Messages

1

EOS Bodies / Re: 21mp Sensor in the 7D Mark II? [CR1]

« on: April 19, 2013, 02:22:33 AM »

I'm sorry things like this never sit with me.

I don't believe articles like this for 2 reasons:

1. If a camera is due for release in the next six months, they wouldn't be making decisions about what is going to be in the camera.  They know already and have already made that decision.  If they haven't then the camera will take longer than 6 months to come to market.

2. Unless you're somebody in the Canon R&D department, you're not going to know details like this.

2

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 POST-RELEASE hands-on views

« on: January 11, 2013, 02:24:13 AM »

The title of the previous Sigma 1.4 post was about pre-release.  Now The Digital Picture has given it its first unqualified reccomendation vs. the OEM product,
    http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-35mm-f-1.4-EX-DG-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx

and Lens Rentals has literally gushed over it..   http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/wide-angle/sigma-35mm-f1.4-dg-hsm-a1-for-canon
  What are we to think?

There's something seriously wrong with the bokeh tests of the 35L.  I saw a post on here or maybe another forum of where somebody had the dots issue in the bokeh.  Turned out it was a faulty 35L.  Looks like they have the same issue.

3

Reviews / Re: Review - Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD with Pictures

« on: November 29, 2012, 01:58:48 PM »

Nice review. Very informative.

I got mine yesterday.  It's as good as everyone says.  Sharp sharp sharp.

Can I ask you, what processing do you do on your photos? Lightroom or via PS actions?

4

Lenses / Canon are obsessed with an IS version of the 24-70

« on: November 28, 2012, 12:51:48 PM »

Just had my CPS email:

If they want to keep calling it the IS, why not just make one:

5

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions

« on: November 21, 2012, 06:48:32 PM »

Sigma are certainly not doing too bad.  The original 30mm was one of the greatest lenses ever.

I just wonder when Canon are going to renew their 35L.

6

Lenses / Re: The Digital Picture resolution tests are up for the EF 24-70 f/2.8L II

« on: September 17, 2012, 03:23:19 PM »

The Tamron is sharper at 70mm compared to Sample 1, but not Sample 2

7

Lenses / Re: The Digital Picture resolution tests are up for the EF 24-70 f/2.8L II

« on: September 17, 2012, 08:59:48 AM »

The Digital Picture resolution tests were posted yesterday. Obviously results are good, but not quite as good as the EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II.

Also according to the tests, the results of the lens deteriorate significantly at 70mm. They appear to be worse than the old EF 24-70 f/2.8L at that focal length.

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

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=787&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=101&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

Look at the 2nd sample, the 24-70 II is good.  Their 1st sample seems to be a dud.

8

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Arrived

« on: September 17, 2012, 08:04:04 AM »

Digitalrev are really taking the michael with the 24-70 II

In GBP, it comes to £2200.  That's £950 more than if I went to the US and picked one up (minus import duty)

No thanks at that price, no matter how sharp it is.

9

EOS Bodies / Re: Describe the 6D in one word...

« on: September 17, 2012, 02:16:18 AM »

Embarrassing!

10

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Reminder: Announcements on September 17, 2012

« on: September 16, 2012, 11:32:26 AM »

a new 35L maybe now the 24-70 II has gone to retail?

What about a new 300 f4?

11

Lenses / Re: 24-70 vs 24-70 II

« on: September 15, 2012, 06:14:46 PM »

Please please do some outdoor wide and tele comparisons in daylight on a tripod. 

12

Lenses / Re: Should I sell 35L f/1.4 to get 24-70II?

« on: September 15, 2012, 07:36:06 AM »

No way!

What is it with everyone saying yes? I bought my 35L not because I wanted to shoot in low light but because I adore the photography you can get with a shallow depth of field.

Yes the 24-70 II will offer you great versatility, but you can't touch the 35L for the depth of field.  They are two completely different lenses.  If a lens offered 24-200 f5.6 and sharp does that mean I should ditch my other lenses? No!

You may not like shooting below 3.2 but what about the shots where you get time to position people and retake?

13

Lenses / Re: Post your 24-70 II Experiences Here

« on: September 05, 2012, 08:38:01 AM »

I am very happy with my EF 24-70 II (non production version).

But I don´t waste my time and money reading charts, looking at tests from magazines or test self the lens against a lot of primes.

How long have you had it and how comes you've got a non production version?

14

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]

« on: August 21, 2012, 08:32:31 AM »

Why not call it the 1D Xs for studio

15

Lenses / Re: If you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they...???

« on: August 14, 2012, 06:22:17 PM »

35L
24-70
70-200 f2.8 II