Canon 7D Mark II announced

[John Koerner]

From what I'm reading, it could well be that more of them will be switching to Samsung, Sony, Fuji and Panasonic.

I already have a Samsung phone, and wouldn't mind owning their cameras either, if 1) they proved to be built to last in the outdoors, and 2) have compatibility with some serious lenses for indoor studio shots.

Stepping up with a fine sensor and rapid-shooting capability is a great start for Samsung, but I'd have to see more of what they can do and how specialized their lenses get (or if they become Canon-compatible).

Here are some awesome macro shots taken with the old EOS 7D, and the setup that was used to take them.

Here is another awesome collection of macro shots, taken with just the old Canon 40D and 5D. The cool thing is, this fellow used both Zeiss and Nikon microscope optics at the end of his Canon bodies ... his shots are fabulous ... so, again, the flexibility is selling point.

If you're just shooting portraits or snapshots, then I could see going with Samsung this early, but I am going to delve into is some pretty specialized macro shooting, and I am 100% confident that the 7D II will give me the most options, as well as outstanding image quality for my intended purpose.

I think I would be giving up way too many options by switching to a fledgling system like Samsung at this point.

Jack

[Torbjörn Tapani]

You do know that macro is mostly all manual and that the MP-E 65 can be used with adapter on other cameras?

From what I've seen specialized macro shooters mix and match optics and accessories from a wide range of brands all the time.

[John Koerner]

You do know that macro is mostly all manual

No kidding?

I would have never known that but for this post

and that the MP-E 65 can be used with adapter on other cameras?

Realistically, the MP-E 65 mm is the single best, most versatile lens for macro shooting, especially out in the field.

I have never heard of it used on other cameras, and especially not on a Nikon. Please show me examples.

I know for sure it is usable on the end of a Canon, without any adapter

From what I've seen specialized macro shooters mix and match optics and accessories from a wide range of brands all the time.

This is true, especially in photomicroscopy.

People use diopters, Raynox, tubes, etc. ... but (in every other system) to switch from 1x to 5x means changing tubes, lenses, etc. ... unless you're using Canon and have the MP-E 65mm, where you don't have to change a thing.

While ALL systems can be set up for indoor studio stacks, including Canon, no other system has the 1-5x field flexibility of the Canon MP-E 65mm on top of this.

For this reason, the lion's share of macro shooters shoot Canon. And, until somebody else comes up with an equivalent, I suspect it will remain that way.

Hey, I too had to stop and think about the D810 sensor, like everyone else, but ultimately the question was, "Why would I want to complicate my macro life, and minimize my options, by switching brands?"

As can be seen in the photos above, the image quality in the old 40D, 7D, and 5D is plenty good to produce colorful, clear, mind-boggling macro imagery ... and the 7D II will be better than all of these ... while still giving me all the flexibility in the world, with the MP-E 65. Why would I go through the hassle of switching to any other brand, just to make my choices more limited and difficult?

I will be able to have my cake and eat it too, and I like the sound of that

Jack

[Torbjörn Tapani]

Since you asked I can get examples. I only need one source. But it is not easy writing it up on a mobile device, so don't hold your breath :-)

Edit: if you are really curious just Google John Hallmen

[John Koerner]

Since you asked I can get examples. I only need one source. But it is not easy writing it up on a mobile device, so don't hold your breath :-)

Edit: if you are really curious just Google John Hallmen

Interesting, thank you for sharing.

I agree, John Hallmen has some fine macro photography.

However, I didn't see any example of him using another system with an MP-E 65mm attached (though he did give props to the lens, as he should).

Aside from his own website, I also saw him featured in this article, wherein he said pretty much exactly what I have been saying. He said, "I was rather disappointed with the mounting solution of the Nikon R1C1 macro flash system. Mostly because it's a nice system in many regards but the plasticky mount is a vital flaw and considering the price Nikon ought to have come up with something better.

"One thing that I find disappointing in terms of macro gear is the apparent lack of interest in serious macro photography shown by the camera/lens manufacturers. There is pretty much one (!) alternative from one manufacturer (Canon MP-E65) to choose from if you're looking to buy something off the shelf capable of larger than life size imaging without add-ons."

And if you scroll down to take a look at links to his gear, he shoots the Canon 5D Mark II + the Canon 270 EX Speedlight.

Jack

EDIT: Here is another recent photo of his gear: a Canon body, this time with Nikkor lens (which can't be done in the reverse). Again, it's about flexibility.

[Torbjörn Tapani]

I think you will find that reverse lenses are quite common :-)

I keed.

I will get back to you with example but I will say this for now. He shoots any gear and makes it work. There is no way of telling from the pictures what equipment was used to make them. It's all about who is behind the controls.

[John Koerner]

I think you will find that reverse lenses are quite common :-)
I keed.

To go beyond 1:1 lot of people use reverse lenses, and/or extension rings, true.

However, to increase magnification, or decrease it, you need to either change the lens or add/subtract an adapter.

With the Canon MP-E, you don't have to do this. You can use the same lens between 1-5x, which is an absolute advantage and convenience in the field.

Your own example, Mr. Hallmen, confirmed this himself: "There is pretty much one (!) alternative from one manufacturer (Canon MP-E65) to choose from if you're looking to buy something off the shelf capable of larger than life size imaging without add-ons."

That is exactly what I have been saying all along.

I will get back to you with example but I will say this for now.

By all means, show me an example that proves your claim ... because (so far) the man's images, outside articles about the man, his own quotes, and his own links to his choice of equipment (directly-stated) prove mine.

But, I agree that cross-platform usage does happen, as it should. Which, here again, Canon bodies allow for ... but other bodies do not.

I have never seen an MP-E 65mm on any other body besides a Canon, but I have seen other lenses adapted to Canon.

There is no way of telling from the pictures what equipment was used to make them.

There is a way to tell what equipment was used: go back to his Flickr site that I posted, click on the individual photos, and you will see the Canon 5D Mark II as the camera being used in the EXIF data.

It's all about who is behind the controls.

Ultimately, it is about both. The man behind it has to have the eye, experience, and talent to shoot like that ... but, without the right equipment, you will never be able to shoot a 5:1 shot.

You need the right tools to be able to make that happen.

Jack

[LesPalenik]

John,

do you use MP-E65 on a rail or just on the naked tripod?

[John Koerner]

John,
do you use MP-E65 on a rail or just on the naked tripod?

I have used the MP-E 65 freehand (with the MT-24EX flash), on the naked tripod (natural light as well as flash), as well as on the B150B-LMT-Pkg manual macro rail (almost exclusively natural light stacks of 2-12 images). I have since sold all of this equipment with the intent to step up my game.

Was thinking of switching systems but am going to re-invest into Canon, beginning December. Will be using a Stackshot automated macro rail now with the MP-E 65, as it is far more precise, and it lets you take really deep stacks systematically (up to 100+ images), which greatly increases the quality. This will mostly be for high-magnification studio shots. Am thinking about taking it even further by getting into photomicroscopy, which is kind of fascinating really. There is a lot to learn, but people are pretty free about sharing their secrets, such as this man's setup.

For the field, I plan on using the MP-E 65 mm, with MT-24EX Twinlite Flash, on top of a RRS Monopod, and with the ends of the twin flashes both heavily-diffused (custom), as well as held quite some distance away (on each end of a Camera Bar). This will be to minimize any "artificial look" and to render as close as possible to natural light.

We'll see how it goes, but I am hopeful the results will be nice

Jack

[Torbjörn Tapani]

http://makrofokus.se/blogg/2012/7/24/sony-nex-7-canon-mp-e-65.html

Canon lens, Sony body, metabones adapter. Examples show 50 and 31 image stacks in the field.

It from his (with Stanislav Snäll) Swedish blog. An absolute goldmine of information.

I do suggest you keep looking through the Flickr. Few are so brand agnostic. And he shares freely with information about gear and the process to create the images.

[John Koerner]

http://makrofokus.se/blogg/2012/7/24/sony-nex-7-canon-mp-e-65.html
Canon lens, Sony body, metabones adapter. Examples show 50 and 31 image stacks in the field.

You were right, at least on the adapter. Thank you for the link.

But I still don't see any evidence that John Hallmén shoots on a Sony body with an adapter.

It from his (with Stanislav Snäll) Swedish blog. An absolute goldmine of information.

I don't think that setup is what I would ever want to use. Does not look absolutely stable, like other setups I have seen.

Some decent images, sure, but I honestly think the adapter (and/or wood tripod) reduced the clarity of most of those shots.

I do suggest you keep looking through the Flickr. Few are so brand agnostic. And he shares freely with information about gear and the process to create the images.

I have found that most guys in macro share pretty openly, which is nice.

Jack

[John Koerner]

BTW, in keeping with this, and in reference to my 10:36:23 PM post two-up, the same individual had this setup, but he said the wood likewise allowed for too much vibration.

With the updated setup, using a solid metal breadboard, his results were much better.

Jack

[Torbjörn Tapani]

Aha, but I never said he did. I said one could use the MP-E on an adapter. I have provided evidence of this from one source, like I said.

The adapter will cause a small misalignment as Roger Cicala has shown with every adapter no matter the quality. This means nothing in this case with 3d objects. You can measure it but you can't see it. And in the case of focus stacking it means absolutely nothing as you select the sharpest parts of each subframe .

That tripod is a Stabil (www.stabil.nu). Made to go low specifically for macro use. John is known for his field stacking work with live critters. Even hand held. Here a flash is very useful.

So while a laboratory setup is nice I tried to provide example of real use case that works in the field as well as in studio. In the text Hallmen mentions that the mirrorbox is completely redundant in the studio where you want EFC and no flappy mirror.

So I could go on forever with this but I think it is quite enough. I don't have to prove anything but I suggest you follow Hallmens Flickr. You will learn a lot of down to earth useful stuff.

I'm done.

[John Koerner]

Aha, but I never said he did. I said one could use the MP-E on an adapter. I have provided evidence of this from one source, like I said.

You implied that Hallmén used this combo, when you said, "Just Google John Hallmén," as your proof of the Sony/MP-E union.

I did Google Hallmén, and what I found was a man who used Canon, and a man whose quotes in a magazine article echoed essentially everything I said here.

In fact, it was Stanislav Snäll, not John Hallmén, who used this Sony/MP-E combo, but since the two are partners on that blog series link you shared your mistake was understandable.

The most important thing is that it looks like they both have a lot of fun out there

The adapter will cause a small misalignment as Roger Cicala has shown with every adapter no matter the quality. This means nothing in this case with 3d objects. You can measure it but you can't see it. And in the case of focus stacking it means absolutely nothing as you select the sharpest parts of each subframe .

That tripod is a Stabil (www.stabil.nu). Made to go low specifically for macro use. John is known for his field stacking work with live critters. Even hand held. Here a flash is very useful.

The tripod does have some interesting and thoughtful features. I reviewed their equipment again, and they both use the same tripod out in the field; they both use the same MP-E 65mm, but I was more impressed with Hallmén's photography overall. I don't know if it is because of something being lost via the adapter, or what.

So while a laboratory setup is nice I tried to provide example of real use case that works in the field as well as in studio. In the text Hallmen mentions that the mirrorbox is completely redundant in the studio where you want EFC and no flappy mirror.

I agree with you here: field and studio are much different. Yet Hallmén even brings his bellows out into the field, which is remarkable.

So I could go on forever with this but I think it is quite enough. I don't have to prove anything but I suggest you follow Hallmens Flickr. You will learn a lot of down to earth useful stuff.
I'm done.

Indeed, I have added him as a contact on Flickr, so thanks again for sharing.

In the links I provided, you will learn a lot of useful stuff also.

Jack

[jjj]

Wake up and smell the coffee, Bernard.

A quick review of the sum total of all your posts says otherwise--that you live and breathe Nikon--and see the world through Nikon-tinted glasses (lenses)

Yup. Bernard can be a bit tedious with his trying to hype Nikon kit all the time, regardless of context.

[BJL]

The absolute max in resolution is not the only deciding factor for me.
mately, there is nothing better about the D810 over the 7D II, except single-image resolution

In every other category, the 7D II trumps the D810, every one.

So, are you saying that it is already established that the 7D II has better dynamic range (better handling of scenes of high subject brightness range) than the D810?  That seems to be a common interest amongst photographers of landscapes and such.

[John Koerner]

So, are you saying that it is already established that the 7D II has better dynamic range (better handling of scenes of high subject brightness range) than the D810?  That seems to be a common interest amongst photographers of landscapes and such.

[Paul2660]

John: 

I believe you wrote this:

"The absolute max in resolution is not the only deciding factor for me.
mately, there is nothing better about the D810 over the 7D II, except single-image resolution"

I have to ask, how you can make such a statement?  I don't believe you have used either camera so are you basing everything on what you are reading?  I think it would be better stated, "there is nothing better in your opinion". as I really don't believe you have the expertise to make such a high ranging general statement.  I know I don't.

It's also very clear to me, that you have a very strong bias towards Canon cameras and their lenses, and for sure there is nothing wrong with that, but I continue to find it quite strange that you seem to find it OK to make such strong/negative statements towards Nikon with no real hands on knowledge of the cameras.  You had mentioned pages back, that you were going to rent a D810 and lenses and try it for yourself, and I suggested at the time, that would be a great idea.   You might re-consider that, and then come back and report to this forum what "your" thoughts are, not some re-hashed information based on review from others.  You are obviously a very accomplished photographer, who specializes in Macro photography and I for one would like to see your feedback, based on real use.  In today's world, it's so easy now to rent for a small cost, test, and report back. 

As for Canon vs Nikon, I don't tend to get into the fray, as it always gets too emotional and statements tend to get made that more than likely are regretted long term.  I saw enough in the results from my testing with the D800 to make the switch from Canon, in 2012.  I don't regret that decision at all.  I made my decision after renting a D800 and shooting it with my 5D MKIII and MKII. 

I also believe that most of the owners of the site, have shown in their past reviews, where the strong points of both Canon and Nikon DSLR technology is to date.  You can read Michael's and Kevin's and many other reviews on this site.  I also don't believe that any of them, (all more accomplished in this business than I am) have ever made a statement, like you did which I quoted in the beginning of this post.  Instead, I have found that in each review or report they give a even and fair progress of the camera/software in question pointing out what they feel are strong and weak points of the products so that each individual person can make their own choice. 

I guess I would ask, please lighten up a bit, after all, it's just equipment and for sure there is not going to be one camera that works for all of us, ever. 

Paul Caldwell

[Glenn NK]

Yup. Bernard can be a bit tedious with his trying to hype Nikon kit all the time, regardless of context.

I won't say it's tedious, and I will say that it's rather harmless, but otherwise my impression matches your comments.

It's very subtle and well done, but still noticeable.  I can't pick it out in any one post, but when numerous posts are read (and one has a good memory), it becomes noticeable.

Glenn

[John Koerner]

John:  

I believe you wrote this:

"The absolute max in resolution is not the only deciding factor for me.
mately, there is nothing better about the D810 over the 7D II, except single-image resolution"

I have to ask, how you can make such a statement?  I don't believe you have used either camera so are you basing everything on what you are reading?  I think it would be better stated, "there is nothing better in your opinion". as I really don't believe you have the expertise to make such a high ranging general statement.  I know I don't.

It's also very clear to me, that you have a very strong bias towards Canon cameras and their lenses, and for sure there is nothing wrong with that, but I continue to find it quite strange that you seem to find it OK to make such strong/negative statements towards Nikon with no real hands on knowledge of the cameras.  You had mentioned pages back, that you were going to rent a D810 and lenses and try it for yourself, and I suggested at the time, that would be a great idea.   You might re-consider that, and then come back and report to this forum what "your" thoughts are, not some re-hashed information based on review from others.  You are obviously a very accomplished photographer, who specializes in Macro photography and I for one would like to see your feedback, based on real use.  In today's world, it's so easy now to rent for a small cost, test, and report back.  

As for Canon vs Nikon, I don't tend to get into the fray, as it always gets too emotional and statements tend to get made that more than likely are regretted long term.  I saw enough in the results from my testing with the D800 to make the switch from Canon, in 2012.  I don't regret that decision at all.  I made my decision after renting a D800 and shooting it with my 5D MKIII and MKII.  

I also believe that most of the owners of the site, have shown in their past reviews, where the strong points of both Canon and Nikon DSLR technology is to date.  You can read Michael's and Kevin's and many other reviews on this site.  I also don't believe that any of them, (all more accomplished in this business than I am) have ever made a statement, like you did which I quoted in the beginning of this post.  Instead, I have found that in each review or report they give a even and fair progress of the camera/software in question pointing out what they feel are strong and weak points of the products so that each individual person can make their own choice.  

I guess I would ask, please lighten up a bit, after all, it's just equipment and for sure there is not going to be one camera that works for all of us, ever.  

Paul Caldwell

Paul, I was going to go line-by-line over your post, and debate some of your points, but you're right: it's time to lighten up.

Debating systems was not why I got into photography; I got in to take gorgeous shots of nature as best as I could.

I first went to forums to learn (and I still do). I feel I have improved tremendously, yet still see tremendous room for improvement.

When people debate like this, they naturally look for flaws in everything. What was said, how it was said, blah-blah. They click to look at other people's photos, not to enjoy their images, but to criticize some small point in their "whatever," so they can criticize their gear, rather than just to connect with and enjoy someone else's world and their imagery.

With that said, I clicked on your website links and am glad I did. I think you have a great, user-friendly website; casual, yet very professional and full of truly beautiful photos.

Thanks for the reality check, thanks for the opportunity to stop and look at your photos, and congrats on a fine website.

Jack