April 17, 2014, 09:52:23 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 - Stig

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
1
Lenses / Re: Canon 135mm f/2.....Is this normal?
« on: April 16, 2014, 03:55:46 PM »
There's no focus limiter on the 135L.

there is, 0.9m, or 1.6m-infinity

2
Photography Technique / Re: Shoot from the rearend of the subjects.
« on: April 02, 2014, 04:14:30 PM »
a rear light for 15 000 EUR vs a rear light for 150 000 EUR :)

3
Photography Technique / Re: Shoot from the rearend of the subjects.
« on: April 02, 2014, 03:55:42 PM »
Times square, 2013
6D 135mm f2

4
Here is what the same scene from each image looks like when enlarged to the same size.... SX-50, Tamron 150-600, and Tamron 150-600 and 1.4X teleconverter.

In this case, it seems like the Tamron with the teleconverter resolves the most detail, the bare Tamron is second, and the SX-50 comes in last.... but when you consider I paid $300 for the SX-50 on sale and it fits into a coat pocket, it is a surprisingly good performance for such a camera.

Nice comparison. I've always been wondering about such comparisons, even just to a Canon 100-400 (before the Tamron came along).
An important aspect - or problem - of the bridge cameras is the small sensor and the aperture (usually 5.6 or even less) at the long end. It means that diffraction is already well into affecting image quality no matter how good the bridge lens is. Rough calculations suggest that at f6.3 or so, a resolution limit of  ~ 2Mp is obtained for this sensor size. Thus a bridge camera is not as effective as the equivalent focal length would suggest.

uuuh, so more reasoning towards my (obviously G.A.S. driven) wanting a 150-600, grrreat  :), keep it comming  ;)

btw, since extenders work on the Tamron (well, the 1.4x obviously does), out of curiosity, did anybody try to push it with the 2x?

5
As promised, I took an SX-50 and a 60D with a Tamron 150-600 outside to see how they stacked up against each other for bird photography.


Don,

thank you very much!

looks like I might be able to talk myself into, and at least mildly justify the Tamron after all :)

then again, this was the 1200mm SX50, not the 2000mm SX60... so I will have to talk myself into the extender as well  :D
or realize that I really don't need the 600mm... but that wont happen ;)

btw, also thank you for testing another thing... I believe that I read somewhere, that the Tamron is not compatible with extenders... now, I realize that there wont be any AF, but it seems like it is working otherwise (at least with the 1,4x)

6
ok, 2000mm got my attention, but I don't know much about these cameras... so, a question to someone who does...

how would a picture from SX60 at 2000mm compare to lets say 6D + lets say Tamron 150-600 at 600mm, cropped to the same frame?

thank you
I would go shoot a comparison between the SX50 and the Tamron....... But we are having a snowstorm here and the visibility is quite poor...

What I can tell you is that the AF and speed of the SX50 is poor in comparison, but on the other hand, I can't tuck the Tamron into a coat pocket.....

thank you very much, that would be great... and I'll gladly wait for better weather  :)

7
ok, 2000mm got my attention, but I don't know much about these cameras... so, a question to someone who does...

how would a picture from SX60 at 2000mm compare to lets say 6D + lets say Tamron 150-600 at 600mm, cropped to the same frame?

thank you

Look a few posts up.

yes, I have seen that, thank you,

however, as somebody already pointed out, 400*1,4*1,6 is not 1200, also, I think at this point we are talking about an MF only combo, with crop sensor at who knows what ISO (its f11 and 1/1000s)...

but I also understand that I asked about a camera, that is in the rumor stage, so never mind  ;)

basically though, for a moment it seemed here, that there is no reason for a big white lens (or, to be honest, for me to buy the Tamron 150-600 for my 6D), when you can have 2000mm with IS and AF in pocket size, and that just doesn't sound right, or?

so what is it (and again, I'm sorry if its a stupid question, but I don't know much about superzooms) that's the trade off, slow AF, ISO...?
And if so, than in good light, with stationary subjects... will the SX beat the cropped picture from an FF DSLR with a 600mm lens, or are the small lenses and small sensors not that good?

8
ok, 2000mm got my attention, but I don't know much about these cameras... so, a question to someone who does...

how would a picture from SX60 at 2000mm compare to lets say 6D + lets say Tamron 150-600 at 600mm, cropped to the same frame?

thank you

9
Thanks for sharing!

reminded me that I got stuck a bit in one shot and I wasn't really aware of the "servo allows shutter release before AF has locked on" part

10
Street & City / Re: Voyeurism
« on: March 14, 2014, 03:32:14 PM »
some really nice and interesting pictures  :)

I got my 135L last September while on vacation in NY and in the evening I was walking through Times square with it. Originaly just some test shots and my first small street photo attempt turned into one of my best and most interesting photo experiences, I got some pictures I really like, and the lens even surpassed my expectations, I really like it (and CR made me look at it more in the first place, so thanks guys for that  ;) ).

11
Landscape / Re: Ugly landscapes
« on: March 11, 2014, 06:09:50 PM »
seems that "ugly landscape" brings up the subject of a factory in many minds... I'll join the club, since it reminded me of an old photo I took at a gas station stop, using my car as tripod to allow longer exposure

the other one is an abandoned tennis court and it was also taken some years ago, both with 350D  :)


12
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Daylight Savings Time
« on: March 09, 2014, 04:04:01 PM »
No! I did not. But feel free to ask March 30th again ;D

+1

same here  ;)

13
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Eos 6D & GPS is just Great!
« on: March 09, 2014, 03:59:43 PM »
ye, I use wifi every now and then, but not really gps... I think I should give it a proper go (after more than a year with 6D  ::) )

btw, since they gave it the GPS (and I'm sure I'm not the first to mention it here) I think it would be cool to include a compass, to see what direction was the camera aimed at...

or, (maybe) take it to a higher level: GPS + compass + orientation sensor + inclinometer (or how its called) + focal lens info + focus distance... could end up in subject location... or?

(though I'm not sure about focus at infinity, MF lenses etc... so no, I haven't thought it through  ;) just came across the idea... hmm, where is the closest patent office  ;D )

14
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: March 09, 2014, 05:00:53 AM »
Pacu Jawi Bull Run, near Padang Sumatra Indonesia, yesterday.

1Dx 200-400f/4, shot @ 200mm f/8, 1/800th ISO 1000

Incredible day.

wow, reminded me of Hemingway's quote that goes something like this "There are only three true sports - bullfighting, mountain climbing, and motorsports. The rest are merely games."

However, given how I sometimes worry about my gear, shooting with expensive stuff like 1Dx & 200-400f/4, D4 & 800f/5.6... in Sumatran mud and water, with bulls running around... must be an adrenaline sport on its own ;)

15
Landscape / Re: Critique - Waterfall Shot
« on: March 02, 2014, 04:01:23 PM »
Well, I'm no professional, but I like it  :) and can't come up with anything really wrong with it, so I'm curious whether others will agree, or what will they come up with that I missed (the only thing that I can imagine somebody might like is a bit more context/environment... so a wider crop).

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9