March 04, 2015, 03:25:30 PM

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 - Fleetie

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19
The non-L 24-105 beats the L version in 3 aspects of its spec:

Minimum aperture: f/3.5 vs. f/4
Macro magnification: 0.31 vs. 0.2(?)
Better IS (4 stops vs. 3, IIRC)

On the other hand, it's NOT weather-sealed, and its motor is STM.

I am lucky: My 24-105L is absolutely pin-sharp. I gather some people's aren't.

What's the 50/2.4 for? It seems like a narrow aperture for 50mm, unless it's macro, or maybe just super-cheap. It doesn't look super-cheap.

EOS Bodies / Re: Do you have a 4K display?
« on: December 18, 2013, 10:45:11 PM »
20/20 vision is by definition average. I'm a little better than that, but when I say that the difference between 1080p and 4K is blatantly obvious, I have confidence that it will be just as obvious for the average person reading this.

I also find the difference to be blatantly obvious.

I checked out the 4k TV display at an electronics store, and I was floored.

Unfortunately, at least for upgrades, my current set still works (and I hope it keeps working for a while).

The next one will have to be bigger... 63" isn't big enough. So glad I didn't buy a smaller set.

Viewers can't tell the difference at normal viewing distance, you have to be close, like 5 ft or less.  That's why video stores arrange them so that you will be close to the screen.  At 10 ft, it makes no difference.

But, but 9VIII is a special person who can resolve 0.05mm from 3ft away. So it must make a difference to him.

Lenses / Canon 65mm f/1.0
« on: December 15, 2013, 09:13:59 PM »

Just found this on eBay. Doesn't seem to have an EF lens mount. Is it FD?

Anyway, it won't fit any camera I own.

But I'd never heard of it. Does anyone know about it?

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
« on: December 15, 2013, 09:04:03 PM »
Why would one spend a few thousand (insert currency here; mine was £3000.00 on 21 March 2012, the evening before it was supposed to be available - and you Americans were crying about it being $3000; we paid $4700 at the exchange rate then - sheesh!) on a 5D3, and then cheap out on batteries?! If you can afford the camera, you'd be silly to fit a crappy battery in it.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: A 40mm f/0.85 for Your EOS-M?
« on: December 15, 2013, 08:59:45 PM »
"If you know of any other extremely fast lenses, please share it with us.
Kind regards,


Fuji seems to be on the right track with retro design.  Can't wait for ff x series.
Df is too bulky with too many buttons.

In fact it looks like it could be painful in use. Big, heavy, bulky and look at that grip....  :-\

It's not 'retro' design but 'reverse' design (reverse as in backward).


EOS Bodies / Re: Bought at 6D on Black Friday; AFMA or not?
« on: December 09, 2013, 07:33:21 AM »
...or just use a piece of paper with suitable lines drawn on it.

There's no need to complicate basic AFMA tests, providing they're done carefully. You should probably put the camera on a tripod.

I've been getting the feeling round here recently that if you don't purcahse AFMA software to do the adjustments, you're as much of a "newbie", or even "simpleton" as people who only shoot JPEG and not RAW.

Ok, the EOS M Pro - when it gets released, if ever.

I'll be all over it, and the M->EF adaptor.

Would it kill them to let us see it?

EOS Bodies / Re: Two New Full Frame Cameras in 2014? [CR1]
« on: November 28, 2013, 07:50:34 AM »
Why don't you think "the other one" will be the 5D Mk IV that you mentioned?

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony to revolutionize our lives!
« on: November 27, 2013, 03:10:48 PM »
A smart wig? That should make Hedwig's undies damp.

Will they extend the range to merkins?

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Leica M 240 vs 5D III vs Nikon D800
« on: November 27, 2013, 03:31:41 AM »
Enjoy it! You could probably stop by here and show us some of your photos in this section, or maybe CRGuy will consider setting up a section for "Third Party Pictures" (Edit: I see there's already a "Third Party Lenses" section.). Anyway, I'd be interested to see.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: EOS M & Lens Sale at B&H Photo
« on: November 26, 2013, 03:58:22 PM »
... and here in Rip-Off Britain, we get to pay... $567 for the EOS M and the 18-55mm lens.

It's £350* from Jessops, and with today's dollar exchange rate, that makes it $567. No thanks.

* They claim there's £50 cashback but if you buy it expecting (or worse, NEEDING) to actually receive the cashback, you're naive. There have been some horrific tales of companies in Britain conspiring to NOT pay cashback. Things like making you apply for it in writing TWICE to different addresses. Stuff like that.

Lenses / Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« on: November 22, 2013, 05:38:56 PM »
Well, I have to admit, I'd like one. (50/1.0 L). I don't think I'd mind the lens' optical issues; I think it's good enough to make a lot of possible photos look really good. Those wedding pictures: Some of them looked great at f/1.0.

I think I'd enjoy exploring its possibilities and working round (or exploiting) its foibles.

In fact I'd like one more than I fancy the new Zeiss 50/1.4.

$4000 wouldn't be a problem for me, but at the moment I'm concentrating on the hi-fi. Valve monoblocs need to be bought! Well I could go and buy them now, but I'd rather not raid my savings, so I'm gonna save up for them until January. Patience can be hard! But I've wanted valve monoblocs for years; a few more months shouldn't matter too much!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19