All images © Bob Atkins


This website is hosted by:
Host Unlimited Domains on 1 Account


Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 on: November 22, 2014, 09:30:22 PM 
Started by marcfs - Last post by marcfs
Hi Bob,

I received my 7D Mark II this week and had time today to set it up today.  I’m planning to shoot with it tomorrow.

There are a series of 7D videos by Rudy Winston, Canon Digital Learning Center Technical Adviser, at

The video topics are as follows:

•   Taking advantage of the Broad AF Coverage in the EOS 7D Mark II
•   Utilize the intelligent viewfinder functions
•   Controlling AI Servo AF to track your moving subjects
•   Using the new Full HD video features in real life situations
•   Controlling the look of your images with exposure control functions
•   Fine tuning custom controls

Rudy’s video’s bring the 7D Mark II capabilities to life!!

IMHO the capabilities/technical advances in this camera are pretty incredible, especially at its price.
The JPEG and raw images shared by many professionals on the internet have been impressive.
From all of this information it seems to me that the 7D Mark II is a real game changer.

My plan is to use it in Bird Photography and as a backup for my 5D Mark III.


 on: November 11, 2014, 07:43:42 PM 
Started by marcfs - Last post by mjperini
There is a very positive, (but very technical) review of the 7D mk II and comparison to the Original 7D,
I'm not certain I got it all, but it's worth a look.  I'd be interested in Bob's coments ( if you have any interest in interpreting it for us)
He anticipates it being a great AstroPhotography camera as well.

 on: November 11, 2014, 12:27:44 PM 
Started by bmpress - Last post by KeithB
Any more thoughts on the 150-600, Bob? I just had my Sigma 100 - 500 stolen and I might be in the market for a new super telephoto. I *think* I had some focus issues with the Sigma, but it is hard to tell somethimes.

So, which would you choose, Bob, the Sigma or the Tamron?

DPReview reports that it is really sharp with a full frame camera, but not so sharp with an APS-C, any thoughts on why this should be?

 on: November 04, 2014, 12:18:29 PM 
Started by Fotobuff - Last post by Bob Atkins
The 70D is absolutely fine with any EF or EF-S mount lens and there will be zero drop in image quality. Canon lenses are not optimized for any particular camera body and work equally well with all. The 70D image quality will be higher than your 600D.

I have a 70D and use it will all my canon lenses from 500mm to 24mm primes and a whole bunch of zooms.

I got mine from ADORAMA. Right now they have a special which includes the 70D body, a 32GB class 10 Sd card, a 3 year extended warranty and a LowePro shoulder bag for $999. The 70D alone is also $999, so make sure you get the kit. Shipping is free. Given that a used 70D is $899, a new one for $999 (Canon currently habe a $200 instant rebate on it) is a good deal and the extra items make it even better.

You can use this link to get to the kit: Canon EOS 70D kit

I really like the 70D. Since I got mine it's become my camera of choice, even over my 7D most of the time.

 on: November 04, 2014, 08:17:13 AM 
Started by Fotobuff - Last post by Fotobuff
I am using a Canon EOS 600D DSLR camera for the last two years and would now like to get the newer model EOS 70D. This is also a DSLR with an APS-C sensor. I would like to know whether it would work optimally with my old EF and EF-S lenses. Theoretically, there should not be a problem but in practice, can there be a drop in image quality ?  Huh

 on: October 20, 2014, 10:41:09 AM 
Started by marcfs - Last post by marcfs

Thanks for your quick response.  I'm looking forward to your review.



 on: October 20, 2014, 09:49:19 AM 
Started by marcfs - Last post by Bob Atkins
I'm sure the 7D MkII will perform well but I can't say for sure until I get one to test. It's on my request list and I expect Canon will loan me one to test when they become a bit more available. Can't say when that will be.

I can't really comment on BIF performance with a 300/2.8 MkII and 2x MkIII because  I don't have either one and so won't be able to test that combination. From all I've read it should be better than the current 7D though. Whether it will equal the 5D MkIII or 1D-X is difficult to guess.

 on: October 19, 2014, 11:06:31 PM 
Started by marcfs - Last post by marcfs
Hi Bob,

With all of the recent 7D Mark II beta test reports, I’m wondering if you have formed an opinion on how you think the new camera will perform?
Do you have any plans/timing to test the camera? 
Would you expect this camera to effectively focus for Birds in Flight with an ef300 f/2.8L IS Mark II and 2X Mark III extender? 


 on: October 19, 2014, 03:50:20 PM 
Started by mjperini - Last post by mjperini
I think Frank is correct and the real mystery is why Thom chose to attempt to quantify the difference between a 1" Sensor and a FF sensor in STOPS.
It doesn't make sense to offer a fixed difference when the FF sensor could be anywhere from 36mp to 16mp.

We all understand that larger sensors and larger pixels gather more light
But if we took the same properly exposed picture on 1" & FF sensors with Normal f/1.8 lenses, and we printed a 4x6 or 6x9" print of each, I really don't thing one would look '2.7 times worse'  than the other. With bigger prints we'd see differentiation.
I don't know how you turn that into stops.
Thom publishes a lot of helpful information which even a Canon guy like me can find helpful. My aim wasn't to find fault but to understand.
I don't think we'll get to understand exactly what he meant, but nrither do I think it matters any more.
Thanks to all

 on: October 16, 2014, 09:21:30 AM 
Started by mjperini - Last post by Frank Kolwicz is the site that is being discussed.

The quote in the original message of this thread comes from this, the second paragraph in the Hogan review:
"But you have to remember that from a light gathering standpoint (how many photons get recorded), the 1” sensor is 2.7x worse than full frame. So we actually have a “system” that’s closer to an FX f/5 one when used in really low light. That’s not terrible, but don’t think you’re going to solve the Nikon 1 small sensor problem with just an f/1.8 lens. As the light goes down this lens is not going to suddenly turn the V3 or other Nikon 1 into a low-light master. The photosite size is just too small, and the random nature of photons is going to definitely produce noise (quantum shot noise)."

Note the last line, all of this is about noise in the images and the part about it being a problem in low light is the first clue. As to why he uses an aperture value as the metric for noise level comparison, I don't know, it's a source of unnecessary confusion, as witnessed here. I think he's confused, too.

There is a standard way of reporting this metric with various levels of technical detail, but a standard deviation number should do for simple comparisons like this. See: for example.

I've tried to think of the things that aperture can affect and come up with these:  exposure, depth of field, noise, diffraction blur and, possibly, the angle of light on sensor (related to microlens design(?)). I bet there are others that I am unaware of, but even this is an unnecessary level of confusion to bring into a discussion of sensor noise effects.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10