October 23, 2014, 08:03:45 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Eldar

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 110
Reviews / Re: Jeff Cable's 7D2 & High ISO Look
« on: October 22, 2014, 05:43:17 PM »
Thanks Jeff, at least that was helpful to me.

I have the 7DII ordered, as a low weight and better reach alternative to my 1DX, for birds and wildlife eand it seems to me that both AF and high ISO performance are where I was hoping they would be.

There are few miracles around where I live and I don´t expect the 7DII to be one ;)

Tough choice ... This lens ... or ... Otus/55, Otus/85, 200-400 f4l IS II 1.4x, 600 f4L IS II, 300 f2.8L IS II, 200 f2.0L, Zeiss 15, 21, 35, 135 ... and 2 1DX bodies, a Pro-1 printer and a 2 week luxury safari. This is truly a tough choice  ::)

Landscape / Re: Fall colours
« on: October 19, 2014, 02:53:18 PM »
Thanks Candyman!

I went for a walk in the forrest next door. And the whole summer is now on the ground. It gives a certain peace of mind walking on a forest floor, covered in yellow, green, red and brown leaves.

1DX, 17mm f4L TS-E
1/13s, f5.6, ISO100

Landscape / Re: Fall colours
« on: October 19, 2014, 06:10:44 AM »
I believe this thread shows that autumn is an inspiring time for many of us. Lots of great pictures have been posted.

We are pretty close to the end of a colorful fall over here, but some leaves die hard.
1DX, Zeiss 135/2.0

1/125s, f3.2, ISO100

And why would I want an sRGB monitor????

do you know for sure it is?

i thought so.. but i did not found any infos.

and i really can´t understand that people are excited about a monitor just because it has a 5K sticker. especially people on a photography forum should know better.
The only reference I have seen to color is "millions of colors". If they did a Billion, they would have said so.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 17, 2014, 01:43:57 PM »
it´s been fun to follow the discussion. As I stated in the opening, I thought I had the pros and cons pretty clear, but realized that there was a bit more to it.

After about page 3 I thought I´d try to sum up the opinions so far, but I don´t think I´m the right guy for that. But it would be interesting if someone could try to make the comprehensive and objective list of pros and cons FF and crop.

Personally I have ordered the 7DII to be an addition to my 1DX for long reach, where I crop a bit too much today and where I also believe the AF will benefit from the 1.6x factor. I also see that it will be a very potent coupling with the 200-400mm f4L IS 1.4x lens. I do not use this lens for birding today, but I expect to do so with the 7DII. I´m also motivated by the AF and fps performance in such a small and light body, for long hikes, where size and weight are important issues.

But again, If someone could take on the challenge of making the ultimate objective guide to crop vs. FF ... Thank you in advance :)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Hello FF!
« on: October 17, 2014, 10:58:58 AM »
In Norwegian, it would not be very commonly used, as a noun, but it would mean someone who are spreading lice ... Slightly less positive than the German version ;)

I think I´ll stay with my Eizo i bit longer. My post processing skills does not deserve any more resolution ...

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: October 17, 2014, 01:37:58 AM »
Ah, the orange would have made for such good contrast. Oh well. My maple had barely dropped a leaf until today. Now, a third of the leaves are on the ground, and it went from nearly 80°F to 40°F in a couple hours, and the low is 34°F tonight. It doesn't look like snow...yet...but winter is almost here.
We had our first snow yesterday, which is early ... And the 7DII does not arrive until late November, which means any real testing with the long whites will be wet, cold and in dull colors, with most of the birds on vacation in the south ...

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Woe and Pathos in the Sigma 50 Art?
« on: October 17, 2014, 12:39:36 AM »
FYI, I have the dock and I did my best to put it to good use. But it never changed the inconsistency. How do you set a value, when the deveation from measurement to measurement goes from -15 to +15?

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Woe and Pathos in the Sigma 50 Art?
« on: October 16, 2014, 04:02:09 PM »
I have to admit that I have a Nikonrumors user account  ::). I got one to see how they reported on this lens. There are less posts about AF problems, but there are some who report exactly what I have found. I also tested on both 5DIII, 1DX and 5DII. I could not see any particular change in consistency (or lack of ..)

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Woe and Pathos in the Sigma 50 Art?
« on: October 16, 2014, 02:05:04 PM »
Eldar, since you use FoCal and claim this lens has inconsistency issues, perhaps you'd care to share some focus consistency test results from FoCal on this lens with us.  Multiple copies, multiple bodies would be indicative.  At least post the charts showing the 10 or 20 shot tests, with the final percentage.

There are few people I trust implicitly on this forum, Eldar is one.
Thanks Private.

This was 50 Art copy no.2. No.1 was worse. I believe it is fairly easy to see that this focus issue has nothing to do with AFMA being wrong or being visible because of how sharp the lens is. It is totally inconsistent and this lens (and the one before) should never have left the production plant in the first place.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Woe and Pathos in the Sigma 50 Art?
« on: October 16, 2014, 01:32:19 PM »
I have not saved many files from my FoCal runs, but I have this. To compare I also added a run with the 85 f1.2L II. Judge for yourselves.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Woe and Pathos in the Sigma 50 Art?
« on: October 16, 2014, 09:50:41 AM »
I have one too and at first, after reading "horror stories" on here, was pretty sceptical about the focus.  When I got it I did an AFMA correction (nothing unusual there, all my lenses need it) and got shooting real stuff. it seemed all over the place, but MAN it was sharp when it was on. I was getting quite frustrated, so thought I'd compare my other lenses.
Canon 85 1.8, less consistent.
Canon 50 1.4, WAAAY less consistent
135 f2, better
Canon 70-200 f4IS, less consistent
Canon 100 macro, about the same.

What was really telling from this though was that the Sigma is so much sharper wide open than all of these lenses that its easier to see that it's out of focus. With the Canon 50 1.4 for instance you only get a vague notion of where the focus point is and if it's wrong. When I really look at the shots from that lens, it's less consistent than the Sig, but just harder to tell: they're all so soft that NOTHING looks really sharp, so i assume that it's in focus. i think they're ALL inconsistent but we just can't usually see it that well.

I think it's a victim of its own awesomeness!

I got a dock, calibrated on that, and it's been great in the real world. No-one has complained because the front of their eyelashes are out but their pupil is sharp.

Now I'm wishing Canon had a dock!!!
I could compare my copies to the a number of other high quality and fast lenses, including L-series and Zeiss. The inconsistency of the 50 Art has nothing to do with it being sharper. On a regular LensAlign test, which is a very visual and simple process, I could have AFMA variations from -15 to +15 in a controlled 10 shot series. If your lens is as good as you say, compared to your other lenses, you apparently have one of the better ones.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Woe and Pathos in the Sigma 50 Art?
« on: October 16, 2014, 06:55:28 AM »
I am very happy for all of you with working copies of this lens. Optically it is phenomenal and it is a steal, when it works. I see many of you doubting some of the results others have had with this lens and write it off on impatience, incompetence or what have you.

I have been doing this for some time and I am a fairly patient guy. I run all my lenses trought AFMA, primarily using FoCal, but also with a manual LensAlign rig. Especially the very fast lenses (f1.2, f1.4 type) benefit from that. Some require a bit more than the others, but the main thing is to be consistent.

I have done my best with two copies of the 50 Art and I don't need anyone to tell me I don't know what I'm doing. I know what to expect from a lens, I know how to focus, I know how to do AFMA and I am able to judge if an image is in or out of focus.

The issue with these lenses are not AFMA. The issue is incosisntency. The first I got was so bad I was unable to establish a conclusion to the AFMA measurement, both through FoCal and manually. It was all over the place and totally unpredictable. I bought the dock and did my best with that. After a few weeks of trying, I returned the lens and got a new copy. This one was better, but still very inconsistent. After a couple of weeks trying, I returned it and got my money back. I'm not talking 3% off or 6% off, but rather 50-60% off and sufficiently off to be useless.

The problem here is that Sigma obviously have a very poor quality regime for these lenses. The fact that some of you apparently have lenses you can use, show that it is possible to make it work. I have bought my last Sigma though.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 110