March 04, 2015, 05:44:11 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 - nomad85

Pages: [1] 2
Lenses / Re: DxO Review of the Tamron 150-600mm f5-6.3 Di VC USD Canon
« on: February 12, 2014, 02:07:15 PM »
If you want reviews that cover more on the practical side, while keeping true to testing objectively, I would recommend . They include AF accuracy and speed, and provide their own opinion when needed. (but alas they have not yet tested the Tamron).

Lenses / Re: Would you sell a 500mm f/4 IS for a 300mm 2.8?
« on: August 29, 2013, 07:17:43 AM »
I agree with above that the switch makes sense, but to keep IQ top notch, I would opt for an 1.4 TC extra.
The 300with 1.4TC gives 420mm, not quite the 500mm, but is a really good combi with the 300 if you look at IQ.

The 2.0 TC works good with the 300, but a 2TC by design will kill some of your IQ.....the 1.4 is less harsh on IQ.

I rather have a razor sharp 420mm, like I am used to having with the 70-200 2.8 IS II and 300 2.8, then a 600mm 5.6 that's OK, but not quite like the others.

Lenses / Re: Need your opinions on selling my 50L and 24/70L
« on: March 25, 2013, 11:35:59 AM »

The difference between version 1 and 2 of the 24-70 is not a life changing difference I believe. A shot that is properly focussed and lighted will be perfectly usable with both lenses.
There is far more improvement to be made on other aspects of photography. For instance lighting, or the decor you photograph in, clothing of a model, time of day etc etc.

Let me phrase it differently. You most be really good indeed that changing from the mark I to the mark II is the biggest improvement you can make to your photography.

Amongst other lenses I have the 24-70L, 35 1.4, 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 (Sigma) and of these lenses my 24-70 is the least sharp (makes sense, the only zoom lens). But everytime I take a lens out of the bag and choose what I want for the next shot, it is not the sharpness I worry about.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark III and green RAw!!!
« on: March 07, 2013, 05:43:58 PM »
I've had this sort of thing happen a few times on my 5D2.  I think I might have had it once on my 5D3, too.  From what I recall mine were always really blue.  It's not a white balance issue at's an error in the camera.  I would be shooting a series of shots and the middle one would randomly come out with nothing but blue, like not all of the color channels weren't recorded.  I've heard other people report it as memory errors, but nothing really definitive.  Conversion to B&W usually did produce acceptable results, too.  I'll did through my library and see if I can find a sample to post.

Same here, 200 normal photo's then one extremely green, like no other channel has recorded anything. The first few green shots I didnt give a second look, just gave up on them.
A few days ago I had a green photo that I wanted to use and opened him anyway in photoshop. Where I noticed that in my case it was just a WB + tint problem on that photo. Opening the older green photo's and I noticed they all had the WB + tint problem. 2000k WB with -150 Tint.
So in my case the photo's were not corrupt.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark III and green RAw!!!
« on: March 06, 2013, 05:21:21 PM »
I had exactly the same problem. On closer inspection whitebalance was saved wrong inside the whitebalance.
Instead of 6300k and 0 tint, it had 2000k and -150 tint (lightroom). The photo itself was not destroyed, and could be corrected. Scared me good, but ended just fine :)

I do not recognize all the bad stories about Dell. As I said, I have 3 Dell screens and all work well.
There is a reason why millions of people, including photographers use the screens. Read the reviews, almost all are quite positive about the pro line of Dell.
Just because 3 or 4 people here like to polarise their story and make Dell sound awful doesn't mean that is the truth. Just as what I say does not automatically mean it's true. Read the better reviews online and check the monitor for yourself.

Like i said, I have 2x U2711 and both work quite well here and am glad I bought them.

I have 3 Dell monitors here and all are highly appreciated :). The U2711's are my main monitors, which I have 2 of next to eachother on my desk. The U2412m is my secondary screen where menu's etc are placed.

I am a fulltime photographer and really like the 2711's and when working on photo's for print etc it's really good. But some of the work I deliver is digital only to consumers and that's where it goes wrong. I like my photo's light and fresh and I push that in my workflow. On my calibrated screens I have no blown out whites and really like the photo's. On the clients laptop / crappy screen with no wide-gamut the photo's are to white and have blown out colors.

My solution is placing de U2412m in sRGB mode and since it has no wide-gamut I use that screen to "proof" what the client will see.

But all in all, I think you should get the U2711 or U2713 screen, the resolution and the quality allows you to work well in photoshop and lightroom.

Lenses / Re: New lenses for 46mp camera?
« on: December 24, 2012, 04:23:46 AM »
can't imagine i'd ever need 46mp.. so i'd stick to what i have anyway..

I bet you couldn't imagine that you needed 12mp about 10 years ago. The worlds changing buddy, get on the train and hold on tight, or be left behind :P

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions
« on: November 30, 2012, 06:10:51 PM »

- Sigma colors are present in this lens as well, so a bit of a yellowcast. The 35L has more red/blue coloring and gave the photo's more spark/vivid/positive feel to it. The yellowcast from the Sigma is not perse my favorite. Though it bothers me little and goes away in postprocessing in a flash :)

Awesome. Thanks for the review!

With regard to the "yellowcast" are we talking a white balance type of cast, or something a bit more complex?

 I always shoot RAW, so if it were a mere whitebalance problem I would hardly notice it, because whitebalance is the first thing I do in post processing. It is as you "a bit more complex". But still well able to be corrected.
The cast is definitely not a show-stopper to get this lens btw and I don't see it in all the photos.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions
« on: November 29, 2012, 11:02:26 AM »
My impression is quite good regarding the Sigma 35 and the combination with the 5d3.
Focussing is accurate in all the shots I have taken so far. Which I can not say of the 50 1.4 Sigma, which has a bigger rate of unsharp photo's.
The 85mm 1.4 from Sigma is very precise as well regarding focussing, so it seems the 35mm might have the same bit of software/hardware for focussing as the 85mm.

So far there are a bunch of things that I really noticed with the 35mm from Sigma:

- It's very sharp, from 1.4 onward. No need to stop down for sharpness.
- Build quality is very good, better then anything I know from Sigma and on par with Canon 35mm 1.4.
- Even the front and back cap are new and have a better construction
- Lens does not need AFMA and is sharp straight out of box

- Sigma colors are present in this lens as well, so a bit of a yellowcast. The 35L has more red/blue coloring and gave the photo's more spark/vivid/positive feel to it. The yellowcast from the Sigma is not perse my favorite. Though it bothers me little and goes away in postprocessing in a flash :)
- Focussingring is nicely damped and smooth, but has to much friction to be operated easily with one finger. The 35L has an easier focusring to turn and can be used with one finger (as I always like to do).
- Focussing speed is about the same as the 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 from Sigma that I also have. The 35L is a wee bit faster focussing, but not by much. Next to eachother, you notice the difference, but they are both fast enough for wedding/action/walking/sprinting.

So far I really like the 35 1.4, what I notice most of all is the sharpness at 1.4 already and that is unseen with the 1.4 Canon 35mm.
If they were both exactly equal pricing, the Canon and the Sigma, I might go with the Canon, due to the colors.
But since there is a 400 euro difference, I believe I have made the right choice to go with the Sigma tool.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions
« on: November 29, 2012, 08:10:36 AM »
I recall from the 5D III manual that third party lenses are not able to use as many of the focus points as Canon's.  For lenses like this one, whose optical performance and focusing speed seem to be on par with Canon's, is that the only downside?

Have the 5d3 and 35mm 1.4 Sigma and can use all the AF points like my L 2.8 glass can on the camera. All 45 cross and 61 points are usable.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions
« on: November 29, 2012, 05:31:55 AM »
If there is such thing as a Sigma holy trinity, I have it :P.
The Sigma 35 1.4 , 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 are all in my bag. The 35mm I got yesterday and the 85mm not long before that as well. So both are new to me.

If there are any questions, my english is just fine, so ask away :). I work with the 5d3.

Lenses / Re: Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS vs Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS II
« on: October 19, 2012, 06:49:59 AM »
I'm a wedding photographer mostly (and studio photography). I have the 5d series (classic, II and III) and use the 70-200 2.8 IS I, which I bought after the announcement of the version II. Why go for the version I, cause it saved me over 1000 euro's and all shots with the 70-200 version I are sharp enough for a 20x30inch print.

The version II is definitely better, but the version I is always good enough for a large print. My clients will never see the difference if I buy a version II, so I invested the 1000 euro's in other glass, which I can use in pictures my clients will see the difference of (in my case the 35 1.4).

Getting the best is great, if funds are unlimited. Since mine are not, I rather invest smart and get the stuff my clients will notice in their shots.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MK2 or MK3 for Manual Focus?
« on: October 07, 2012, 08:35:13 AM »
5d3 has confirmation on all AF points. So you choose a point and he will help you on that AF point for confirmation, just as you would hope it works.

I have all 5d's (I, II and III) and before I had de 5d3 is wasn't using manual focus lenses, but since the 5d3 I find it doable to use. I still prefere AF, but that is just me. The 5d3 is quite good with his focus confirmation, 10 times better then 5d2 focus confirmation.

whether that is enough to justify the extra 1000 dollars of money....I'm not so sure. For some it might be a dealbreaker, but I think a 1000 dollars could get me a pretty extra lens to use on a 5d2 :)

Software & Accessories / Re: BG-E11 weight
« on: October 07, 2012, 08:30:45 AM »
I suggest to purchase some really bulky lenses. This may provide enough weight training to be able to lug around gripped bodies without discomfort.  ;D

Something else to consider altogether... Inertia!
One of the 'benefits' of having so much mass - is that mass requires more force to move - and so you now have the  potential 'benefit' associated with a steadycam - without the investment requirement.

Less camera shake - except when you have severe muscle fatigue from holding the kit - and then you shaking hand may be stabilised by the increased mass of the camera/lens combo.  ;)

I'll tie a bowlingball to your camera and you tell me how that works out for you :P

I agree with the startpost, the 5d3 with grip and 24-70 with 580ex is just to heavy. I'm not a small man, but my wrist definitely are sore after a hard days work.

So I ordered a 35 1.4 lens this week (already had a 50 1.4 Sigma and 85 1.4 Sigma), so I'm gonna try working without the 24-70 and without the grip and work with primes more.
I normally work with one body (5d3), but im gonna try to work with 2 now, both combined with a prime (35 and 85). If that works for me, maybe both the grip and de 24-70 will be sold.

Pages: [1] 2