April 16, 2014, 09:11:04 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 - raptor3x

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1
As someone who has not shot any video on my DSLRs, can someone explain to me the value in spending 4k on a 50mm zeiss lens to mount on a DSLR that is going to down sample the image to 2 mega pixels?

This is something I've never understood either.  I understand that cine lenses are expensive because their designs need to minimize focus breathing and zooms are usually parfocal, but it seems like they should have relatively low sharpness requirements.

2

With the 1-series you can set your minimum shutter for example at 1/1000s in Av, so you can get up to 1/8000s if there is enough light, and like Neuro said, if a player drops in to the shadows or into the sun, you will never have longer shutter than 1/1000s, but always correct exposure.

Pretty sure that's only for the 1DX and even then only with the most recent firmware update.  Previous bodies were, for no obvious reason, limited to 1/60th of a second for minimum shutter speed.

3
Lenses / Re: General purpose zoom for honeymoon
« on: February 26, 2014, 11:10:36 AM »
I'm heading on my honeymoon in April to Mauritius for 2 weeks.

At home, I shoot 5d mk iii and generally with primes (24L, 35, 50L, 85L, 100L macro and soon to have 135L).

I'm thinking of not taking any of those and just buying a general purpose zoom so that:

a) Im carrying less stuff (so my new wife doesn't kill me for taking so much stuff), and
b) I can focus on enjoying my honeymoon and taking snaps rather than worrying about having the right lens on (so my new wife doesn't kill me for taking so much stuff).

I could just take the 24, 50 and 135 + an extension ring and that would cover most scenarios. However on a general walk about I'd still be carrying 3 lenses.

I'm sure this has been covered before (somewhere) but I think my options are:

The canon 24-70 ii feels too expensive to justify.
The canon 24-70 f4 doesn't feel exciting enough (70mm @ f4) to warrant £1000.
The canon 24-105 f4 could be a reliable choice but its dated and I worry about sharpness and sample variation.
I like the look / idea of the tamron, but the stories I hear about AF inconcistency (not MFA) worry me.

So I'm kind of leaning towards the sigma 24-105 f4. But I've owned the old sigma 24-70 f2.8 in the past and found the AF to be unreliable and the bokeh to be unattractive. But I could save a bit of cash and buy a used canon 24-105 f4.

But does anyone have any good opinion (or bad opinions) of the sigma 24-105? and/or any decent and definative review sites? and/or does anyone have an opinion on whether the canon 24-105 would be a better bet?

And/or any other suggestions that I haven't considered?

Your time is always appreciated.
Thanks all
Alex

The 24 1.4 and 35 1.4 will both be great for taking shots of indoor activities,  ;D.

4
I'm curious.

Why do you think, did Sigma for only for a f/1.4 rather than down to the f/1.2 of the Canon L 50mm ?

Because it's going to be 815g with f/1.4 :)

The extra glass for top performance at f/1.2 would have been an overkill. I'm more surprised that Zeiss didn't go for f/1.2 considering they definitely had the budget.

IIRC the Distagon design means the maximum possible aperture is F/1.4.

5
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 Pro FX Spotted
« on: February 17, 2014, 07:12:31 PM »
In any case, I'm not keen on Tamrons and Tokinas because their rings tend to rotate the Nikon way round, which I find annoying when combined with a bag of Canon lenses!

If you look at the photo  you can see the zoom ring rotates in the Canon convention.  Maybe they'll have the different mounts rotate in different directions for consistency with the OEM lenses.

I stand corrected, it's just Tamron (should have looked twice at the photo in the post!).

I still can't see the point of this lens unless it has an ultrasonic motor. All the other major manufacturers have moved on (except for Zeiss and Leica, obviously) from this eighties arrangement. Who cares if it's built like a tank, I don't intend to use it to invade another country  ;D.

Tokinas usually have the zoom ring rotating in the opposite (Nikon) direction as well, at least, that's the way it is on the 16-28.

6
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 Pro FX Spotted
« on: February 17, 2014, 11:57:18 AM »
In any case, I'm not keen on Tamrons and Tokinas because their rings tend to rotate the Nikon way round, which I find annoying when combined with a bag of Canon lenses!

If you look at the photo  you can see the zoom ring rotates in the Canon convention.  Maybe they'll have the different mounts rotate in different directions for consistency with the OEM lenses.

7
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Sensor reflections from eos-m
« on: January 22, 2014, 08:30:32 PM »

Only thing I can think is that the registration distance of mirrorless cameras is so small that maybe flare is exacerbated by slight reflection off the sensor. The registration distance of DSLR's is much larger, so any kind of reflection off the sensor will fall of to almost nothing by the time it reaches the lens again. With EOS-M, or pretty much any other mirrorless camera, the registration distance is only a couple/few millimeters.

That was my first thought, except he's using a 40mm pancake lens so the registration distance will be exactly the same as if it were on an EF mount DSLR.

8
Lenses / Re: Walimex / Samyang 24mm T1.5 for 88 euro @ amazon germany
« on: October 07, 2013, 01:36:36 PM »
Well, it's not like anyone would like the declicked aperture ring, anyway. And it's a cheap brand. And the lenses were ugly. And dumb.

Actually...yes, I would have liked it. While declicked might have been a bit of a pain for some photography, it can be used to great effect with video.

And while it's a cheap brand, the lens optical IQ is pretty good. Go read some reviews.

Wooosh

9
Lenses / Re: Best 35mm wide open????
« on: September 24, 2013, 05:00:45 PM »

But the answer to your question the Zeiss 35mm F/1.4 is the best. Is it $1000 better than the L or the Sig? It would be to me, but not to most people.

This is really interesting as pretty much every comparison I've seen shows the Zeiss being the worst of all the 35 1.4 lenses.

Edit: Scratch that, I was thinking about the 85 1.4.  I may have to rent a Zeiss 35 now.

10
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Rokinon Rebates on Select Lenses
« on: September 24, 2013, 01:08:35 PM »
Everything I saw for the Rokinon 24mm TS was it really wasn't that great optically, about or worse than the Canon 24mm TS-E v1. We all had big hopes after the optical IQ of some of their other lenses, such as the 24mm & 85mm. Sadly, their 24mm TS didn't live up to that. It's a fair deal if it was priced cheaper, but after seeing sample images I'd personally save up for the Canon 24mm TSE v2. That is one awesome lens!

I thought that the 24 1.4 was supposed to be pretty bad as well.  The 35 is the really good one.

11
Lenses / Re: 70-300mm IS due for update
« on: September 12, 2013, 05:43:04 PM »
I'm sure I'm not the only one with this opinion, but don't you think the 70-300mm IS is embarrassingly outdated, especially considering its Nikon equivalent?:

  Canon 70-300mm IS USM  Nikon AF-S 70-300mm VR 
Focusing Design    Front focus, extending, rotating, no FTM      Internal focus, FTM 
Focusing Motor  Micro USM, noisy, slow  Ring-type SWM, silent, fairly fast 
Stabilization  3 stops  4 stops 
Year  2005  2006 
MSRP  $650 US  $590 US 
Street Price  $360 US eBay / $650 US B&H  $420 US eBay / $587 B&H 

One could say that Canon did upgrade it by releasing the 70-300mm L, but that is in a whole different price bracket, and shouldn't be compared.  It would be like comparing the Canon vs. Nikon 28-300mm lenses; they are clearly in different classes.  How has Canon not updated this lens in the past 7 years?

I must say, I miss the fast, quiet and accurate focusing my old 100-300mm USM and 70-210mm USM lenses had; and they were small and light, too.  If either of those lenses had IS I would not have considered 'upgrading' to the 70-300mm.  I wish Canon would up date this lens to be on par with Nikon and stay in the same price bracket.

I also find it funny that Canon announced this lens alongside the crowd-pleaser 24-105mm L. 

By the way, I have used both, as I own the Canon and my dad owned the Nikon (on a D600).  The Nikon wins hands-down in overall feel, responsiveness, build quality, etc.

And then there's the Tamron 70-300 VC which stomps on both the Canon and  Nikon options.

12
Lenses / Re: New Lens Announcement Tonight [CR3]
« on: August 21, 2013, 07:32:18 PM »
Optical upgrades?!?! The old 55-250 is already a pretty solid piece of work optically. I can't wait to see how it could improve. I mean, if it gets much better, it would practically eliminate the need to go to an L in that range.


I wouldn't go quite that far:  http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=456&Camera=474&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=738&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Yeah, the L lens is five times as much, but it is in a whole different league optically.



Not really, if you compare them both on an APS-C body then the L lens is just barely better than the 55-250.  On the other hand compare the 55-250 vs the 70-200 is ii at 200mm both on crop and you'll see a world of difference.

13
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 70D Sample photos ISO 100-25600
« on: August 01, 2013, 11:51:50 PM »
Do the 7D shots have some noise reduction applied?  There's way less color noise in that shot than I remember at ISO 6400.

14
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: June 19, 2013, 03:11:36 PM »
'd pay $1-2K for a breathtakingly sharp autofocusing 24mm L that didn't shoot itself in the foot (i.e. corners) to offer side a wide aperture.  Negative points if you tell me to just buy the 24-70 II.
Except they already make that. Just tape your 24-70mm L II into the 24mm position and you're set. You don't want it to go to f/1.4 apparently, so it doesnt, it does f/2.8 sharp corner to corner. Sure, it'd be great if it was $500 cheaper, but thats the price of sharpness

Even better, set the lens to 24mm, engage the lock, and then epoxy the switch in place.  24mm prime in 5 minutes.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Is This the EOS 3D?
« on: June 17, 2013, 04:27:04 PM »
Why would you post your receipt here? Are you trying to brag about having two 5D Mk III's? I don't get it.

I would imagine for the same reason you have your entire inventory listed in your signature: To feel like more of a man.

Erm... wait, no that's not it... he's probably just excited and wanted to let other people know what he owns, much like your signature. Congrats Dylan, I hope to pick up a second 5D3 someday soon (Actually my wife does, she's stuck with the 7D when we shoot weddings together =)

Burn.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4