http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Nikon-AF-S-Nikkor-500mm-and-600mm-f-4G-ED-VR-lens-reviews-legendary-performers-in-the-range/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-500mm-f-4G-ED-VR-fights-off-both-Canon-and-Sony



When you put a d600 on the nikon 500,
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Compare-Camera-Lenses/Compare-lenses/%28lens1%29/1174/%28lens2%29/393/%28lens3%29/891/%28brand1%29/Nikkor/%28camera1%29/834/%28brand2%29/Canon/%28camera2%29/795/%28brand3%29/Sony/%28camera3%29/831

Hey Gents,

I will open my first post on this great forum with a question.

I just received a brand new 16-35L II today. I tested the 16-35 on my old 20D body (I will not be using it on that body, don't worry!!) and when I compared the lens to the 10-22 the DOF on the 10-22 was SO much greater at same aperture. I don't understand why DOF on the 16-35 is not the same when used on same body. I understand the DOF being much different on my full frame vs. cropped, but its exactly why I used my old camera do a lens comparison. Wanted to see how the new L held up against the old 10-22. I can post the comparison pics if anyone needs to see.

Thanks,

Mike

Received my 6D advertised with "100% Brand New Canon USA Model with Canon USA Warranty" and also "never been used, not refurbished not grey market." Well it did not include a warranty, and the agent on the phone admitted that sometimes they ship cameras that don't have warranties. Buyer beware.

ADORAMA is the BEST. No questions, discussions.

Do you know that Helen sleeps in shifts to cater to her world wide clients because of the time difference?

Hats off to her. (Yes, I do wear a hat at times. Check my photo in the publications. LOL.)

http://greypartridgefilms.com/wp-content/pdf/Cottars-Terrascape.pdf

Hi guys,
atm i'm looking for a 70-200mm-lens. And man, the new Canon 70-200mm 2.8 II is great, but expensive as well. So, i took a look at the Tamron 70-200mm... and was a little bit surprised about the zoom ring. It is dwarvish like on a 24-70mm-lens - compare it to the zoom ring of the canon version. And it is so far away from the camera body. The whole system of camera+lens feels somehow unbalanced.

What do you think about the zoom ring of the Tamron? It is as disturbing for you as for me? Or haven't you even determined it?

After 4 years using Canon gear i am thinking of selling all my stuff and switch over to Nikon to get better sensor performance. The lenses of Nikon are not as good as Canon's but with the Nikon sensor the (DSLR+Lens combi) scores are much better. "It's the combi that makes the picture"

What do you all think?
Keep waiting till Canon gets up (again) with Nikon?

I think this can take a long time... Maby never... Or are there any rumors canon wil get back on top soon?

Kind of neat, it can blend multiple exposures into a RAW file.

http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/5/0300011965/01/eos70d-im-en.pdf

Also, remote shutter with a cellphone! Not just shutter but a whole live view.
http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eos70dshootingguide/style/index.html

Hey, I stumbled across the new crops on thedigital picture

It looks a lot better than the older OS version

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=844&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=0&LensComp=803&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0


However, I do wonder if maybe TheDigitaPicture had a bad copy of the older version? or that he possibly had a bad copy ?, Midframe to corner the new S version looks really really good compared to the older one

at 3.2 the difference is even bigger
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=844&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=1&LensComp=803&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=1

Actually the new Sports version @ f3.2 looks about as good as the canon 300 f2.8 IS @ f2.8
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=844&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=1&LensComp=249&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Which is quite an accomplishment for a zoom .....

With teleconverters(1.4) its also looks good , if you stop down 1 stop
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=844&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=6&API=3&LensComp=249&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=3


The older version with TC's looks a bit better in the center when shot wide open, but again mid frame and corners the new version looks really really good.
That it almost matches the old 300 f2.8 IS really makes me crave for this lens, and as soon as the price drops a bit I will hopefully add it.

I had been thinking about possibly going for the 200-400 1.4 , but this new information has confirmed that I might be better (and even less expensive) off with the 120-300(with sometimes 1.4converter) from sigma and the 300 2.8(sometimes 1.4/2.0 converter) from canon, on two different bodies.

Which gives a lot of versatility as well, and when used correctly could give equal or better results than the 200-400.

Some of my thinking based on the crops

@300mm f4 (sigma / canon 200-400)
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=844&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=2&LensComp=764&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0

@300mm 2.8 and f4 ( canon/canon)
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=739&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=764&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0

@420 f4 /400mm canon 200-400
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=739&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=1&LensComp=764&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

@420 5.6 sigma, 400 f4 200-400
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=844&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=6&API=3&LensComp=764&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

@600mm 6.3 (3002.8) , 560mm 6.3(200/400)
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=739&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=3&LensComp=764&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=2


If the budget was lower and only 1 lens possible, the Sigma still looks pretty good, the only thing where it really misses is @ 600mm, The results don't look promising.

Already had such a thing in my mind when I saw the price of the 200-400, but as I like to shoot wildlife, it is such an appealing lens , hopefully I can stay strong and stay away from it

Budget wise, the 200-400 is 11K here, got the 3002.8 IS II for 4800, if the 120-300 price drops to 3k,
That would still be over 3k under the price of a 200-400 and gives 120-300 2.8 , 420 f4 - 600 6.3, which is also quite versatile, the thing to train for is F1 style 'tire changes ', get those converters changed rapidly when needed.

I am curious if there are any people who have purchased the 120-300 S already and could post some samples of it?, do your findings back the digitalpicture crops up ?

Just saw the SX280 has it..Why isn't the 70D using it?

I really just want to upgrade for autofocus, so anyone that is familiar with the 7D's system, how good will 70D be compared to 50D?

With the announcement of the new 70D and it being a plastic body/not weather sealed, I'm inclined to go the route of a 7D. With that said, I might be interested in a used 7D while we all wait for the 7D mkii timing/details.

My question is with regards to shutter count. Is there a specific number of shutter activation that I should be wary of with a used 7D body? 15k? 30k?

Thanks!

After importing photos from this weekend's trip, I saw that quite a few were front-focused. Sure enough, my 5D III was set to -8 AFMA for the camera, and in fact this was shown on the full-info playback if I had been more attentive. The problem is, I didn't set it! I looked back at all the images on the memory card, and saw where I was shooting the same scene with the same lens (100 2.8 macro, no AFMA configured), and in one shot there is no AFMA shown, and then the next shot, taken less than a minute seconds later, it's there and it stays there for subsequent shots.

Interestingly, it seems that although this was a "body" AFMA setting, it's not being shown in playback for all lenses. A lens that had AFMA configured only showed the lens value (I'm not sure how the single AFMA number in playback is determined when there's both body and lens adjustments - does it pick one or do a sum?), and other lenses showed 0. I reset the body adjustment back to 0 but now I'm paranoid that it will happen again.

Has anybody heard or seen this happen?

I plan to upgrade my lens set - which consist of 17-85 and 28/1.8 - with something else. Most immediate need is landscape/travel and "close quarters" interiors. Crop sensor.

I'm bit torn between:
- upgrade to C 15-85 and selling 17-85
- or adding C 10-22 (and probably fooling myself I'll get 24-105 L someday later).

Anyone had something similar? Any advices?

I've seen some DSLR's where all the branding looks cleanly shaved off. Usually they seem to be older models. I'm wondering if there are any tutorials on doing this, but in a professional-looking way (like filling the cutout logo, finishing/painting to match, etc).

I'm aware that most of you will probably think that the idea of even attempting this is ridiculous, but if anyone has any experience doing this or has any advice that would be constructive, Id appreciate it.

I attached a pic where I roughly photoshopped what I'm talking about.

I realize it's unfair to compare the bokeh quality between 135L and 70-200 f4. Not until I got my 135L did I realize how busy the bokeh my tele zoom produces. My question is whether it is due to the use of IS. I've heard someone mention that turning off IS on 70-200 2.8 would make the bokeh smoother so I would wonder about the same on my f4 IS. My preliminary conclusion is that the bokeh quality is the whole point of having a prime and it is irreplaceable by a tele zoom.

Right now is testing geotag on my iPhone. I don't need high accuracy but more of a reminder where I was. Other suggestions to test. Test of iPhone geotag will done later this week when I get home

tl;dr version: I'm really interested in low noise during low-light/high-ISO shots, and am wondering if shooting in smaller RAW formats could help in that effort.

I'm betting it doesn't work, but what does shooting in smaller RAW sizes (e.g. M-RAW, S-RAW) actually do in terms of mapping sensor sites to the final image, and can it combine sensor site outputs to increase apparent light sensitivity without boosting ISO? And if not, why not?

Example: take a 20 megapixel sensor, intelligently combine the readings of each block of 2x2 red, green, and blue neighboring sensor sites, and spit out a 5 megapixel image. If that's done closer to the sensor, before the interpolation of subsensor sites into RGB pixels, might it result in a better (e.g. lower noise) result? The idea would be to discard the outputs of aberrant sensor sites before they could muddy the interpolation algorithm and "dirty" more final pixels. I wonder if that would be better than taking a full resolution image, applying noise reduction post-processing tools, and spitting out a 5 megapixel image at the end of the workflow.

Any thoughts? Anyone actually know how sensor sites are mapped onto S-RAW and M-RAW image pixels? Thanks!

Does anybody know if this flash is compatible with external battery packs and if so which ones.
I believe the Mk1 is not but I am having trouble finding out about the Mk2.
Thanks for your help.
I would also any other opinions you may have on this flash gun.

Currently I am using the ST-E3-RT. Last time when I went to WPPI, I saw someone doing the demostration on the PocketWizard plus iii, since the PocketWizard plus iii is not TTL. Does that mean I have to adjust the flash power on the flash each time. I won't be able to change that on my Mark III ?

This topic comes up from time to time and I think it would be a great way to do a number of things.

The utility of using EF lenses AND getting the full frame effect they were meant to give is more than just a passing nod to these optical treasures.

Focal reducers have been used in astronomy for more than 50 years. All the do is they make the resulting light cone steeper, the result is that exposure time is reduced, and giving a wider field of view.

For my 8" f/10 Intes Maksutov, it changes the optic from a 2000mm f/10 to a 1360mm f/6.3. This particular one works both with CCD cameras AND visually. There are some that will change this to a 1100mm f/5.5 or to 550mm f/3.3 but these are for CCD use only.

Hey all,

I am a 5D3 user who (gasp) prefers SD cards to CF as I don't shoot video or high-burst sports stills. SD cards are super useful for sharing on-camera JPGs for friends and family, and my MacBook Pro has a built-in reader. So, SD is overwhelmingly a convenience for me.

But sometimes I want to share things when I am away from my laptop. So I was wondering what options I have to (a) use wifi to share files to friend's computers who may lack a card reader, or (b) use wifi, bluetooth, etc. to swap photos to my phone so that I can broadcast to Flickr, Facebook, etc.

So what options do I have? Must I switch to capturing large-capacity still work on CF to free up my SD slot for Eye-Fi? (I don't see a CF-based Eye-Fi offering.) Must it be Eye-Fi -- is there other tech I am overlooking?

Background that may guide your advice:

1) Once transferred, all my photos are entirely in the Apple ecosystem -- iPhoto, MacBook, iPhone, iCloud, all that. Facebook and Flickr are the odd need that I am referring to.
2) I never shoot tethered, nor do I need the 6D's apparently pretty cool app LiveView thing.
3) I am not a pro. These are family / fun / sightseeing snaps. No need for DRM / watermarking / etc.
4) I wouldn't want or need to swap everything I am shooting, of course. This would be the 1-3 keepers from a day out.

But if it does turn out to be Eye-Fi, can I use CF as the large storage option and then selectively pipe the few photos I want to share to a very small capacity Eye-Fi card in the SD slot? Or must I capture the photos originally on the Eye-Fi card?

Thanks!

- A

I only know of one place that is selling this in the USA. Pre-orders are being accepted with shipments starting on July 16th.

http://mpex.com/lumopro-lp180-quad-sync-manual-flash.html

Loved the previous incarnation, the LP160. This LP-180 has some interesting new features; I really like the ability to gel the flash without resorting to velcro. Being able to directly screw it into a light stand and plug it into an external battery pack are really nice touches as well.

Just wanted to bring this flash to the community's attention. This brand has been the "go-to" for Strobists who prefer manual over TTL until it was discontinued.

Disclaimer: I do not work for nor profit from MPEX in any way. I just cannot find this flash on the internet anywhere else for sale. Got an email from MPEX and thought there could be a few of us out there in need of a quality, manual flash.

I scored a 135L for $859 the other day. I have this trust issue with used things, especially high quality technology, but I pulled the trigger anyways. The lens arrived in immaculate condition, basically brand new. These following shots are LITERALLY the first two shots I took out front of my house. Wow, the countless comments I read on this forum really do live up to the hype. Easily my favorite lens yet.

Was just browsing the net and didn't find any news about a probable sensor fabrication shift (from 500 to 180 nm) by Canon for its newest camera body. Can it be expected by 2014 along with a rumored 7DII? Stumbled upon an older but intresting thread at this forum instead
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=10545.0