Відео

It has had a dramatic change over the last ten years for sure and for me it's a more convenient target than Downtown Portland.

These lenses are extremely useful and diverse.

The 7d Mk II was the flagship APS/C camera from Canon. It is still a tremendous performer even now. It is also much newer having come out in 2014. Canon used the 7d platform as a testing ground for the latest tech. Some of the tech in that camera made it into the 5D Mk IV.

@@photofair37 Canon still sells the 7D2, which says a lot for such an old camera.

@@larrycoonrod5563 I shot with the original 7D and that camera was way ahead of its time. The 7D Mk II is still absolutely viable. It had dual processors that were strong enough compete with the 90D M6 Mk II which came out years after it.

Digital camera technology has a way of aging quickly and often becoming obsolete faster than other types of products. This is quite evident in the computer world. Cameras however seem to defy this trend in electronics as evidenced by this perfectly usable if not slightly less convenient 16 year old Canon 5D Mk II :) You might be surprised at how many people think a digital camera from 2008 is unable to perform at a satisfactory level by 2024 standards. I'd say they are ill informed.

Kinda what I thought. It's more the image that counts but the camera is a legend in it's own right and can put any camera to shame....unless you into very heavy cropping. The full frame sensor is well known.

I'd love to have a Zeiss rifle scope!

It's a solid little camera :)

I bought mine used in mint condition with the box and everything several years ago at the PhotoFair in Newark, CA

Supply has been tight on new products in general and inflation has further pushed the cost of new higher. I am not surprised you can sell a used camera for more than you paid a few years ago for it new.

Fuji has some great cameras!

Thanks.

@@mikhailphoto31 You can't use a hood on a lens like this, its coverage is way too wide. Much wider than a typical 17mm for full frame because this lens has enough coverage for 60x44mm. The lens does not exhibit much flare, it is well coated, but certainly under circumstances with the sun at just the right spot, I'd imagine flare would be an issue.

@@mikhailphoto31 I don't have much trouble with flare, but this is a specific purpose built lens so keeping bright lights at bay is ideal.

@@mikhailphoto31 The 17 TSE is an L series lens, so Canon has used the best optical components possible with this lens. The 45 TSE is a more affordable lens with optical components designed for good performance e at a base level price. That said, I would rent the 17 TSE before buying it. The edges of the frame are sharp, but the lens is SO wide that there is some geometric distortion when you make a sizable movement. I do not use this lens that often, it is reserved for those occasional times where the function it provides makes an impossible image possible.

Some of those old lenses had great contrast and great bokeh too. I'm not sure there is a correlation. It could be a little spherical aberration that makes the bokeh creamy in some lenses. As far as the aperture blades, they only matter when stopping down, at full aperture the blades are wide open and don't matter for bokeh.

@@photofair37 I have to agree but am still wondering where that bokeh comes from. I am thinking that it is a happy side-effect and not a design factor. Having said that while shooting products in my studio for a major food store I was using an older Linhof Schneider 150mm 5.6 lens on a 4x5 with a 6x7 back. Bokeh was not a factor for this type of shooting but the lens was not always tack sharp. The contours were sharp enough but contrast was fairly low. With adjusted higher accutance developer it was very good until I purchased a late model Fujinon 150/5.6 lens. My first roll of film was quite a shock when processed together with the films from the older lens. 2.5 paper grades difference. Kodak Plus-X. I totally understand that many food photographers at that time (mid eighties) stuck with older low contrast lenses. Older food masters were likely talking about bokeh but the term did not exist yet. I suspect that many visitors to the Photo Fair all have their own reason for selecting their lenses. Thanks for answering.

It is actually great for the moon. The moon is a very bright object and thus you can use a reasonably high shutter speed. It will reveal good details on the moon.

Very well thought through, I still want that lens to focus down to 12-15 feet ;) The 100-400 L with the TC 2x is not that sharp, the 200-800 is sharper and offers an extra 2/3 stop of speed. I love the 800/11 I think it is an excellent product that fills a giant gaping hole in the camera industry. That's why I gave it a warm fuzzy review :)

@@photofair37 I LOVE the 800 F11 🙂👍

I used to have an EOS 5D Mk III. It is still a solid camera even today 12 years after its initial launch. It's AF system is not as fast and precise as the modern systems in Canon's RF mirrorless cameras, but it will track reasonably well and the Magic Drain Pipe 80-200 should make very sharp images for you. Practice with the tracking system on to learn and understand its limitations. The 5D Mk III had very good tracking ability for its day, but modern systems are far more sophisticated. If you understand its limitation you will work around them and get great shots. I would also make some images when you first get the new lens with the focus on AF one shot. This will let you see the types of images the lens is capable of before experimenting with servo and tracking AF.

@@photofair37 I appreciate it. Got the drainpipe today Holy Crud, the Mark iii with that one on there made me truly reconsider going without a tripod. I felt like the guy that got stuck carrying bazooka. Its a good thing I ordered the Benro geared head i Think it will help. My neighbor across the street has a brick house --very good for testing lenses, and the drainpipe is a stunner. thanks for everything.

@@JohnJohnson-bo5sv Take care of it because Canon no longer has parts fro that lens.

​@@JohnJohnson-bo5sv Hi Sir, I have the 5D mark III and I was thinking about getting this lens. I am curious how does it stack up right now? Majorly want to use it for some rally cross, motorsport and outdoor portrait shoots.

@@matigarimanjirungi59 i was wanting to go and shoot some motocross at Swan's in Tx also. as for the lens the speed and sharpness will not disappoint, hopefully you found a good deal on one. The real drawback is the weight and sheer size of it, combined with the 5DMiii it borders on ridiculous. I have a Tamron 24-70- 2.8, the Sigma 150mm 2.8 Macro, throw in the 14mm Rokinon 2.8 and I need a Rucksack to carry it all? if you are in my shoes and can't afford to go mirrorless and get the great optics and shed all that weight then it will give us great looking images we'll just have to work a bit harder is all. good luck.

The lens weighs in at 20.5 oz (581g) which is not too heavy at all. It is rather dense for its size as was the custom back in those days everything was steel and brass to go along with the heavy glass. I should have mentioned the weight in the video, good catch :)

Mini Magic Drainpipe?

I have shot with three different Canon lenses that use the "Diffractive Optics" The original 400mm/4 DO, The 75-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO and this 800 f/11. All three seemed to have softer contrast levels than comparable lenses without DO. Canon's website does not say they are using Diffractive Optics in the 200-800 but they do mention it in other lenses that use it. So my guess is that DO designs lead to softer contrast and the 200-800 doesn't use them.

Yes I should have mentioned that there is a third party Arca Swiss type foot. It was on the lens when I bought it and the standard Canon foot is gone. I believe it is this one: www.amazon.com/Haoge-LF-RF800-Replacement-Canon-800mm/dp/B08SC9KGS7?source=ps-sl-shoppingads-lpcontext&ref_=fplfs&psc=1&smid=AST9DIMYBFQ3A

I thought about that as a possible reason for the limitation. That may be a mechanical limitation and thus not available to improve with software. But I believe they may have nerfed the focus area to "protect" the higher end L glass. Canon does have a history of nerfing products to protect other products in their line.

I suppose hunters could benefit from this lens if that's what you are referring to

I use an M6 Mk II to make the video, the lens I used with the 80-200 Magic Drainpipe was an EOS R5 with the EF adapter. I usually run that data in the credits but I forgot on this video apparently :)

@@RealtorRod64 all good man. I like to see ppl using my camera! Hope to see more content from you on it.

Canon LTM is often underrated, they made some great glass.

Yes Canon started with the 2.0 then went to 1.9, then to 1.8 over the course of about 10-12 years. They had a 1.5 that was a completely different design. The 1.8, 1.9, and 2.0 lenses are often seen selling for $150-$250 mostly dependent on condition.

"teleplus couple"? Not sure what you mean. Is this a tele-extender? I do not have any images made with this lens and a tele-extender 1.4x or 2x. Only with the speed booster which does the opposite.

Yeah and when used in conjunction with a modern close focusing M adapter on mirrorless cameras, double Wow!

Absolutely!