January 29, 2015, 01:39:25 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 - TWI by Dustin Abbott

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 114
1
Reviews / Re: Review: Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/15mm
« on: January 28, 2015, 10:14:00 AM »
Here's an image I made a while back with the Zeiss 15 of the Conrad Hotel in Miami. While it's used mostly for interiors, the lens offers a cool perspective for architectural exteriors as well.

This is a very cool shot!

2
Reviews / Re: Review: Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/15mm
« on: January 28, 2015, 10:13:38 AM »
Great review Dustin. As an owner of one of these beauties, they can also make for interesting portraits.
5D3 @ 1/25 f3.5 and real close :)



I like this - quirky and fun.  WA distortion is fun to play with in creative ways - you just have to have subjects that don't take themselves too seriously.  Knowing the lens as I do I would say that you were VERY close for this picture!

3
Reviews / Re: Review: Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/15mm
« on: January 28, 2015, 10:10:16 AM »
"The Zeiss resolves strongly throughout the frame, and that resolution is further boosted by a quality that I rarely see equalled by non-Zeiss lenses, and that is microcontrast. When I use that term I refer not only to the global contrast of any particular image but also to the unique quality of strong contrast in the fine details. It aids the appearance of resolution because images do not have any of the “haze” that makes them appear softer. This really helps images from Zeiss lenses like this one have a nice three dimensional quality.  Head to head comparisons consistently show that Zeiss lenses have better contrast than just about any of their competitors (including the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8), which simply means that details resolve more crisply."

Can we see some of these head to head comparisons?

I've heard many people throw around the term "micro contrast", but I've never seen anyone back it up with actual examples.

Matt Granger does just that with the Zeiss 15 vs. the Nikon 14-24mm here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toqo-_q2WPg&spfreload=10

I compare the microcontrast with the Zeiss Sonnar T* 2/135mm vs. the Canon 135L (the results are amazing, by the way.):  http://dustinabbott.net/2014/07/zeiss-apo-sonnar-t-2135mm-ze-review-2/

4
Reviews / Re: Review: Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/15mm
« on: January 27, 2015, 01:50:44 PM »
Would you rather  ().  I know two very different lenses, but Dustin has recent reviews of both. With a limited budget, would you prefer either the $3K Zeiss 15mm or the 4K Otus 85mm lens to be in your kit?

If you want my opinion, I would go Otus every time.  The 15mm is amazing, but I can produce reasonably similar images with something like the Rokinon/Samyang 14mm (now the build and handling are a whole other story!), but I haven't used any lens (other than maybe that Zeiss Sonnar T* 2/135) that comes close to the amazing resolution, contrast, and general usefulness of the Otus 85.  I would be willing to release a number of other lenses in my kit to get it.

5
Reviews / Re: Review: Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/15mm
« on: January 27, 2015, 10:20:34 AM »
I'd hesitate to drop this kind of coin on this focal length - I find the 15mm is often not wide enough. At a similar price point, the rumored 11-24/4 I could justify.

Ok that's my only excuse, in reality, I'm drooling over this lens.

That's interesting, because I have a 14mm lens and I can't imagine wanting a wider focal length than that.  I have a 12mm crop sensor lens (about 19mm equiv), and it is actually a very nice landscape focal length.  Composition would become really difficult at 11mm, and you would literally have to watch out for your feet getting into all your photos.

For architecture 14mm often falls short. This image is with the 14mm 2.8 II, leaving out part of the house on left, glass railing and beach cabana plus environment on right. 11mm may be a bit extreme, but a rectilinear 12mm would have captured everything I wanted. It sounds like we're splitting hairs over a mm or two, but at those widths 1mm makes a difference between getting an architectural feature in the shot or cropping it out. Also, it's not always a case of having your back up against a wall, but using focal width to push features apart, opening ceiling/floor details etc.

Cheers.

Love the tones here, BTW.  Oh, I'm not saying there is no application for a ultrawide lens (and you are right, 1mm makes a big difference in angle of view at these focal lengths).  I think many users need 11mm about as much as they need 50+ MP  ;D

Many people don't even use a 14 or 15mm well, so going even wider is NOT going to improve their work!

6
Reviews / Re: Review: Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/15mm
« on: January 27, 2015, 08:17:07 AM »
I'd hesitate to drop this kind of coin on this focal length - I find the 15mm is often not wide enough. At a similar price point, the rumored 11-24/4 I could justify.

Ok that's my only excuse, in reality, I'm drooling over this lens.

That's interesting, because I have a 14mm lens and I can't imagine wanting a wider focal length than that.  I have a 12mm crop sensor lens (about 19mm equiv), and it is actually a very nice landscape focal length.  Composition would become really difficult at 11mm, and you would literally have to watch out for your feet getting into all your photos.

7
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: New 6D and M42 lenses capability.
« on: January 26, 2015, 12:03:39 PM »
Just to add more confusion: I have a copy of that same lens (SMC Takumar 3.5/28) and the mirror *does* hang on my 6D. Not only that, but it does hang quite a bit, or in other words, it does take a fairly significant amount of rotating away from infinity to free the mirror.

And while I'm at it, I might as well add more info about other m42 lenses I have.

I found the following lenses to cause the mirror to hang on my 6D at infinity:
- SMC Takumar 3.5/28mm
- Super Takumar 3.5/35mm
- Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 2.8/50mm

On the other hand, the following cause no hanging whatsoever:
- Meyer Optik Oreston 1.8/50mm
- Super Takumar 1.8/55mm
- Helios 44-2 2/58mm
- Super Takumar 1.9/85mm
- Avanar DC 2.8/135mm
- Tokina RMC 2.8/135mm (that one with CY mount, not m42)

It's almost absurd how much variation there is.  I love my Helios 44-2, but it DOES hang at infinity for me with multiple adapters.  Ditto for Super Tak or SMC Tak 50mm f/1.4, but I also have no issues with the SMC Tak 55mm f/1.8.  Typically none of the 85mm+ focal lengths cause any issue.  The Super Tak 35 is really bad on full frame, but I loved it when I shot crop and still like it on my EOS M.

8
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: New 6D and M42 lenses capability.
« on: January 24, 2015, 09:10:57 AM »
Hello Everyone!
Can i use PENTAX 28MM F/3.5 SUPER TAKUMAR M42 SCREW MOUNT MANUAL FOCUS LENS in this link:https://www.keh.com/243685/pentax-28mm-f-3-5-super-takumar-m42-screw-mount-manual-focus-lens-49
on my canon 6D??I don't know mirror hang issue?

I have SMC Tak 28mm f/3.5 and it works fine on my Canon 6D.  No hang.  It does vignette fairly heavily wide open, however.  It's actually a very cool lens on the 6D.

What is different between smc takumar and super takumar.I had ordered super takumar,and some people warn me it will hang mirror.  :'( :'(
BTW,Thanks you because your reply

I don't know if there is any physical difference.  The SMC refers to the coating (Super Multi Coated), not necessarily a physical difference.  Just know that with many of these lenses the difference between hanging and not hanging is very slight.  Just the difference in the adapter could make all the difference.  All I can tell is that my copy does not hang at all.

9
Videography Technique / Re: Good Wireless Lavalier Mics and Set Up
« on: January 24, 2015, 09:09:15 AM »
There is a brand new system from Rode that looks to be exactly what you are looking for.  It's also worth a look.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1115091-REG/rode_rodlnk_fm_rodelink_wireless_filmmaker_kit.html/BI/19614/KBID/12112/kw/RORODLNKFM/DFF/d10-v2-t1-xRORODLNKFM

10
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: New 6D and M42 lenses capability.
« on: January 23, 2015, 11:12:52 AM »
Hello Everyone!
Can i use PENTAX 28MM F/3.5 SUPER TAKUMAR M42 SCREW MOUNT MANUAL FOCUS LENS in this link:https://www.keh.com/243685/pentax-28mm-f-3-5-super-takumar-m42-screw-mount-manual-focus-lens-49
on my canon 6D??I don't know mirror hang issue?

I have SMC Tak 28mm f/3.5 and it works fine on my Canon 6D.  No hang.  It does vignette fairly heavily wide open, however.  It's actually a very cool lens on the 6D.

11
Preorders now at http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/0/Ntt/Tamron+15-30mm/N/0/BI/19614/KBID/12112 for $1199, which strikes me as a pretty amazing price.  I will have one for review purposes first week of Feb, and my hope is that this is our chance to have a lens like Nikons 14-24mm.

I may soon have a holy trinity of Tamron zooms - I own and love the 24-70VC and 70-200 VC lenses.

12
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG Art
« on: January 21, 2015, 10:43:12 AM »

4. I think Dustin Abbott does great reviews. I have complemented him on every review he has done...but ...on this one...it was extremely short and based on all of his other reviews he has done I think this one was half-hearted.  No harm... no foul...I just think that to avoid all the controversy regarding this lens's AF etc. and to touch on the attributes...he decided to stick his foot in the water and then just get out. That's OK..this lens is complicated on many levels.


This review is made by Justin VanLeeuwen and not by Dustin Abbott (whose reviews are on his own blog)

Best

Whoa...thanks for correcting me!...I will fix that...no wonder I thought I was different! DUH

Dustin...Justin... what's confusing about that ;D

13
Landscape / Re: Please share your snow/ Ice Photos with us in CR.
« on: January 21, 2015, 10:22:56 AM »
In the spirit of the post above, here are ice crystals forming out on a frozen pond.

The Formation of Winter by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

14
Reviews / Re: Review of the Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/50 ZE
« on: January 20, 2015, 11:45:14 AM »
WOW - I have to say it Dustin, you really disappointed me with this review.

Do you realize the that the throw from infinity to 1 foot is just a smidge over 3/4inches?
Aren't you aware that a common trait, welcomed and desired in macro lenses (even half size as this one) in indeed the heavier focus dampening and long throw below 1 foot range, as precision focusing really matters?
Also, it's very common to see the a very narrow DOF in macro lenses, as it's common to have an above average sharpness.
Further more, almost no macro shooting occurs with a lens wide open- nor even if doing photo stacking.

I am surprised and shocked after reading other reviews from you, seeing you bluntly fail and commit such amateur, uninformed mistakes thru your comments.

Can't compare this lens to a canon 1.8 nor even the Otus 55 - It's a whole different league, and built for a special purpose...but can be used everyday.

You are certainly entitled to be disappointed with my review (BTW, Zeiss certainly isn't: https://www.facebook.com/carlzeisslenses/posts/937419462934961; https://twitter.com/CarlZeissLenses/status/557213223095894016), but I'm not sure where some of your points of view are coming from.

If you have used the lens, then you should recognize that the focus throw is very long.  As I point out, that's great for accuracy, not so great for speed.

The reason for the heavier damping that I give is directly from the president of Zeiss of the Americas.  I don't personally like the weight compared to all other Zeiss lenses I have used.

Of course the DOF is very narrow at macro distances...that's the whole reason I supply that information.  "That aperture advantage over the typical f/2.8 of most macro lenses is great for use in a variety of applications, but macro is really not one of them. DOF is only .08″/1.98mm at minimum focus distance and maximum aperture. That is TINY! Even at f/5.6 the DOF is only slightly over half a centimeter at the minimum focus distance." - The point here is that you AREN'T going to be using the lens at f/2 for macro purposes.

I don't think your particular criticisms here are valid.

15
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG Art
« on: January 20, 2015, 11:26:56 AM »
Nice review, Justin.  It's not a perfect lens, and it is too big, but it would still be my choice at the moment for a reasonably affordable 50mm prime.

I am still waiting for Canon to bring us an equivalent of the 35IS in a 50mm.  If it was similarly sized and performed similarly, it would be be my choice.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 114