July 23, 2014, 10:42:37 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 - YuengLinger

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: New lamp, what to buy?
« on: Today at 09:55:52 AM »
Mac I also like my Einsteins very much; could you please post those links? Thank you.

Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm Art 1.4 Focusing problems
« on: Today at 09:52:20 AM »
Based on seat of my pants calculations it seems like these lenses have a problem in about one out of three cases.  Does that seem fair?

No spray?  Shoot at a different time or place.

I hate those gnats.  They go right into my ears.


Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm Art 1.4 Focusing problems
« on: July 22, 2014, 07:38:51 AM »
All Sigma lenses have focusing problems! I had two of the a 24-700 and 70-200 last versions - I sent them to be calibrated with my body and then everything was ok.

This is FALSE.  I have two Sigma lenses that have had no focusing problems.  (I don't consider improving AF accuracy with in-camera AFMA to be part of a "problem.")

But the 50 Art that I received did have erratic, unreliable AF that could not be helped with AFMA.

So, if online chatter can lead to Sigma fixing the problem, we aren't helping by using sweeping, ranting statements such as "All Sigma lenses have focusing problems!"

Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm Art 1.4 Focusing problems
« on: July 22, 2014, 07:25:49 AM »
Dilbert, you are misunderstanding "inconsistency."

The 50 Art can be perfectly calibrated, yet still misses focus on too many shots. 

You get your AFMA perfect, then you get into a shooting situation, and one shot will be just right, then the next three will be terribly front or back focused.  I know--that is exactly why I sent mine back.

After trying for 10 days to get the 50 Art to function properly, I went back to using lenses that do work, such as the ef 85mm 1.2 L (so I know all about shallow DoF) and the ef 24-70mm 2.8 II L.  WHAT a FREAKING relief to have sharp, accurate, 95% successful AF!!!

Dilbert, do you understand now?  The 50 Art, for whatever reason, can be perfectly "tuned" to match a body, and still be all over the place.  If you happened to get a copy that does not exhibit such behavior, stop trying to tell others that there is some kind of user error or misunderstanding.

And, btw, I have a 35 Art that is almost as reliable with AF as my 24-70 (the best AF I've ever seen), and a Sigma 15mm 2.8 fisheye that is spectacular.  Those work.  I think I made a mistake buying the 50 Art before Sigma, using its customers as testers, figured out what is wrong with their production. 

As for the USB dock, it might make things worse for Sigma customers, because now there is this extra level of trouble-shooting Sigma tech support can use to delay actually finding out the true problems with their lenses.  Customer calls Sigma complaining about erratic AF, Sigma asks, "Have you used the dock?"  Customer buys dock, gets frustrated, return time to merchant has expired...Seems like it will cause more problems than it fixes FOR THOSE CUSTOMERs WHO KNOW HOW TO AFMA IN CAMERA. 

Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 18, 2014, 06:30:46 AM »
Asked and answered!   ;)

Lenses / Re: Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART questions
« on: July 17, 2014, 09:05:23 AM »
I bought my 35Art last October, and it had, I believe, the third generation of firmware.  It did need AFMA on my 5DIII, nothing extreme, but it is super accurate with AF and produces spectacular landscapes stopped down, and lovely close-up stuff with better bokeh than the ef 35mm 1.4 L that I sold.  Very little CA even wide open, solid build.  I love it.

But I'm no Sigma fan after being teased by the awesome IQ of the 50Art, only to be let down by erratic AF beyond five feet.

The 35Art spoiled me, and I'm in a hectic time now, so I did not want to pay another $60 for the USB dock, spend a lot of time working with it, and possibly find that the AF was still erratic (not just in need of calibration).

So...Before I got the 50Art, I would have gushed about Sigma.  Now I just scratch my head.

Funny, Viggo, you mention the 85L, because I was just telling a friend that the 50Art had the best bokeh under 100mm I've seen on any lens EXCEPT the 85L II.  I know, the 85 has clunky AF, but for portrait stuff, it truly excels.  Also, I've had minimal issues with CA, and I'm usually shooting between f/1.2 and f/2.2.  But I do control my backgrounds for portraits, don't play much with lens flare or include metallic surfaces or reflections on water with the portraits.)  Not good for much else, but I still think it is the best at what it does.  (But I did give up fast on the 50Art.)

Lenses / Re: What Lenses are missing from Canon's range
« on: July 16, 2014, 01:33:53 PM »
Two:  A GREAT fast-wide zoom, sharp edge to edge, minimal distortion. 

A 50mm1.2 with Sigma Art sharpness, and kickass AF.

Fast-wide zoom is my top wish.

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 135mm f/2L
« on: July 15, 2014, 06:36:26 PM »
I don't think anything except IS could improve this lens.

One little quirk, though:  I find that when using the deep, cup style hood, I have to consistently over expose by about 1 stop.  Without the hood, it's inline with my other lenses, about 1/3 of a stop EC for a nice histogram.

Love it, and think it's probably the best portrait lens for the money anywhere.  And lately, I've started taking it along for landscape, leaving my heavy, more expensive 70-200mm resting at home.  Great for landscape.

Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm Art 1.4 Focusing problems
« on: July 15, 2014, 12:17:28 PM »
Just got my RMA from B&H.  Simply don't want to deal with the dock.  Also, just read on the lensrental site that they have had "multiple" problems with the lens locking up during adjustment on the dock.

And I don't play the "good copy" game.

Lovely bokeh, all around IQ, but I'm too spoiled by AF to give it up for MF!   :-X

Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm Art 1.4 Focusing problems
« on: July 15, 2014, 11:13:07 AM »

To help with the decision making process, whether to keep or ship back the 50 Art, I called Sigma Tech Support.  Got right through.  Yes, they recommend the dock, but the surprising bit I heard was a vehement denial that Sigma "reverse engineers" their AF systems.  The tech said that "Japan is a socialist nation, and they don't keep these things secret.  Sigma works with Canon.  We get our specs from Canon.  Anything other than this is internet fantasy."

He also went onto say that the 50mm Art is a "reverse telephoto...a VERY TOUCHY type of lens."  This as an explanation for why the dock is so important.

Had a photo session this morning, using my ef 24-70mm 2.8 II.  How wonderful to hit the focus every time, not worry.


Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm Art 1.4 Focusing problems
« on: July 15, 2014, 09:59:24 AM »
Well, I got mine, and...Darn, the AF is whacky.

Works fine up to about 5', but definitely front focuses badly beyond that--a good part of the time.  Not always!

I did an in-camera AFMA with my 5DIII, hoping that would be all I needed, as it looked great at the tested distance.  But as soon as I got outdoors, the inconsistency started.

I did not order the dock with the lens, as I had great luck with the 35mm Art.  I do like the lens when it works, but I don't know that it is worth more ordering, testing, adjusting...

Seriously considering just returning the thing. 

Thanks to all who have posted their ups and downs with this much hyped, much desired lens!

ALSO:  I do get the impression that, for some reason, I can "help" the AF by doing an AE lock on the targeted area that I want to focus on.  How could this be on a 5D3?  Seems to work too often to be just my imagination...

Got mine,  seems good w/+3 AF, but wife had baby in meantime...Trying to make time to test!

Lenses / Re: UV filter on the new 16-35 f/4?
« on: July 12, 2014, 10:30:01 AM »
Yes, you might get a small (VERY small) additional amount of flare with a B+W XS-Pro Clear multicoated 007m filter.  There really is no other tangible impact on IQ.

But, in exchange you get:

* Weather-sealing: both the 16-35 f/4L IS and the 16-35 f/2.8L II are *not* weather sealed without a filter.

* Ease of cleaning:  Got some crud on the clear filter?  Spit shine it with your shirt! If you scratch it, the investment to replace is minimal.  Busting out a microfiber cloth in the field isn't always practical.

* Virtual lens cap: sometimes during sessions you need to swap between two cameras quickly.  Would you want to throw a camera in a bag - or have it in a holster - with no lens cap?  Well, assuming you don't drop your bag on concrete, for these fast swaps there is little risk if you put a capless lens/camera in a bag if it has a filter.  One shouldn't make a habit of this, but its an option you generally would not have without a filter.

* Riskier shots: 16mm on full frame may require you to get VERY close to what you want to photograph in some cases.  Do you want to risk your unprotected front element in these cases?  How about action shots, if you are photographing in harsh elements, or just greater confidence in general since you don't have to worry about your lens?

* In reality, it does cost a lot to fix the front element of a lens, and you will lose use of the lens while its being repaired: While some blogs have pointed out that the cost of a front element is not always that much, the labor to replace it usually is large amount and it involves your lens being out of action while getting repaired.  If you are getting paid, this is not a situation you want to be in.

In my opinion, the benefits FAR outweigh the very minimal additional flare you might get with a quality filter.  If you are shooting pictures of the moon at night, that is one situation I can think of where you might want to pass on a filter due to the extremely bright/dark transition (high contrast) subject matter being the focus of  the picture.  Every other situation, keep it on.  That is, assuming you buy a good one - I only use the B+W XS-Pro Clear MRC 007m as it is color-neutral, multicoated, and very slim.


Canon recommends filters on L series, which carries more weight than OCD fretting over invisible lmpact on IQ.

Geeze' when somebody wants advice on gear or techniques that bug you, just let it go.  Silly old debate.

And +1 for B+W!

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: to 600rt + st-e3 or not....
« on: July 03, 2014, 08:02:20 PM »
Chuck:  Wonderful picture of the couple in the field.  You'll make great use of the 600's, no doubt.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13