Posts

dolina · Nov 11, 2012

Yes they do! That's why they sell them at a higher price than lenses that do not have the feature.

robbymack · Nov 11, 2012

The tamron has a 5 or 6 year warrantee, it's almost not worth worrying about a manufacturing defect here and there you'll discover it long before the period is up. I'm thinking the tamron will be my next purchase once it comes down in price. I have trouble paying 1300 for a third party lens.

Nov 11, 2012

Considering your budget, second hand seems to be the option. You could find a 28mm 1.8 USM, a 24mm non USM, or even the 28mm 2.8 non USM. For 100$ more you could have them new.

I would not recommend the 14mm, since these are extremely difficult lenses to use. Anything under 24mm is less than universal, the extreme angle of view makes it very challenging to compose an interesting image. If you are not used to wide angles, I would highly recommend that you try something between 24-35mm to start with. Extreme wide angles (20mm and shorter) are somehow specialized lenses useful when you have no other choice. I do a lot of architecture and interior photography, were wide angles are standard lenses; the shortest I use is the 17mm, only in a few occasions would I have needed a shorter lens. One of the rules I always stick with is : take a lens as short as you NEED but as long as you CAN.

Try if you can to rent a 14mm, you will quickly realize how difficult it is to compose a clean image in most situations.

Mt Spokane Photography · Nov 11, 2012

Its mostly fallout due to the greatly reduced purchases of luxury items. Everyone has been hit by it, and, if the economy continues to get worse, we may see more of this.
Many stores have been barely hanging on.
A Chapter 11 reorganization does not mean that they will go away, it merely lets them clear their debts and contracts. This can attract new investors if they see a possible return. However, in times like this, investors are very careful.
Abe’s largest creditors and the amounts owed them include the distributor Wynit, $531,905; Pentax, $321,020; Warrentech, $215,893; D&H Distributing, $200,453; Nikon, $189,187; and KitchenAid (Whirlpool), $123,407.

bdunbar79 · Nov 11, 2012

rhysb123 said:
Hi Everyone,

I'm still thinking this one over!

I've heard that the 1Ds batteries can cause problems as they get older. Anyone experienced this?

I'm also thinking of swapping the 5Dc for a 5D mk2, but I guess that's a different debate!

The thrill of owning a 1ds mk2 is outweighing a 5d mk2 at the minute!

My only real concern is its low light capabilities. The 5dc barely cuts the mustard in dark wedding venues, will the 1ds mk2 be any better????

Thanks all

Rhys

The 5D Mark II in my opinion is a better overall camera than the 1Ds Mark II. Personally I'd pick the 1D2 over the 5Dc, but not the 5D2.

Quasimodo · Nov 11, 2012

Re: First attempt with my 1d-x

Technique fine, content like a 14 year old boy's fantasy.

infared · Nov 11, 2012

OK..I am flattered...I know this makes me a Canon Fanboy...but I AM amazed at the image quality with 5D III, 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, ISO 2500.....Handheld in 90 MPH winds...the photos are so sharp..that they freak me out a little...

Nov 11, 2012

Depends on your use. I'd say for outdoor portraits using a fast prime wide open, a variable ND might be a good choice. The higher end ones will not have a significant negative impact on IQ. But for long exposure landscape shots, where you might be using a wide angle, I'd go with the standard NDs.

Nov 11, 2012

I don't think you mean metering mode - that's evaluative, spot, partial, etc.

You mean auto exposure mode - P, Av, Tv, M. That's the only thing that can't simply be changed on a C# setting. You need to set the new mode, re-establish all the other settings, then register.

wickidwombat · Nov 11, 2012

dr croubie said:
a) yes that would be cool. There's already a lot of other T/S adapters for various lenses to Mirrorless systems (i've also got a few for MF lenses to my EF bodies)
b) But 'af passthrough' wouldn't work. AF works by looking at the relative phase-differences of the lightwaves coming through the lens. as far as I know, if the lightwaves aren't coming in at the right angle, AF would struggle (if you've ever used a tilt or shift lens, or lensbaby, you'll know it messes up the light-metering, same deal). But using contrast-detect in live-view works (for light metering at least). so maybe it might work for AF too (the contrast-detect af, not the phase-on-sensor). Still, I don't know what would be the point of a t/s lens with af...
At least being able to pass the aperture-closing signals through would be good, then any EF lens would be a t/s lens (no point on ef-s lenses). I was thinking that might be difficult to keep constant-rotation in the adapter, the wire links can't go around forever. But then I realised that normal TSE lenses so that anyway, so there's probably a way around it...

cool thanks for the info on b) i guess at least AF confirm and exif data transfer would be nice then, I would think the EF image circle onto the AP-C sensor and having the extra flange distance it would be a cool adapter to be able to turn any EF lens into a TS lens

charlesa · Nov 11, 2012

Sell you mine? It is a beautiful lens if you can cope with the manual focus that is.

gmrza · Nov 10, 2012

neuroanatomist said:
NormanBates said:

What full frame gives you is MORE bokeh, not better bokeh (i.e. DoF is shallower).

Click to expand...

It's my understanding that bokeh refers only to the quality of OOF blur, not the quantity. Therefore it can be better or worse, but 'more bokeh' is an non sequitur.

At least that is the way the OED sees it:
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/bokeh?q=bokeh

the visual quality of the out-of-focus areas of a photographic image, especially as rendered by a particular lens.

Mt Spokane Photography · Nov 10, 2012

alben said:
Thanks for the info, I had not realised the 2x would be f11 :-[ any preference between the Canon or Kenko, my instinct is to go with the Canon Mk111 even if it is more expensive.

Alan

One thing to consider is that the Kenko will work with lenses like the 100mmL and the 70-300mmL while the Canon TC either will not mount at all, or only works at certain focal lengths.
I bout a Kenko f/1.4 and it worked for about 20 images and then dies the 2nd time I went to use it. I did not replace it, just returned it because Canon announced the f/8 firmware and I already have Canon TC's.
I have not heard of reliability issues with Kenko, so it might have just been bad luck.

Mt Spokane Photography · Nov 10, 2012

You have two custom file naming setups in the 5D MK III, its easy to switch. You can also quickly change one of them for each bracketed shot, but that might get frustrating.
In any event, stack them in lightroom and that will keep them together.
http://lightroomsecrets.com/2009/04/stacking-your-bracketed-shots/

Dylan777 · Nov 10, 2012

Jesse said:
Has anybody compared these 2 lenses at 24-35 yet?

16-35 II is no where near 24-70 II from f2.8 to f5.6 - over all range. Can't wait for Canon next WA, similar or better to Nikon 14-24. Sorry to say that 16-35 II is not "De Lens" for Canon.

littlepilotdude · Nov 10, 2012

Mt Spokane Photography said:
littlepilotdude said:

Mt Spokane Photography said:

You did not say what you would use it for, or if you would be a heavy duty user or ligh user. There is not a huge difference in image quality between a cheap 50mm f/1.8 and a $750 lens. For the most part, you are paying for a wider aperture, improved construction, and faster autofocus.
If you are only going to use the lens occasionally, get the Canon 50mm f/1.8. However, if you want to use manual focus one of the others will be better, the Zeiss being much easier to manually focus. However, with manual focus, you run into other issues like the viewfinder size, focus screen type, etc.
Another thing to understand is that lenses perform differently on APS-C and Full Frame bodies. The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 is optimized for Crop bodies, while the Canon 50mm f/1.4 is optimized for use on FF bodies and has better IQ on FF than the Sigma does.

Click to expand...

Hello,

I would use this lens quite frequently in all situations. I'm looking for a well constructed lens and good quality. I have used the Zeiss and it was great. I have also used the Canon 50 1.4 and it wasn't as good as the Zeiss. The only one I haven't used is the Sigma. I use a 5D Mark II, so I wouldn't go with the sigma since it isn't great with full frame.

Thanks,

littlepilotdude

Click to expand...

Are you talking the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4? It certainly is not as good optically as the Canon 50mm f/1.4, but has a better build by far. With a wide aperture autofocus lens, its pretty common for the AF to need fine tuning with AFMA for the best results.
Here is a link to comparisons of test data. The Zeiss has less viginetting, but loses by a lot in the other areas.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Compare-Camera-Lenses/Compare-lenses/(lens1)/196/(lens2)/341/(brand1)/Canon/(camera1)/483/(brand2)/Zeiss/(camera2)/483

I was talking about the 50mm in general.

JPAZ · Nov 10, 2012

Bang bang, shoot shoot.

So I did "pull the trigger" on this lens. So far all seems fine, but, the Kevlar vest that I wear while using it is a little snug...... ;D

Thanks all.

Cgdillan · Nov 10, 2012

Dylan777 said:
Cgdillan said:

I just heard that we will be seeing a new 70D and 7D mkII!!!
Here is the timeline I was told

present:
The 7D and 60D will remain current

year 2015 still current

year 2018 new sensor tech announced

year 2025 70D and 7D mkII receive a long awaited upgrade and have digic VI processors and an 18MP hybrid sensor with phase AF for continuos focus in video mode! Also, the power of the new processor will enable 1 full stop better high iso when shooting jpeg.

seems about right to me...

Click to expand...

You must be really f_ken bored....to have this type of topic posted

I was...

Nov 10, 2012

bran8 said:
I am wondering if some light could be shed on the max useable print size for landscapes taken with a 5dii/5diii. I have looked over another post on this forum that discussed this topic and have read some of the links provided, but am still left wondering a few things:

1) The link that was given referencing a tutorial on Adorama's website suggested that the print size be limited to the pixel dimensions divided by 135. That would give a roughly 42" x 28" print (rounded up) printed at 240 dpi for the 5d mark ii. My question is, how accurate is that assumption? What if I print at 300 dpi?

2) How much of an advantage does someone using a d800 (or for that matter a 46mp Canon when the time comes) have over someone using a 5dii when printing at say 45" x 30" or 60" x 40"? Anyone with experience printing landscapes from a d800 vs. a 5dii/iii?

3) What do you find the best program is to enlarge landscape photos? I have Perfect Resize 7, but have found that I like the results from CS6 better. I feel that Perfect Resize 7 gives results that look more like a painting (on the screen, I have never printed one of these to a 60" x 40" size, so maybe it looks better than CS6 once it is printed), but I really don't know a lot about the program and only use basic settings. Am I missing something there?

4) I know that a common answer to the question of how large can you print a photo is, "It depends." I would like to get a more specific answer from someone that commonly does print large, high-detail landscape photos. How large are you willing to print landscapes taken with a 5dii/iii?

Thank you in advance for any responses to any of the above questions!

You can go 2 miles x 3 miles wide as long as your viewing distance is about 9 miles or more away.
Viewing distance is what matters.

The question for you would be how far away will it be viewed.

sagittariansrock · Nov 10, 2012

Firstly, >1600 ISO images from 7D aren't bad, and I am sure in the hands of competent photographers are perfectly usable- however, that I feel is the one weakness of that excellent camera.
Secondly, when you think of all the extra light there is to be had if you go FF (I know FF users can also think the same of going MF!) and all the shallow DoF that you can use creatively, that is one big incentive.
I haven't ruled out 5DIII, in fact that is what I am going to save up for now- thanks to the general advice I got in this thread and elsewhere. I do think I'd miss the fps of the 7D if I go with 5DII/6D.
But this is very good advice:

elflord said:
If you're shooting indoors a lot, you'll be better served by faster glass

dtaylor said:
* Finally, for the price and hassle of moving, why not just add a fast prime?

I think I'd benefit from f/1.4 glass as well- it will counter my high ISO problem as well as provide the shallow DoF when I do go FF. But I think a 24mm or 35mm will suit me better indoors. 50mm on a crop is too long. I used to have the 1.4, but ended up selling it and just kept the 50 1.8.

Promature · Nov 10, 2012

Thank you everyone for the replies. Unfortunatley (or fortunately for my wallet), I'm going to be at work for the whole night, so I'll have to hold off on moon shooting for a few more nights now. However, the clouds are looking quite wonderful for a spectacular sunrise. I'll be sure to post them tomorrow morning.

gmrza · Nov 9, 2012

The 24-105 f/4 is a very popular lens amongst wedding shooters in Melbourne. - Even Yervant uses it.

While a f/2.8 zoom is a blessing in terms of having the extra stop of light and more accurate AF, a lot of the time a wider aperture only affords you enough DoF to get one person in focus - unless all your subjects are parallel to your focal plane, which is often not true.

If you are only shooting with one body, the 24-105 also allows you the benefit of not having to change lenses as often. - Apart from 1 stop less light, the 24-105's bokeh is nowhere near as nice as the 24-70 f/2.8II.

My wife started out shooting weddings using mainly the 24-105 (partly because of not having other lenses), but is gravitating more towards the combination of the 24-70 f/2.8II and 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM II. The double Blackrapid strap just arrived in the post this week ;-)

Someone else made the comment about using a cheaper prime to make up for the lack of a f/2.8 zoom - that was one of the strategies my wife applied as well - taking along a 50mm f/1.4 as well and using it when she really needed low light performance.

Mooose · Nov 9, 2012

Flattering.

x-vision · Nov 9, 2012

dlleno said:
They've telegraphed the big MP FF (to keep people from jumping to Nikon I suppose) ...

Canon hasn't telegraphed anything.

The 46mp figure is derived by scaling the resolution of the 7D/60D sensor to FF:

18mp * 1.6 * 1.6 = 46.08mp

Not sure who thought that this was a good idea but it looks like wishful thinking to me.

40mp would be much more palatable, for example.
A 40mp sensor will be able to achieve UHD video resolution (3840 × 2160) with 2x2 pixel binning.
Canon is already doing 2x2 pixel binning on the 5DIII for HD video (hence the magic number 22mp).
And it would only make sense if they do the exact same thing on a high-MP camera.
This would require a 40mp sensor, though, not a 46mp sensor.
So, 40mp is actually more likely than 46mp for the high-MP camera.

The 46mp figure is not only not telegraphed by Canon but it's also a very weak [CR0] rumor.

Krob78 · Nov 9, 2012

Florida Panther~ 8)

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics