April 20, 2014, 04:56:36 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 - Rudeofus

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dissuade me to get a Rolleiflex
« on: April 19, 2014, 03:09:13 PM »
sootzzs, US$ 120 is not going to to get you very far in medium format, and you also need to take cost for film and processing into account. Shooting landscape with a cheesy camera will only disappoint you.

The cheapest way to get started is an analog EOS camera, that way you can use all your full format lenses and get started with film while you save up for a decent medium format camera.

2
Lenses / Re: DxO Review of Sigma 50mm 1.4 DG HSM Art
« on: April 18, 2014, 04:34:05 AM »
It looks like they measure it across the frame, and they don't mention vignette compensation:


That would explain why a slow IS zoom like the 24-70 F/4 IS has T=4 whereas all fast lenses have T stop significantly above their largest aperture. In other words, this T stop number is a poor substitute for their vignetting number and as such should be considered most useless.

Very confused ...

3
Lenses / Re: DxO Review of Sigma 50mm 1.4 DG HSM Art
« on: April 17, 2014, 11:20:29 AM »
Since all of these fast lenses have severe vignetting wide open, I wonder how they measure T stops. Do they measure average across the whole frame, or only in the center, or somewhere in between these two extremes?

4
Haha, to all those who made fun of Canon with the alleged 75D with hypersvivel: Canon can be even less innovative than the most creative minds on the web can imagine!

If I was British, I would be insulted that they picked my country for this ugly abomination.

5
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art
« on: April 16, 2014, 11:31:47 AM »
One key issue with the 50L is the "focus shift" that occurs if the lens is used near minimum focus distance at apertures between 2 and 4. Since this is quite a common setting in portrait shots, I wonder why so many people recommend the 50L so much as a portrait lens.

And the second thing which wonders me even more, is that none of these reviews checked whether the 50A suffers from this same focus shift issue. Since the issue appears to come from spherical aberrations which are less present in the 50A there is a good chance that the 50A is less affected, but the many tests and comparisons between 50L and 50A might as well take a closer look.

6
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dissuade me to get a Rolleiflex
« on: April 14, 2014, 05:04:46 PM »
PS.: As a side question: except of the obvious advantage of the Medium Format resolution (is it really equivalent to 60 Mega pixel picture?) is there any advantage to the film (35mm or other) over a full frame DSLR (which I can't compare to)?
With a medium format camera you will quit counting megapixels very quickly. Assuming you buy a decent piece of equipment and use modern film and developers, you will have all the resolution you'll ever need, period.

What you will notice quickly once you get your analog process dialed in is that these films bring an incredible tonality and color palette out of the box. You think of the mood you want to create, pick the proper film and the result will look just right. In theory you could do all this in digital, but given the dreadful digital B&W images posted by self proclaimed professional photographers here in this forum, it seems to be a lot more difficult than it looks at the first glance, sometimes more options don't lead to better results.

7
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dissuade me to get a Rolleiflex
« on: April 14, 2014, 06:05:57 AM »
If you enjoy TLRs and their way of shooting, by all means go for it. Since US$ 2k is a lot of money and can get you a wide range of very decent analog gear, I recommend you do some price shopping (look at keh and adorama), and maybe investigate the merits of possible alternatives, just to be sure.

Once you make the Lubitel-->Rollei upgrade, you may need some extra things that help you get optimal results: a decent exposure meter, a sturdy tripod and cable release, and ideally some equipment for processing exposed films yourself. Maybe check out whether there is a dark room available nearby wherever you live.

Even if some people here seem to hate film, the results will speak for themselves.

8
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art
« on: April 14, 2014, 05:31:24 AM »
I´m really curious to see how it performs against 35 Art. I have seen a couple of reviews but it seems no one compares these two. Still waiting for the first user reports and then I´ll decide. I would prefer 35 before 50 focal length for my 5D3. But if this new 50 is optically better then I´ll probably change my decision. Only optical performance matters for me, I do not care about weight or size. Sharpness, CA, micro contrast, this is important for me.

I think Neuroanatomist explained this in some recent thread: most 35s use retrofocal design, whereas most 50s in the market (until recently) use a double gauss design. The double gauss design is simpler and more compact, but allows for fewer corrections and as a result gave lenses that were less than stellar in performance, especially wide open. Zeiss, and now Sigma, changed that by offering 50s as retrofocal designs, and as a result they now have 50s that blow the competition out of the water. But that means only the 50mm competition, other 35mm lenses always used retrofocal design and always had the opportunity to be decent performers.

So what do we have now: we have an outdated 35L that gets outclassed by a very modern 35A, but only by so much, the 35L wasn't all that bad after all. And we have a new 50A that makes its competitors look really old. That doesn't mean the 50A is going to be that much sharper/better than the 35A or the 35L. What the 50A does is give you the option to pick between a decent 50 and a decent 35. The final decision should (and can now) be made based on what focal length you want, not by some 2% difference in MTF ratings.

9
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art
« on: April 13, 2014, 11:29:37 AM »
Interesting review, which covers many aspects that would be of interest to potential buyers of this lens. One line didn't make much sense, though: "Additionally, we feel that the saturation is a bit too strong for skin tones when shooting portraits despite Sigma’s attempts to not saturate the orange channel too much–at least that’s what we feel in our color tests."

A lens can't saturate colors beyond what's coming in through the front element. If the image looks too saturated, check and adjust your post processing settings and don't blame the lens for doing its job as intended.

10
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 Pro FX Spotted
« on: March 11, 2014, 04:09:25 PM »
I admire your patience, but personally I would not invest big money in gear that is unsupported in my country. If Sigma/Tamron/whoever are unable or unwilling to provide adequate service for their equipment in your place, they don't deserve your money. Software upgrades aren't the only reason you need a service center.
Then I cannot see how we disagree.  I agree with this 100%. And judging by the companies behavior in the past we have the right to act accordingly in the future...

Sigma's behavior 10 years ago should make everybody cautious, but not hysterical. We might as well ditch Canon for their less than smooth FD-->EF mount transition. Forfeiting a whole range of purchasing options because of some misgivings a decade ago is certainly within your rights, but it doesn't sound smart or cost effective.

BTW Rienzphotoz' case seems very special, AFAIK Sigma, Tamron and Tokina do provide service in most countries with a significant photographic market.

11
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 Pro FX Spotted
« on: March 11, 2014, 02:49:30 PM »
Even though you know "their existence is an old and well known fact" you felt the need to post it, but when others also mention it you feel the need to be sarcastic ... how logical ::)
I posted these old news in reply to a posting which perpetuated the old "I won't get upgrades if Canon plays silly again" meme, and the sarcastic tone (stemming from the obvious contradiction between my praise for the other guy's invention paired with the links to already existing products implementing that very feature) was another futile attempt to put that meme to rest for good. Read tron's posting immediately before my first one in this thread and then mine to get the context.

Every single one of those lenses developed some issueor another with AF or OS/VC after upgrading to a new camera or firmware, they would suddenly start hunting for auto focusing on a subject or the image stabilization would take longer to be activated and/or drain the battery with the OS/VC on even when they were not being used ... were they useless? absolutely not, coz I could still get great images with every one of them (except the Rokinon T/S, which was just a sh!tty lens from the beginning) but the issues they developed were annoying. I am sure a visit to the the third party manufacturers service center will fix those issues, but (as mentioned earlier) where I live there is no service center for third party lens manufacturers

I admire your patience, but personally I would not invest big money in gear that is unsupported in my country. If Sigma/Tamron/whoever are unable or unwilling to provide adequate service for their equipment in your place, they don't deserve your money. Software upgrades aren't the only reason you need a service center.

1. Put it to rest and spend your money. Then if something breaks wait for the 3rd party companies to really change the firmware...
Funny thing is all the pros I see rarely have brand new gear with them. It's usually wannabe amateurs who need the latest and greatest the minute it hits the market, when it is sold at a premium and hasn't received thorough testing yet.

With a few months of patience you can save 20+% on camera bodies AND can use cheaper third party accessories.
3. I do not recall reading about other 3rd party manufacturers doing the same as Sigma...
  • Metz flashes come with a USB connector for firmware upgrades. My first post in this thread links to the relevant page
  • Sigma received the most heat during the last decade, because in 2003 (release of the 10D) a long list of lenses in their lineup could no longer be used on Canon's latest and greatest, and Sigma decided to throw their customers under the bus. They seemed to have learned their lesson lately and want to be seen not as cheap alternative but as viable and well reputed alternative. Since that Err99 debacle is still in people's minds, Sigma had to come up with a viable option for simple upgrades.

12
Lenses / Re: Sigma ART Series: 70-200mm f2.8 possible?
« on: March 11, 2014, 12:53:20 PM »
The street prices I see for the Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 have come down a lot lately, and I would assume they had to cut their prices to stay competitive with Tamron's new 70-200, and especially the used price of Canon's 70-200 Mk I.

Sigma more or less has to come up with a new (and better) 70-200, if they want to stay in that market ... BTW the same is true for their 24-70.

13
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 Pro FX Spotted
« on: March 10, 2014, 02:12:00 PM »
Relax, we are not stealing your thunder, I did read and understand that you were already aware of their existence, I was merely stating my experience of having used Metaz flash and also having tried the Sigma USB dock ... so the credit for mentioning them first goes only to you  ;) :) :)
Their existence is an old and well known fact, especially on a rumor site where new products are discussed in depth many weeks/months before their official announcement. My posting was deliberately sarcastic and aimed at people who perpetuate the "then Canon changes the protocol and my expensive third party accessory will be worthless" meme. These times are over, they have been over for over a decade AFAIK, and we should put that meme to rest already.

14
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 Pro FX Spotted
« on: March 10, 2014, 11:40:46 AM »
+1 Having flash memory (if they indeed have flash memory) is NOT ENOUGH. It's their willingness to backup their lenses with GOOD SUPPORT. So, they have to MAKE the firmware to upgrade the one residing in ... flash memory... So, as I said feel free to spend your money and test good support later. And by later I mean many years actually as many as with Canon lenses.  Because if someone gets an expensive lens with very good IQ they want to keep using it or ... sell it. Certainly not ditch it...


You just brought up a great new idea: third party makers could add a USB connector to their flash devices or make a special USB dock for their lenses. This would make firmware upgrades really easy ....

For several years now, Metz, (a German consumer electronic company) has been routinely providing firmware updates on their flashes (for customers to update on their own), to address compatibility issues with newer cameras. I still have the Metz 58 AF 1 flash (which I bought in 2008) and have updated the firmware at least twice, until the plastic hot shoe broke ... now it just sits in my cupboard to be used as a wireless flash once in a while. Also, Sigma has the USB dock for their newer lenses. I think in future we will see more and more manufacturers coming up with USB firmware updates for their lenses and flashes etc.
Sigma has a USB dock already. Has anyone used it? Any opinions on that ?


WTF. Did anybody bother looking at the links I provided in my posting ?????

15
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 Pro FX Spotted
« on: March 10, 2014, 05:41:19 AM »
+1 Having flash memory (if they indeed have flash memory) is NOT ENOUGH. It's their willingness to backup their lenses with GOOD SUPPORT. So, they have to MAKE the firmware to upgrade the one residing in ... flash memory... So, as I said feel free to spend your money and test good support later. And by later I mean many years actually as many as with Canon lenses.  Because if someone gets an expensive lens with very good IQ they want to keep using it or ... sell it. Certainly not ditch it...


You just brought up a great new idea: third party makers could add a USB connector to their flash devices or make a special USB dock for their lenses. This would make firmware upgrades really easy ....

Pages: [1] 2 3 4