October 21, 2014, 12:18:31 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.


Topics - heptagon

Pages: [1]
1
Hello dear photographers,

who has experience with at least two of the lenses Canon 24-105 f/4 L IS, Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 IS, Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L II? I'm particularly interested in how well they perform for specific applications. Which one did you pick after comparing and why?

The Canon 24-105 f/4 L IS and Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 IS have about the same resolution. Do they perform similar in practice or do you prefer one over the other for some reasons. When do you actually use f/2.8?

The Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L II clearly is the sharpest of those lenses but it lacks IS which makes me believe that hand-held it may be impossible to obtain this resolution and the IS lens actually may win.

At 70mm f/8 all lenses look very similar:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=787&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=4&LensComp=786&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=1&FLIComp=3&APIComp=4

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=355&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=3&LensComp=786&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=1&FLIComp=3&APIComp=4

This makes me believe that they all are "good enough" for Studio settings when shallow DoF isn't required.


In contrast the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L II clearly loses to the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II at 70mm f/2.8:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=787&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

So for shallow DoF portraits it wouldn't even be a second choice (135 prime would be the first) but still costs double of the other lenses. If you got the 24-60 L II, what was the reason to justify the extra cost?

Thanks for sharing your experience,
Heptagon

2
Lenses / Quality control issues with the 24-70 L II?
« on: September 19, 2012, 02:16:16 PM »
These two lenses should look exactly the same:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=787&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=787&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=1&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

At the short end one is better, at the long end the other. But why? They should both look best for all focal lengths and never have passed the quality control.

Maybe the optical design has such low tolerances that Canon can't make it work properly and this was the reason for the long delays.

3
EOS Bodies / Techradar: 12 EV dynamic range for 650D
« on: July 09, 2012, 06:16:42 PM »
I just found this article comparing the Canon 650D, 600D, Nikon D5100 and Sony Alpha 37:
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/cameras-and-camcorders/cameras/digital-slrs-hybrids/canon-650d-1083870/review?artc_pg=5

If you look at the lower graph, the dynamic range of the 650D looks a lot like the Nikon counterpart with only a gap of 1EV. However i'd wait for independent confirmation of the results and for techradar to recheck their data because the labelling for the 600D is wrong (pink curve is also labelled 650D) and it seems that the 600D has the JPEG curve in the TIFF result. So we wait for the techradar people to sober up and redo the graphs.

On DxOMark the 600D scored 11EV and the Nikon D5100 scored 13EV at ISO100 screen resolution. If the 12EV figure is true that would be a modest step forward.

4
EOS Bodies / T4i/650D RAW samples
« on: June 25, 2012, 06:07:47 PM »
Over there at imaging resource they shot a lot of sample test images with the T4i and provide CR2 RAW images for download: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-t4i/canon-t4iA7.HTM

Pages: [1]