February 28, 2015, 02:13:56 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 - LOALTD

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
It was good to see some data on the Tamron, after seeing the ISO crops on TDP.  I'm surprised that the Tamron 15-30 can not categorically beat the much-maligned 16-35 f/2.8 II.  The TDP results showed weak corners on the Tamron and LR confirms it.  Would have loved to see the 16-35 f/4 IS in the same dataset though, even if it is not a f/2.8 lens...

I don't believe in TDP results. Look at my sample pictures:

Canon 16-35 2.8 II at 2.8:
http://www.kubacichocki.pl/test/tamron1530/can16.jpg
http://www.kubacichocki.pl/test/tamron1530/brzeg_canon.jpg (focus on the top of the frame)
http://www.kubacichocki.pl/test/tamron1530/corner_canon.jpg (focus on Tamron box)

Tamron 15-30 2.8 VC at 2.8:
http://www.kubacichocki.pl/test/tamron1530/tam15.jpg
http://www.kubacichocki.pl/test/tamron1530/brzeg_tamron.jpg
http://www.kubacichocki.pl/test/tamron1530/corner_tamron.jpg

And a lot of my sample pictures from Tamron 15-30 (full size):
http://www.canon-board.info/testy-sprzetu-25/recenzja-tamron-15-30-2-8-vc-usd-99121/


WOW, not even close!  Thanks so much for posting.  Classic smudgey Canon 16-35 f/2.8 corners.

2
Landscape / Re: Landscape paradise: Colorado vs. Pacific Northwest
« on: February 24, 2015, 09:12:12 PM »
No worries, happy to help!  Feel free to PM me if you have any questions, I love that part of the country, and will probably move back there eventually.


Some other destinations, farther out from Portland, all to the south:


Smith Rock State Park (3hrs): lots of easy hiking, and TONS of rock climbers to take photos of.  This place looks every different than most people's vision of "Oregon" in their head.  Lots of orange and yellow rock, arid, more like Arizona or Utah than the wet forests people usually associate with the NW.


Painted Hills (1.5 hrs from Smith Rock): again, more Oregon High Dessert stuff, multicolored huge piles of sand, very surreal.  Google it.


Bend, OR (3.5hrs): Great little town in eastern Oregon high desert.  Recently one-upp'd Portland for most breweries per capita of any city in the world!  You can clearly see the "Three Sisters", three 10,000ft volcanoes from the Bend area.  Lots of hikes up in them as well.


Crater Lake, OR (1.5 hrs from Bend, 5 hrs from Portland): only national park in Oregon.  Bluest water you will probably ever seen.  The lake is at 7,000 ft above sea level, so there is still a ton of snow up there, even well into summer.

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Skipping the 5D-s. What do you want in 5D4?
« on: February 12, 2015, 03:19:27 PM »
Here’s my overly-ambitious list.  Yes, I realize almost none of these are going to happen.  I’ve been a Canon shooter for 6 years now; I’ve learned to keep my expectations in-check.  (read: low)
 
In order of importance:
1.    14 stops DR.
Doubt it.
2.    4k video or 1080p RAW or at least 1080p with a much beefier codec. 
I think 4k is possible, but I’m not getting my hopes up.  I shoot and love RAW 1080p with Magic Lantern right now…hopefully they won’t make the Mk III un-Magic Lantern-able. I doubt they would give us RAW video built-in.  As not even their cinema cameras (which have robbed the Mk III of good video features) can do this.  I want 4k because it would allow me to down-res and get very-crispy 1080p.  I would also give me smaller file sizes than RAW 1080p does!
3.    1-stop better high ISO
I think we’ll get 1/3 stop better high iso in RAW.  Canon will likely talk about how much cleaner the .jpg’s are and only give us drastic differences on that front.
4.    Flip screen
So handy for both video and for low-to-the-ground landscape/tripod shots.  Canon doesn’t seem to want to put these on any of their higher-end cameras though.
5.    Touch screen
I never thought I’d care much for this feature, but since getting an EOS-M I now find myself unconsciously trying to touch the screen on my Mk III!
6.    WiFi
It would be nice to have just to be able to transfer files to/from a computer without having to use a card-reader.  One less piece of gear to remember.  I’ve forgotten a CF reader in the past and been royally hosed by it!
 
Random crap I’ve always wanted but may never get: 
Backlit buttons: cars have had this for…what? 30 years?  Why don’t any Canon DSLRs have backlit buttons for use in the dark?  Couldn’t they at least make them glow in the dark?
 
 
 
Things I don’t care about:
Burst rate: current is more than adequate for my needs
AF system: see above
Megapixels: do whatever you need to do to get the DR up and the noise down!  As long as it has more resolution than my cellphone, I do not care!
GPS: I do a lot of mountaineer and you’d think I would love this feature but, I bought the add-on GPS unit and I rarely use it.  Maybe I would if it were built-in?

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Skipping the 5D-s. What do you want in 5D4?
« on: February 11, 2015, 03:54:44 PM »
I don’t need dual CF slots, just make the SD card slot FAST!

The most ridiculous flaw of the Mk III is that the slooooow SD card slot bottlenecks the entire camera when you have an SD card installed…which defeats the whole purpose of having two slots.

Looks like they finally fixed this on the 5DS.  They market it as a feature, but it should’ve never been an issue from the start.  Lazy, lazy engineering.

I actually prefer having an SD card slot as well because those cards are easier to find in a bind when you’re in the middle of nowhere with only access to a maybe a Walgreens or a gas station (this happened to me once, sucked!).  Try finding CF cards at gas stations.  It’s also easier to find readers for SD cards, and many laptops have the readers built-in.

5
Lenses / Re: Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art announced..
« on: February 11, 2015, 03:47:30 PM »
Just to echo what others have said: for me, the way this lens handles coma is going to be the determining factor in a possible purchase!  I’ve rented the Canon 24/1.4 II numerous times, I love it, very sharp, great all-around rendering.  But…the coma while shooting stars is simply too out-of-control.  Shards of glass/bats in the corners, makes it a real deal breaker for nightscape (which is one of my favorite things to shoot).

For now I’ll be content with my 28/2.8 IS (for day) and Samyang 14/2.8 (for night).  Having a 24/1.4 sure would be nice though  8)

6
Lenses / Re: Who is going to buy the 11-24 f/4L?
« on: February 04, 2015, 07:58:37 PM »
Word on the street is $3,000.

7
Landscape / Re: Landscape paradise: Colorado vs. Pacific Northwest
« on: February 04, 2015, 07:11:23 PM »
Freddie, dburchfield, and LOALTD,

Thanks for posting such stunning images. I might have to check out the Pacific Northwest first, then Colorado :) This probably gets asked a million times, but what are the pros and cons of the Portland area vs. Seattle for this type of trip? It seems like the weather might be better in Portland?

Haha, oh man, it probably has, but it’s no less controversial!

Just to get my bias out of the way: I lived in Portland for 5 years.

There is a lot of Seattle vs Portland nonsense in the NW.  As far as which one to make your base of operations?  That really depends on what you want to shoot most and what your travel style is.

Personally, I’d probably try to wing it and just get places to stay as I shot.  I’m not much of a planner though, and I’m very much a seat-of-your-pants style traveler.

It’s definitely much easier to find cheap places to stay in Portland, that is for sure.

People from Portland will exaggerate how much better the weather is there, but really, it’s pretty much a wash.  In the summer (July-Sep is what is often considered the summer in the NW) they both have incredible weather.  70’s and sunny just about every day.  As you move further away from this window, you chance of overcast skies and drizzle increases.  Seattle is slightly colder and slightly more drizzly, but not enough to really notice.  If it’s overcast in one city, it’s very likely overcast in the other!

Depending on where in it you go, the Columbia River Gorge is 20min-1hr from Portland.  Mt Hood is about 1hr 20 min from Portland.  My old climbing club has a lodge on Mt Hood that is VERY cheap (about $22/night), you can stay right on the mountain for next to nothing.  You’ll be sleeping in a bunk with other people though, it’s very much like a hostel.  Hood River is a very fun/party town in the Gorge that’s about 30-40 min from Mt Hood as well. If you like breweries, there are a lot of great ones there.  (most well-known would be Full Sail, best ones to check out in town would be Double Mountain and Pfriem)

There is some incredible stuff in Washington though: Mt Rainier, North Cascades National Park, Palouse Falls, the Palouse wheat fields, Olympic National Park (only temperate rainforest in lower 48), Washington Coast (much better than Oregon coast, don’t tell anyone I told you that!).  I also think Seattle is probably one of the most gorgeous cities I’ve ever been to in the states.

In my opinion, Washington’s scenery is even more incredible than Oregon’s, but you have to work much harder to see it.  Long drives and in some cases, long hikes.

If you had a limited amount of time, Portland would be a better call.  If you had over a week, I might start considering Washington. 

If you plan on constantly running-and-gunning, you could probably see a ton of both in a week.

Clear as mud?

8
Lenses / Re: Who is going to buy the 11-24 f/4L?
« on: February 04, 2015, 06:36:32 PM »
MTF charts will lead the way  ;)

Current 16-35 f4 IS is good, but 11mm uhmm ::)... ;D


I came really close to picking up the 16-35 f/4 IS, rented it once, outstanding lens! 

Glad I held off though.

It’s weird to see Canon focusing on wides (finally), has hell frozen over?

10
Landscape / Re: Please share your snow/ Ice Photos with us in CR.
« on: February 04, 2015, 06:23:45 PM »
Moose's Tooth, Alaska, January 19th

11
Lenses / Re: Who is going to buy the 11-24 f/4L?
« on: February 04, 2015, 06:12:13 PM »
I don't know about buying, but I will certainly be renting!

Very interested to see what the optics on this are like.

I haven’t been a fan of many things Canon has been doing lately, but this lens does excite me.  Doing something DIFFERENT from everyone else.  Canon has been too “me too” lately.

The price does make me sad.  But maybe with some saving and/or 0% financing, I could make it worth.

I would love to shoot the Aurora Borealis at 11mm as well as take some crazy first-person climbing/summit videos!

If I owned this, I would probably be that annoying guy constantly saying things like “this one goes to 11.”

12
Lenses / Re: New 50mm & 70-300mm Coming Soon? [CR2]
« on: February 03, 2015, 05:50:58 PM »
Why is everyone insisting this is slower than f/1.4?

24mm f/2.8 replaced by 24mm f/2.8 IS
28mm f/2.8 replaced by 28mm f/2.8 IS
35mm f/2.0 replaced by 35mm f/2.0 IS

Now.

50mm f/1.4 replaced by 50mm f/2.0 IS?  Really?  Why?  That would be a boring optic.  Less wide than the 35mm and not any faster, boring.

13
Reviews / Re: Review: Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/15mm
« on: January 27, 2015, 10:20:02 PM »
"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. 

14
Landscape / Re: Landscape paradise: Colorado vs. Pacific Northwest
« on: January 27, 2015, 10:09:51 PM »
Having lived in the PacNW and visited Colorado many times...

I'd say PacNW for landscape.

Colorado for animals. (you really can't go wrong with the landscape here either though)

I have no idea why, but I did extensive mountaineering, hiking, and backpacking in the PacNW and rarely saw wildlife.  I've only been to Colorado a handful of times and it seems like I'm always seeing tons of critters, even from the road.

I live in Alaska now, it has them both :)

15
EOS Bodies / Re: what is the body you want to see canon release next ?
« on: November 21, 2014, 01:52:26 PM »
5D MkIV

14 stops dynamic range: probably won't happen though.

2/3 to 1-stop increase in high ISO performance: see above

4k is a MUST, preferably with an h.265-based codec.  Smartphones are now capable of decoding this, and in early 2015 they'll be able to ENCODE it as well.  What's your excuse going to be, Canon?

Ability to shoot video in CROP modes.

A FULL-SPEED SD slot (or two CF slots).  It's a shame I even have to ask for this, but SD is so neutered on the Mk III.

Magic Lantern features built-in: intervolometer in particular.  RAW 1080p would be nice, but it will probably never happen.

Built-in WiFi.

Dual-pixel AF: probably the only thing on my wish list that is a sure-thing.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10