July 28, 2014, 05:34:26 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 - zlatko

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17
Granted the white balance is off, but otherwise you are stupefied that a camera with 50% more pixels on the same sensor size and mounted to a lens that frame the subject 50% tighter gives you more details? Now I'm stupefied...

I agree.  Apart from the white balance, the problems are multiple:
  • The D810 resolves more to begin with.
  • The 85/1.4 is a better, costlier lens ... sharper wide open ... as most 85's are sharper than most 50's.
  • The 85 frames the subject tighter, resolving more detail.
  • Reducing the 85mm image to match the 50mm increases the apparent resolution of the 85 image.

Yes, these results are typical when you stack the deck in this way.  Considering the four points against it, the 50/1.4 did rather well!

One can see the same comparison on The Digital Picture (mouse over the image for the 50/1.4):

Also, not sure which 85 that is.  If it is the 85 G from 2010, then it is a much newer design than the 50/1.4 which came out in 1993, early in the EOS era and before the DSLR revolution.

Lenses / Re: New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)
« on: Today at 04:27:56 PM »
I'm hoping for a 50mm with IS, equivalent quality to the 35 f/2 IS !

Me too.  That would be beautiful!

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: Today at 12:35:14 PM »
Perhaps DxO is biased. Perhaps Nikon and Sony have decided to "build to the test." Perhaps the differences being tested are so insignificant that the ratings have only academic and no real-world application. Most likely it's a combination of all three.

It's not like the scores have the tiniest bit of impact on the market. So really, who cares?

jrista and neuro obviously care a lot because they go to great lengths to shout down DxO's results.

Do you agree with DxOMark lens scoring, which currently ranks the EF 35/2 IS and the EF 100/2 above all other lenses made by Canon?  If so, why?  If not, why not?  Either way, how is DxO's scoring of these two lenses as the highest among all Canon EF lenses relevant to photographers?  Do these two lenses truly deserve higher scores than any L lens or any other Canon EF lens? 

On the 1DsIII, DxOMark scores for these lenses are:
100/2 = 30
35/2 IS = 29
85/1.2L II = 28
24/1.4L II = 28
300/2.8 II = 28
400/2.8 II = 27
35/1.4L = 27
85/1.8 = 26
100/2.8L = 26
200/2.8L II = 24
180/3.5L = 19

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 26, 2014, 12:26:28 AM »
I'm going to use this example again:

When the 70-200 f/2.8L II IS lens came to the market and was tested, it got a lower score than the version I lens.  Later, DxO mark used a different CAMERA to test them, then the v2 finally scored higher.

Well, their Lens Scores are an even larger, stinkier pile of steaming BS than their Sensor Scores.  Even the name itself is intentionally misleading, since the primary determinants of the Lens Score are the T-stop of the lens and the low light performance of the camera body on which the lens is tested.

Last time I checked DxOMark, the very best lens that Canon makes was the EF 100mm f/2.  Yes, the famous $499 100mm f/2 known by professional photographers all over the world as the very best lens that Canon makes ... not.  That lens is from 1991.

Now that honor has gone to the EF 35mm f/2 IS.  Yes, the $599 lens is better than ANY other lens that Canon makes ... according to DxOMark ... and no one else.

P.S.  Nothing against either of those lenses (both excellent), but giving them the highest scores of all lenses in the entire Canon EF system is pretty much proof that the DxOMark scoring is faulty.

Lenses / Re: What Lenses are missing from Canon's range
« on: July 17, 2014, 10:40:55 AM »
EF-S 15-50mm F2.8 IS
EF-S 18-70mm F2.8 IS
EF-S 50-150mm F2.8 IS
EF-S 15mm F2
EF-S 22mm F1.8
EF-S 30mm F1.4

I agree with the above.  Those would be very nice additions for EF-S cameras.  I'd also like to see:

EF 85/1.8 IS

Canon General / Re: New Speedlite Coming? [CR2]
« on: July 17, 2014, 01:29:30 AM »
I hope they give the new flash head the same range of rotation as the 600EX-RT.  The head of the 430EX has a limited range of rotation.  When holding the camera in vertical position, the head will only rotate 90 degrees straight upward.  This means you can't angle it a bit backwards as you can with the 600EX-RT.  Likewise, when holding the camera in horizontal position, you can only turn the flash head 90 degrees to the right (although you can turn it 180 degrees to the left).  This makes the 430EX much less useful for me.

How about 35/2 IS? One full stop faster, 56mm equiv. reach/FoV on the crop (very close to "normal" lens) and very sharp lens.

RuleOfThirds feels that 40mm is too cropped and 35mm is just a bit wider.  It could work and it is very sharp as you note, but may still feel a little too cropped.

The 28mm would give the closest to a true normal view on an APS-C camera, keeping in mind that 50mm on full frame is a slight telephoto, not a true normal.  A true normal is something like 43mm equiv. on full frame:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_lens

Both the 24 and 28 IS lenses are fine lenses and I can't think of a way to recommend one over the other.  It really comes down to personal preference.  Good luck!

Canon General / Re: Have G.A.S. and can't to get rid of it!!
« on: July 11, 2014, 02:31:41 PM »
  What are your thoughts?

    Thanks in advance!!

I find that my needs & preferences change over time, so there is no end to changes in my gear.  I don't know what I will want next year.  Rather than offer specific advice, I say:
1) use what you have;
2) if something doesn't get used for a year, then sell it;
3) if something is needed for your current photography, then buy it.

We could have printed so much lager than 32x48. It would have made all the difference in the world to me. I want to leave you with one final thought as you find a new home. Don't let the door hit you in the A$$.  :o

How ever did Salgado, McCurry, Art Wolfe, Paul Nicklen, Alex Webb, Ami Vitale, et al, ever make museum-quality large prints, for years, before July 18, 2014 when the D810 came out? :o To think, they were never informed of their folly, until now...

Exactly.  World famous photographers print large with any camera.  Museum quality.  Gallery quality. 

But anonymous people on the internet "can't survive" without their extra pixels.  Nikon gives 7,360 horizontal pixels.  Canon gives 5,760 horizontal pixels.  So with Nikon one can print 5 or 7 inches bigger.  Wow, that's like ... soooo much bigger.  Worth a system change for sure. ;)

Lenses / Re: Video Review: Canon EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« on: July 08, 2014, 02:07:43 PM »
He is right about it being a "fantastically fun lens to use".  I prefer it to the 10-22 because it's smaller.

Canon General / Re: Seeing Rebels....
« on: July 07, 2014, 07:29:45 PM »
I use a bunch of Canon DSLRs, but sometimes the smallest one is the most fun.  The Rebel SL1 (100D) is super light and small, easiest to carry, and it works with all of my Canon lenses.  By comparison, all of the other Rebels are big! :)

EOS Bodies / Re: What do you hope-for MOST from Canon in 2014
« on: June 27, 2014, 05:56:34 PM »
What product do you hope-for the most from Canon this year?

What I'd like to see are some new lenses:

For full frame:
updated high quality 50/1.4
50/1.8 or 5/2.0 with IS
85/1.8 with IS
100/2.0 with IS

For EF-S:
12/2.8 or 14/2.8
22/2 with IS, or 22/1.4

All of the above with excellent autofocus and very good to excellent performance wide open.

ALSO, a new 430EX-RT flash with radio control to work like the 600EX-RT and with same degree range of motion as the 600EX-RT so that it can be bounced backward when shooting in the vertical position (rather than just 90 degrees upward).

Where did you get that information from?

Yes, please tell us.  Interesting rumor, but are you just making this up?

Even photozone's at it now; comparing against the EF 50mm f1.2 L II !

What the 50L does well doesn't have a metric that can be easily recorded.  That lens is about color, draw, bokeh, etc. and less about meat and potatoes forum fodder like sharpness, chromatic aberrations, distortion, etc.

However, the Sigma Art seems purpose-built to wow the forum crowd.  If you are a sharpness junkie (who needs AF), you've found your lens.

So you're justifying the 50/1.2L by saying that it has some immeasurable quality to it that nobody else can beat? Do you understand how irrational that sounds?

Lenses have qualities that are not easily described with numbers, at least not in the measurements usually seen in online tests.  Have you seen a numerical measurements for how a lens draws faces?  I'm not talking about sharpness, but how it draws.  Likewise, does any site publish numerical measurements of foreground and background bokeh with subjects at various distances and with foregrounds & backgrounds that have various degrees of detail and contrast?  How about numerical measurements of a wide range of colors from various lenses?  Probably not.  And yet lenses produce all of these things.

Renowned photojournalist David Burnett uses the 50/L.  He says, "It's really great ... It's funny how you can look at pictures and know it that it was shot with this lens ... What's the look?  And it has a look, and there's no doubt about it."  See at 15:30 — https://vimeo.com/13036394

I am finding this forum more and more misleading in the worse fashion, lead by couple of devoted brainiacs with great ability to browse, process and serve confusing information.
It is so much like politics is scary!
Now even titles are intentionally skewed.
Internet is buzzing with reviews, positive impressions about Sony, and all we got here is bitter, sarcastic ind smart ass comments without the end in sight.
I own A7r and it is the best camera I ever own for my shooting style!

When anonymous know-it-alls declare that Sony's new camera is doomed, that pretty much assures it will be a success.  :)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17