlfriend has a Panasonic Lumix FZ-50 which has a 12x zoom and 35 - 420 mm equivalent and is f/2.8 - f/3.7. It takes fabulous pictures given enough light, but so far the 420mm equivalent has been enough reach. What's lacking in this case is more wide angle, something that she's missing a lot. So we're actually looking at something new.

The FZ-200 looks great, 'only' 24x optical zoom (25-600mm equivalent) but it is full range F2.8!!! What's missing is the manual controls of the lens that the FZ-50 has. That really was/is a special superzoom camera.

I have an FZ-50 too and I love it- if it wasn't so noisy I'd probably still be using it more regularly. It's got better ergonomics than entry level DSLR's. Although the LCD seems so TINY now.

I know there's probably physics involved blah-dee-blah but I really can't fathom why there isn't even a 1/1.7" birdge/superzoom (or even better, something like Nikon 1 series). Once you get past the miniaturization constraint of most point and shoots, it seems like there would be a way to get something reasonably sized.

Tiosabas · Jul 23, 2013

To me there seems to be something wrong with the "S" lens results. When comparing it to the "EX OS" version it is as good wide open and bare.. but with extenders its way worse in the centre and better in the corners. Something fishey with that. Here is the comparison @600.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=803&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=7&API=2&LensComp=844&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=1

I would expect the "S" to give better IQ with a Canon 2x III than the APO Sigma 2x.

There seems to be rave reviews every where about this lens. Another thing to remember is this lens costs much less than a Canon 300 2.8 II or 200-400 so I would never expect to get equal results. But for 3K, if I could get 85% performance of Canon supertele in a similar focal length than that suits me just fine.
Personally if I was thinking of a 300 2.8 to use primarily with extenders I would go with a SH Canon 300 2.8 IS or wait to see if a Sigma 300 2.8 OS comes along in a couple of years which should give better quality with extenders. Thats what I will be doing for now anyway since I dont have the funds right now to upgrade my Sigma 300 2.8.

By the way I think the 120-300 S should be dubbed the "Sexma"

CarlTN · Jul 23, 2013

Zv said:
CarlTN said:

Axilrod said:

Wow are there really people complaining about the 135L and linking comparisons with the 200 f/2!?!?!? $6k vs $900, I'd hope to god the 200 f/2 was better for costing 5x more.

I thought the fact that the 135L is one of Canon's sharpest lenses and best values was just common knowledge, never ever seen anyone complain about it. And test charts can only tell you so much, try real world use and then come back and complain. I mean for you to say that I can only believe you've never actually used one.

Click to expand...

+1, but again it's possible there is some sample variation...even with a Canon L lens.

Click to expand...

Hmmm could be. I've not noticed all that much purple fringing, perhaps wide open in a brightly backlit situation you can and even then in the corners. Nothing like my 85 1.8 did! That thing drove me nuts!

I absolutely love love love my 135L. I mostly use it between f/2.2-2.8 which gives amazing results. I do wish it had IS but it's not a big deal. You can get sharp shots at around 1/125s. Does take away some of the low light advantage. Then again people don't stay very still and IS can't really help with that!

I recently used it on my 7D and the IQ was just outstanding. So good in fact I mislabeled my images as from "5D2" on import!

+1

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics