Canon EF 14-24 f/2.8L [CR2]

[mackguyver]

Ken Rockwell said "Thou shalt not use polarizer for wide angle"

but for grads, Lee SW150 System/ Lucroit-Hitech 165mm/ Cokin X-Pro are available while Singh-Ray makes filters for these three.

I think you cut it prematurely... Polarizer only makes uneven sky but not uneven water or other non-metallic objects. If you included a little to no sky in your photo, you can still use polarizer.

I use a polariser a lot on a 16-35IIL...it's fine. Mr Rockwell is making big bold nieve statements again. Yes there's an unevenness...but rotating the polariser can place the dark spot in a neat and compositionally strong place...so what's the problem?

ditto, only problem is if you forget you have the polariser and shoot a pano then realise later it won't stitch :'(
other than that i use the polariser on the 16-35 all the time.

Well here's a 17-40L with CPL.

You forgot the other "rule", never use a polarizer to shoot people

 

[NWPhil]

well, I am done waiting for the Canon 14-24mm....

I like UWA lenses, and have a nice set of primes on that range.
The 17-40 is not keeping me happy anymore, but indeed was/is a very nice multi tasking lens for travelling and hiking on the light.
Tried the 16-35 mk2, and was not please with color rendition.
Tried the nikon 14-24mm with an adapter, and the the f value guessing work is really a pain - don't mind the MF focus, and compose all open, but often had to re-take the picture due to overexposing; only with live view the reading was coming correct ( maybe I can blame the cheap adapter?)
The 24-70 mk2 is very sharp and has a nice IQ but not an UWA, and old R leica lenses do not offer anything of interest as UWA zooms.
So, I decided to go after the Sigma 14-24 mk2 - yes, a compromise of many sorts, but I need it now for use - not whenever if ever Canon decides to release it.
Paired with my 24-105, I have all I need for hiking and travelling light.

Thanks for nothing Canon

 

[privatebydesign]

Tried the 16-35 mk2 from, and was not please with color rendition.

Did you create a profile for it before dismissing it? It takes ten minutes and is done.

 

[NWPhil]

Tried the 16-35 mk2 from, and was not please with color rendition.

Did you create a profile for it before dismissing it? It takes ten minutes and is done.

No, I did not(?) - I let the 5Dmk2 UI take over and same in LR.
Similar opinion I got with the ef 8-15mm when compared with old ef 15mm

 

[privatebydesign]

Tried the 16-35 mk2 from, and was not please with color rendition.

Did you create a profile for it before dismissing it? It takes ten minutes and is done.

No, I did not(?) - I let the 5Dmk2 UI take over and same in LR.
Similar opinion I got with the ef 8-15mm when compared with old ef 15mm

If you had you couldn't have been unhappy with colours and contrast, corner sharpness is another thing all together though, no profile is going to sort that out!

I can't ever see me letting my 15 fisheye go, it is so small, cheap and sharp, and an f2,8, what in the world comes close?

 

[NWPhil]

Tried the 16-35 mk2 from, and was not please with color rendition.

Did you create a profile for it before dismissing it? It takes ten minutes and is done.

My aplogies to come off the thread for a minute:

- How and/or where can I get that profile? I mean, can I find one made one already to use as a guidance?
is that to load to the camear or just to LR/PS?
Thanks



No, I did not(?) - I let the 5Dmk2 UI take over and same in LR.
Similar opinion I got with the ef 8-15mm when compared with old ef 15mm

If you had you couldn't have been unhappy with colours and contrast, corner sharpness is another thing all together though, no profile is going to sort that out!

I can't ever see me letting my 15 fisheye go, it is so small, cheap and sharp, and an f2,8, what in the world comes close?

 

[privatebydesign]

"My aplogies to come off the thread for a minute:

- How and/or where can I get that profile? I mean, can I find one made one already to use as a guidance?
is that to load to the camear or just to LR/PS?

Thanks"

No, not off the shelf. The best way is to get an X-Rite ColorChecker Passport, or any standard 24 patch card, and Adobes free DNG Profile Editor. Take a little time and make a good solid dual illuminant colour profile and apply that to your files on import to Lightroom and you should be happy.

It doesn't go in the camera, it is for Lightroom and PS to read.

 

[J.R.]

"My aplogies to come off the thread for a minute:

- How and/or where can I get that profile? I mean, can I find one made one already to use as a guidance?
is that to load to the camear or just to LR/PS?

Thanks"

No, not off the shelf. The best way is to get an X-Rite ColorChecker Passport, or any standard 24 patch card, and Adobes free DNG Profile Editor. Take a little time and make a good solid dual illuminant colour profile and apply that to your files on import to Lightroom and you should be happy.

It doesn't go in the camera, it is for Lightroom and PS to read.

+1

NWPhil, basic pointers to creating your own profiles can be found here

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/colorchecker-psssport.shtml

Hope this helps.

 

[privatebydesign]

Regarding profiles, I found Adobe's free DNG Profile Editor to be a nicer program than the X-Rite one.

As for the question why do we need them? Well if we think about it, the out of the can ones do not make any allowance for the lenses used, they can't possibly be neutral for all lenses, the only way you can normalise your output is if you normalise your input.

 

[privatebydesign]

Unbelievably I just this second got this special offer from B&H through in my email, hope somebody can take advantage of it.

 

[Arctic Photo]

Regarding profiles, I found Adobe's free DNG Profile Editor to be a nicer program than the X-Rite one.

As for the question why do we need them? Well if we think about it, the out of the can ones do not make any allowance for the lenses used, they can't possibly be neutral for all lenses, the only way you can normalise your output is if you normalise your input.

Hi, how would the workflow look with this? I am using LR4 today, will upgrade to LR5 soon. Will I have to convert my RAW-files to DNG ang applying this filter before importing to LR?
Thanks!

 

[J.R.]

Regarding profiles, I found Adobe's free DNG Profile Editor to be a nicer program than the X-Rite one.

As for the question why do we need them? Well if we think about it, the out of the can ones do not make any allowance for the lenses used, they can't possibly be neutral for all lenses, the only way you can normalise your output is if you normalise your input.

Hi, how would the workflow look with this? I am using LR4 today, will upgrade to LR5 soon. Will I have to convert my RAW-files to DNG ang applying this filter before importing to LR?
Thanks!

All the information you need, is available here -

http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/extend.displayTab2.html

Check out the documentation available on the DNG Profile Editor.

 

[TexPhoto]

Ken Rockwell said "Thou shalt not use polarizer for wide angle"

but for grads, Lee SW150 System/ Lucroit-Hitech 165mm/ Cokin X-Pro are available while Singh-Ray makes filters for these three.

I think you cut it prematurely... Polarizer only makes uneven sky but not uneven water or other non-metallic objects. If you included a little to no sky in your photo, you can still use polarizer.

I use a polariser a lot on a 16-35IIL...it's fine. Mr Rockwell is making big bold nieve statements again. Yes there's an unevenness...but rotating the polariser can place the dark spot in a neat and compositionally strong place...so what's the problem?

ditto, only problem is if you forget you have the polariser and shoot a pano then realise later it won't stitch :'(
other than that i use the polariser on the 16-35 all the time.

Well here's a 17-40L with CPL.

You forgot the other "rule", never use a polarizer to shoot people

When did Ken issue that edict?. On his we side I see 2 things: 1 "Avoid polarizers on wide-angle lenses" and 2. "I rarely use polarizers with ultra wide lenses." This seems a lot less like a commandment.

Also, a pic of a kid's hat and shirt are not really a people picture are they?

 

[NWPhil]

"My aplogies to come off the thread for a minute:

- How and/or where can I get that profile? I mean, can I find one made one already to use as a guidance?
is that to load to the camear or just to LR/PS?

Thanks"

No, not off the shelf. The best way is to get an X-Rite ColorChecker Passport, or any standard 24 patch card, and Adobes free DNG Profile Editor. Take a little time and make a good solid dual illuminant colour profile and apply that to your files on import to Lightroom and you should be happy.

It doesn't go in the camera, it is for Lightroom and PS to read.

+1

NWPhil, basic pointers to creating your own profiles can be found here

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/colorchecker-psssport.shtml

Hope this helps.

thanks JR

 

[IsaacImage]

Any news about this lens ??!!
C'mon Canon - you Can do it.
Please