March 03, 2015, 02:45:02 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 - mememe

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Canon General / Re: Are Metal Mounts Better Than Plastic?
« on: January 05, 2014, 06:34:17 AM »
Are you really sure that stuff in the 24-70 where the 4 screws go in is plastic? I dont really think that is true...

Lenses / Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« on: November 23, 2013, 02:51:58 AM »
How can he say, all photons are captured at 1.0? How can he know?
I doubt that, cause canon applies some tweak at apertures faster than f2.8, and brightens up images a bit, cause the microlenses dont get all the light when it comes from extreme angles.

There was this site and he tested a lot about it. Even made a tool to find out if the twak has been used on a particular image.

EDIT: And even when you read his explaination: The image circle is NOT round at 1.0. It is cut top and bottom... But i guess it doesnt matter. The circle will change its size depending how far you are away or defocused. And the strange rectangular shapes only occur out of center...


It's amazing how Sony got 35mm sensor in a tiny body. As you can see, olympus om-d e-m5 Vs A7/A7R body size.

That's pretty easy if there is no need for a mirror or any optical viewfinder...

Lenses / Re: Good or lucky copy of the 50L?
« on: October 18, 2013, 02:56:42 AM »
When used at 1.2 focus is fine. Stop it down and work at close distance.

Or mount your cam on a tripod. Focus in close distance. Set to MF and take some images at different apertures. You will see how the sharpness is moving away. And if it's bad it will move so far that your first focussed spot is out of focus.

Lenses / Re: Sell my 85L for these two lenses?
« on: October 08, 2013, 10:15:05 AM »
I would take 100 f2 instead of 85. Its a bit better when it comes to CA and stuff.

Lenses / Re: Need Help with a 24-70 lens
« on: August 17, 2013, 09:49:18 AM »

I had five 24-70 f/2.8 MkI lenses over many years and they were all dogs.

I had 3. First was bad (got it used). After a long time i bought a new one. It was great. I sold it for some primes. Now i got another one. Also great.

Crazy. Here in germany it is nearly twice that price...

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: I'm returning my Sigma 35 1.4
« on: June 10, 2013, 02:26:49 PM »
This is the nature of big aperture prime lenses.

With Canon 50 f1.4, you almost have to step it down to f2.8 to get sharp photos - that would kill the funs buying a f1.4 lens and shoot it at f2.8 :-\

I rather shoot with my 24-70 II @ f2.8 ;D

Mine is pretty usable at 1.4
Not softer than the 50L at 1.4
Seems like i got a pretty good one.

It does shift focus when stopping down. My 50L also did.

There was no reason to keep the expensive L (ok, more and round blades. But u cant have everything)

I even had a 50 1.8 II which was really great wide open (sharpness. Contrast could be better)


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Real iso's?
« on: May 29, 2013, 07:12:23 AM »
To the iso darkroom tester:

Dont do this test with a lens that is faster than f2.8 (or not stopped down) cause Canon does strange stuff to get the brightness level properly under 2.8 (cause film collects the light which comes in at certain angles better than sensor)

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Canon EOS 50D Shoots RAW Video
« on: May 28, 2013, 01:41:17 PM »
But it doesnt make it a ccd sensor camera.

? So how does a CMOS camera compare to a CCD sensor camera in terms of RAW video output?

I dont know but ccd is wobbly

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Canon EOS 50D Shoots RAW Video
« on: May 27, 2013, 07:53:05 AM »
But it doesnt make it a ccd sensor camera.

Bad Rumor.

1.8 + OS = dont think so!!!!

Why not?

A fast lens with stabilization is the best of both worlds. For one, just because you can shoot wide open doesn't at all mean you want to. A 135 f/1.8 is going to have a razor-thin depth of field. There'd be plenty of times you'd want to stop down to at least f/8 to have all of your subject in focus. If you're in Sunny f/16 light, you can easily get hand-holdable f/8 exposures at 135mm. But with stabilization you could step indoors, keep your aperture at f/8, boost the ISO to 3200, and still have a fast enough shutter for portraiture even if not action. That opens up an awful lot of doors.



Yes, all nice. But i am not worried about the need of such a lens. More about the possibility to even build it! (For a price someone can pay)

But seems like its more easy to add IS/OS to a telephoto-lens. So there is a little chance to get that but i am not really confident.

BTW: The canon 135 is even a bit faster than f/2. Could be that the Sigma will be only 1.9 and they are cheating a bit...

Bad Rumor.

1.8 + OS = dont think so!!!!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5Dc a good option?
« on: March 24, 2013, 03:57:29 PM »
the 5Dc is severely hampered in low light situations. the usable ISO caps around 1600 but. the Mrk2 you can push to 3200 or slightly more if absolutely necessary.

i own both and shoot weddings. during ceremonies i try not to use the 5Dc at all...the Mrk2 is just so much better in those situations. in daylight i use both simultaneously. at receptions i favor the Mrk2 but with my flash and room strobe the 5Dc does fine.

at this point in camera evolution i would not waste any money at all on a 5Dc.

Thats why i didnt like the 5dII. It didnt give me that much better IQ at  3200 that everyone hyped about... It was even a more ugly noise with more banding etc. Its much overrated...

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5Dc a good option?
« on: March 24, 2013, 01:44:29 PM »
I went 5d -> 5dII -> 1dsII -> 5d again.

Its enough for me. But having this resolution is really nice if you earn your Money with it. I just did not like the 5d II somehow.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5