August 01, 2014, 07:53:43 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 - MLfan3

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO Sonnar T*
« on: July 27, 2014, 06:40:20 PM »
If only Zeiss made AF Canon lenses.  :P

I think I can safely say that all of us agree with you on that point.  This lens with AF and IS would be worth $3000+.  It is crazy good optically.

You could just buy an a99, or A7R and E4 adapter paired with the Sony 135 sonnar f.18 and have AF


If you've actually used both the APO Zeiss 135mm f2 and so-called Sony Zeiss 135mm f1.8, you must have already known that they are not in the same league, the APO ZE/ZF lens is much better.
The Sony 135mm f1.8 is not that good , it is just a tiny bit sharper than an old Nikon AF-D135mm f2DC lens.
I cannot compare it to the Canon version because I never used the Canon 135mm L seriously, but I think it is not much worse than the old ancient Nikon DC, so I think the Sony's so-called Zeiss is not much better than the Canon 135mm L.

I know the FE55mm f1.8 is a truly amazing lens but it is a Sony designed Sony lens with Zeiss brand mark on it.
So try not to confuse Sony Zeiss with Zeiss designed real Zeiss.

They are completely different beats.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 27, 2014, 06:33:27 PM »
as a multi-system user I have to agree with DXO guys, they are honest, much more so than DPR or any other unscientific review sites online.

The problem is that DXO's "science" is in dispute. How can you trust something that produces inconsistent and obviously incorrect results?

so what are the so-called incorrect results?
I think all what they have posted are right, at least mirror to my own experience.  only one issue I found with DXO mark is their stupid overall score D810=97, D800E =96, 5D3=81,etc.   But other than that almost all graphs and numbers they provided there seem very correct. Why do you think they are inconsistent with some obviously incorrect results?
but I think you know much more than me in this kind of things , so I would like to hear your view on DXO.


Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO Sonnar T*
« on: July 27, 2014, 03:15:24 PM »
must say it is the best lens I have ever used on my D800E and A7R(in terms of resolution and CA control), but it is not really great on my 6D or 5D2.
and I found the ergonomics of the Zeiss APO and Otus terrible(I dropped the Otus 2 times because it is so slippery in my hand), so I just sold them.
I just think it is not a PRACTICAL lens for anything out side of my studio, and in my studio we tend to use MFDB(rented back on our Hassy V cameras).
But if you are doing stitching landscape or landscape at 135mm, then it is the lens for you.
I honestly think the Zeiss ZF ZE line primes are overrated, I think some of these especially this APO deserve the hype but most of so called zeiss ZE ZF primes are just as good or a tiny bit better than similar Canon, Samyong or Nikon primes.
I think  most of online reviewers tend to confuse perceived build quality of feeling of it with actual build quality, but the Zeiss lenses are not that durable, if you drop or shoot it in real harsh winter, then you will know it.
The plastic Sigma or Nikon 50 are much more durable than the Otus, I learned this in very hard way in winter lake and after that I never ever wanted so-called ZF Zeiss but sold all.

The truly remarkable noteworthy ones are:
1 this 135mm APO
2 the 15mm f2.8
3 25mm f2 Distagon(f2.8 version is a crap)
4 21mm Distagon.
All the other so called Zeiss actually Coshina primes are just above average.

Personally I will never get this line of lenses regardless of their optical or mechanical quality, the metal hoods really damage other lenses or camera bodies, I got lots of  odd scratches on my 6D and A7R when I used them with the 135mm APO via an adapter. I am pretty sure the silly metal hood of it scratched my 6D and A7R.

And the metal hood sometimes become loose or too tight to fit on the lens too easily.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 27, 2014, 02:58:43 PM »
as a multi-system user I have to agree with DXO guys, they are honest, much more so than DPR or any other unscientific review sites online.

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon
« on: July 24, 2014, 10:15:21 AM »
oh one more thing to add, I or I think many people here want a FF mirrorless that pros can take seriously.

hope Canon will listen to us and design some really nice hybrid FF camera something like FF version of near almost perfect Panasonic GH4.

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon
« on: July 24, 2014, 10:13:48 AM »
honestly, I am very worried about the quality of read noise and final IQ of this sensor since the low mp sensor of Canon's best such as the one used in the 1DX or the 5D3 is already that bad.

if increasing the pixel density means more noise at pixel level , I do not want it.
I think the current best FF sensor is the Sony 24.3 used in the NORMAL A7.

it is the best balance of great low ISO DR and high ISO quality we can get for now.
I like the D810 sensor too but it is not much better than the D800E or the A7R, in fact , I found them all the same in  practice.  In lab, the D810 might be a touch better in DR and color depth, but not as good as the D800E in lowlight.

But this small minor difference in DXO test suggests that the real life IQ of the all current 36mp sensors are the same or very very identical.
I hope Canon would focus on serious new gen sensor not a just high resolution Bayer out to be already dated kind of junk.
The 36mp sensor in the D8xx is very overrated imho(as a long time Nikon user).

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Anyone own both Canon and Nikon
« on: July 22, 2014, 01:39:21 PM »
I think my previous reply to the OP was very confusing.
So try to rewrite it here:

1 N 14-24 vs C 16-35.  I think they are about identical in resolving power and the 16-35f4 IS has a bit lower CA and distortion. So they are optically of similar quality.

So I think the N 14-24 is the most overrated lens ever and it is already a bit too long in the tooth.
The 16-35f4 IS is a very sharp zoom and it is very versatile with the super effective IS(works on the A7R too) and very strong FL coating.
The 16-35mm f4IS seldom flares , the 14-24 N is extremely prone to flare in comparison.

2 A7R vs D810.
the D810 is indeed a bit better with a bit lower color noise throughout their ISO range , but in print it is invisible or at least indistinguishable, so if you want to save a lot of money(and weight) and want reuse your Canon lenses get the A7R. I often use my 16-35f4IS, 35mm f1.4 Sigma, 135mm f2 and 200mm f2 on my A7R and A7s.

You can not use your Canon lenses or Sony lenses on the Nikon, so unless you absolutely want to go dual mount with many specialized Zeiss and Nikon primes, you do not want to get the D810.
3 if your only reason to get or want to try a Nikon 36mp sensor is the sensor itself , then go for the D800E and save some big money, or even better the A7R.
The D810 is indeed a better more refined body but the RAW IQ is the same as the D800E, or at least very identical that no one can see the difference in print.

I have the D810 but I got it for better AF, better LV  with EFC and better ergonomics not for the newer 36mp sensor, and I've already got many many Nikon and Zeiss lenses for it.

And going dual mount or more mount system is nothing wrong, and in fact it is the only realistic solution for people shooting both video and stills or more than one type of app.   

The 5D3 is useless , the sensor is really bad , I never thought it was actually as bad as some Nikon die-hard fanboys say about it at DPR or many fora ,but unfortunately, it is as bad as the mk2 was or even worse.
I confirmed it by testing it against my 6D , 5D2, A7R, A7 and D810.
So do not get the 5D3 unless you absolutely need the 61 AF with 41 cross type sensors.
For me it did not work regardless of the super AF or super high quality body, and I am sure the upcoming 5D4 will get at least as good sensor as the one in the 6D with more pixels.

So I am looking forward to visiting Germany in this Sept for the Photokina.
If Canon cannot get out a great 5D3 replacement , I think they will seriously have hard time competing against Nikon in the high resolution high end 35mm D-SLR market(especially old guys with a set of Leica R or Zeiss Otus kind love it).

The D810 is a great camera and if you only want to own one camera, then it is the camera for you(at least for now). But in your case , I think the A7R is a bit more rational choice since you can re-use your Canon EF lenses on that body.

I personally do not think D-SLRs of any kind is exciting , even as good as the D810 is kind of boring compared to Sony A7 or Pana GH4.  The mirrorless is the future and I think Nikon is investing wrong kind of money on wrong kind of market.   I hope Canon will make 5D3 replacement camera without mirror (with EVF), it will need 4k , clean LV and great EVF at least to be even competitive to the next gen Sony A7 series or Panasonic GH4.

Nikon is too timid to go there, and like all other old tech makers in this industry, it will eventually  be forced to go out of this market just like Minolta.  And their shareholders know it so Nikon stocks devalued and their trust status degraded by 32 percent in the last 13 days.
So while Nikon seems to have been doing everything so well in this particular market , it has been like Minolta in its last few years of its life it has been investing too much money into wrong old dying technology, e.g , the D-SLR(OVF tech), therefore it's stock hit hard and the company is doomed.

BTW, Nikon lost about 13 percent of market share in last year and now it is the no3 in this game.
I think it will be Sony vs Canon , not Nikon vs Canon any more.
I guess what I have been trying to say is to invest too much money on the dying system is too risky, and unless you already have expensive Nikon glass or Zeiss or Leica R glass for it , it is not worth going for it.
Just keep what you've got and get a Sony A7R or a A7 in addition to your current camera.
In many ways the Sony A7R is not as refined as the D810 is , but it is a lot less risky and  also much cheaper to get.

And if you do shoot only landscapes or studio set up work , then there is no difference between the D810 and the A7R.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Anyone own both Canon and Nikon
« on: July 22, 2014, 12:39:40 PM »
In particular I am considering the new D810 with 14-24 and 24-70 for landscapes.   

The Canon 16-35 F4 is good but the 14-24 is great!

I do not agree here , the 16-35mm f4 is much more practical lens and even optically a bit better than the aged Nikon 14-24.  the 14-24 is the most overrated Nikon lens, imho.

The 5DM3 is a nice camera but lacks the DR of the D810.

I do not think the 5D3 is a good camera , the D810 is a good one but it is just a REFINED D800E, I have both D800E and D810 and every time I compared them with the Zeiss 25mm f2 ZF2 or 135mm f2 APO , the results were always same identical.
 In Jpeg, the D810 is about stop better as promised, but hey who will shoot this type of cameras jpeg?
I got the D810 for the new better ergonomics , the new AF , the new quiet shutter and the better LV , not for the new sensor.
But I found ISO64 is very very handy shooting long exposure.

The 5D3 ,in comparison, is already dated camera that no rational people buy at this point.   it has a poor quality sensor , no need to compare it to the Nikons or Sonys , but even Canon's own low end camera the 6D kills it in terms of DR and over all IQ.

Hate to spend the extra $ for another body and duplicate lenses.

Then get the A7R ,which I just sold due to the shutter issue but for landscape type of work , you can use some adapter and heavy tripod with your Canon lenses. So it is much cheaper and much more logical to go Sony + Canon than Canon + Nikon.

Does anyone shoot both Canon and Nikon - Canon for long lens and Nikon for wide angles?  Experience?  Thoughts?

I shoot Canon Sony Nikon Panasonic , but I do seldom use them side by side. I have the GH4 for video and for street work, IMO for street , the m43 IQ is more than good enough and I use it very often.
I have Sony A7s for extreme lowlight handheld work and video, the A7s has excellent lowlight AF and I think it is much more accurate than the D4s ,which I compared to my A7s in real world several times before I returning it to Nikon.
I have D800E /D810 for all around use, and they are great for that. 
I also have Canon EOS6D for TSE and a set of great small IS primes of Canon. 

I think I use my gh4 more often than anything else , but I just prefer feel and size of my 6D with its incredible lowlight capability, so I think I use that one a lot more than my heavier D810 or D800E.

To be honest , after I got my D810 , I've never liked my D800E because the D810has much better quiet shutter and its grip is much better than the grip of the D800E, and I think the D810 is about 100g lighter than the D800E, also the D810 LV mode is much more refined, not as good or noiseless as my 6D or A7s but close.

Oh I also have A6000 and this is my always in my work bag kind of camera, I've never left it at home , it's been always in my work bag.  I also keep my NEX5n in my car.
Anyway, I think all cameras are great but work great  for different apps.

I am not trolling nor trying to start a flame war, but look for well thought out positions based upon experience.

Oly extreme fanboys care about brands and fight over whatever they prefer or happen to own.
So ignore them and go dual or even more mount kits if your wallet or bank allows you.
Really there is no one good brand solution for now, honestly if I can afford it I will also have Phase One backs for my high resolution work(for me the D800E or D810 is a big compromise but a good one, indeed).



SAR may be fun to follow , but it is always exaggerating things and always want to generate some meaningless forum fight by using extremely aggressive wording, so I think it is better take it with a grain of salt.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: New Nikon D800s... Why?
« on: June 25, 2014, 01:46:25 PM »
it will be called D810, not D800s.  it has the same sensor without AA filter.  Native ISO range of 64-12800.
it shoots 6f/s and has the same AF used in the D4s.  it is about 120g lighter than the current D800E.  priced at US3200 or 312800yen.    Oh and it will be more cheap plasticky , so I do not think it is a big enough update to the current D800E.  In fact, it is an insult to us who have the D800E.  this is just some nasty devious marketing decision to get back some lost money on the D610.

great then, the 6D is a better camera even it costs more than the 5D3, I personally hate the 22mp sensor in that camera, it is super noisy and has worse banding issue at base ISO than anything else in its class.  so unless you really need the 61 AF or RAW video, there is no absolutely no reason to choose the 5D3 over the better 6D with better sensor.  Even the AF area , I prefer the -3EV of the 6D, with a bit better metering system (on paper it is not but in reality it is).  so imho, the 6D is a real bargain.

The noise levels look promising, although it is not enough difference to the 5DIII to justify the resolution loss.
 it really depends on how and what you shoot.  I mostly shoot in extreme lowlight event where I really need ISO6400, f2 to get needed shutter speed(about 1/100), so it am very interested , and have been testing it.  but I am sure for most of people , there is no significant enough difference at ISO3200-12800 range to justify the cost of switching system of their camera  to Sony for this camera.

I think really clean ISO1600-12800 is much more important to many of us than useless high ISO number thrown into the spec sheet of some Sonys and Nikons.   On last Friday It was already out here and I compared it to my 6D, A7R and Df(not mine) at a local shop(last Friday), I developed all RAW files via ACR and 6D ad A7R files were scaled down to 12mp. I expected to see huge difference between them, but honestly I could not see much difference in ISO1600-12800 range(just like DPR results), from ISO12800 and onward  the A7s and the Df  are actually better than my 6D resampled to 12mp or my A7R resampled to 12mp, but I do not shoot anything like ISO25600 except a couple of test shots at my studio or on a street at night.  So it is good imo, but not great, definitely not great enough to justify the low resolution sensor. For video only use maybe it is great, but then the 4K mode requires external recorder, so it is just really difficult to justify the high price of this camera.It is not 2400US camera , it is actually 5000US camera in reality because we'll need the Shogun to record 4k.

Lenses / Re: When does the 16-35/f4L IS arrive?
« on: June 15, 2014, 03:44:28 PM »
it is a great wide zoom, I think I will get it soon.  I tried it at Canon show room here, but I did not buy it there.  I will buy it online cheap and compare it to my 17-40f4, 21mm distagon and 25mm f2 distagon.   but in real life , I think better  practicality/vesatality of the zoom wins over ultimate IQ of the Zeiss. I used to care pixle level IQ or optical perfection more than versatility or practicality, but these days I tend to go for more practical lenses and systems, thus I am shooting Sony main and Canon(and sold Nikons Fujis ,etc). I think this 16-35f4 is a very very practical zoom for both Canon 6D /5D and Sony A7R/A7s. so it is a great bargain lens for me.

it is only practically useful for fixed lens cameras such as phones and RX1 type of cameras.  it requires a  new set of lenses. and considering Sony's current financial status , it cannot afford doing it. unless Samsung or Fuji or some more rich company do it , it is kind of meaningless tech. 

Lenses / Re: 24-105 vs 24-70 2.8 ii
« on: June 02, 2014, 03:01:28 PM »
why not also consider the 24-70mm f4LIS lens , which is a better lens than the 24-105mm f4L and a lot smaller and cheaper than the f2.8 MK2.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8