March 02, 2015, 07:42:04 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 - kev8d

Pages: [1] 2
Tonight I experimented with the light and several cameras. The clipped highlights appears to be due to high ISO settings on the 5D mkII. After around ISO 1000 the clipping appears.

I haven't noticed it at similar ISOs on our 7D and 5D mkIII.

Yesterday I was filming a wedding with a new video light (1000watt lowel DP light), and I noticed that the brightest part of the light appeared black with bits of blue in my footage rather than white. (See sample jpeg)

Can anyone explain this? I was shooting with a 5D mkII.

Lenses / Re: Do you still love 24-105L?
« on: April 26, 2013, 02:21:27 PM »
Wow, Sporgon, your building panoramas are fantastic!

Back on topic, the 24-105 is my most versatile lens. If we could get a 24-105 f/2.8 IS, I'd happily sell most of my other lenses.

I use mine for non-critical stuff, Like ebay photos, vacation photos and personal stuff. When I do use it for clients it's usually at F/8 so no-one could tell. It's a great lens if your using flash...

f8 - that's the key to optimising results from this lens.

All our Building Panoramics pictures that have been shot with this lens are at f8.
Even so, it still has to be king of versatility.

Lenses / Re: What to do with a broken 70-200 f/2.8 IS mkI?
« on: December 11, 2012, 01:43:49 PM »
I should mention, the quote was after my Canadian CPS gold discount of 20% :\

Lenses / What to do with a broken 70-200 f/2.8 IS mkI?
« on: December 11, 2012, 01:18:06 PM »
Our 70-200 f/2.8 IS mkI hit the concrete this year, and after sending it to Canon for a repair quote, it'd cost more to repair it than to buy another used one ($1500).

Canon shipped the lens back to me, so now the question is: What should I do with it?
Do people actually pay ok money for shattered lenses?

I've heard of people turning lenses into cool household items like teabag holders. Any neat ideas?

If you're curious, here's what Canon says needs to be fixed:

Lenses / Re: What's your dream lens
« on: December 07, 2012, 05:51:13 PM »
My dream lens would be a: 24-105 f/2.8 IS. I'm sure it'd be huge and expensive, but I'd happily sell most of my lenses and then just carry this one around all day if Canon made one. This plus a teleconverter would be extremely useful.

I like how you guys think! LOL

Checking with the insurance company today. Will see!


I've got your EF 70-200 2.8L IS USM and there is an estimate that requires your approval.

Repair cost for this unit is $1,426.74
We are going to have to replace  a few parts on the unit they are;

Thanks, Canon! I bought the lens used for less than that.  :-\

Lenses / Re: My unscientific 50mm macro shootout: Canon vs Zeiss
« on: November 18, 2012, 11:51:24 PM »
I'll try to do a more accurate test tomorrow with the camera mounted on a tripod. I'll be sure to shoot at f8 and f11.

Lenses / Re: My unscientific 50mm macro shootout: Canon vs Zeiss
« on: November 18, 2012, 07:48:00 PM »
It's the same camera in both, manually focused in both using live view. 5Dmkii.

Lenses / My unscientific 50mm macro shootout: Canon vs Zeiss
« on: November 18, 2012, 05:48:11 PM »
I recently had the opportunity to get my hands on a Zeiss 50mm f/2 makro planar, and I took a few shots to compare it to my Canon 50mm f/2.5 macro. The camera was placed on a table, and the shutter was triggered via a 2 second timer. I tried my best to line the shots up, but they aren't perfect.

These are 100% crops of the centre part of the image. The USB key image is the cover photo on a USB key box, hence the fine printing lines.

Lenses / Re: The new Voigtlander 28mm f/2.8
« on: November 15, 2012, 11:21:10 PM »
I haven't tried the Canon 28mm's focus ring (the store was out at the time). I really like the focus ring on the 50 f/1.4. Good to hear the 28mm's feels nice too. I'll try to look at one in person next chance I get. :)

Lenses / Re: The new Voigtlander 28mm f/2.8
« on: November 15, 2012, 10:54:51 PM »
I considered the Canon 28mm f/1.8 because it has a pretty good reputation online, but the build quality of the Voigtlander won me over. As a videographer, I really appreciate having a solidly built lens with a buttery smooth manual focus ring.

How does your lens perform on a full frame body? Shooting on a crop body will not reveal the corners' true sharpness or softness since they're cropped out by the camera.


Lenses / The new Voigtlander 28mm f/2.8
« on: November 15, 2012, 10:23:02 PM »
A few weeks ago I ordered a manual focus Voigtlander Color Skopar SL II 28mm f/2.8 lens. The lens debuted in October 2012, and there has been very little press coverage on it now that it's out.

Now that it arrived, I've started to try it out. The lens vignettes pretty strongly at f/2.8, but that disappears by f/4. The centre image quality is excellent, even at f/2.8. The corners are soft until stopped down to about f/8, so it's probably not an ideal landscape photography lens. That being said, it's light weight makes it a great lens to pack when you're going for a long walk and don't feel like lugging a heavier lens. The tiny profile also prevents you from attracting too much attention. Even a 5D mkIII looks somewhat unassuming when equipped with this lens.

Another great feature is the accurate hyperfocal distance markings on the lens.

Here is a photo taken from a quick walk with the dog today. I wanted to take more, but he kept pulling the leash as I was trying to hold still! LOL

The vignetting in this shot was added in POST.  :)

The hood in the picture is a 3rd party ebay hood. It protects the lens without adding to the vignetting.

Lenses / Re: What lenses do you own?
« on: October 20, 2012, 06:14:05 PM »
You should know that I'm a professional videographer, so autofocus isn't a priority to me.

  • Samyang 14mm f/2.8. Shows significant distortion, but it makes a great effects lens for video. Quite sharp. Great value if you don't need AF.
  • Canon EF 24-105 f/4 L IS. One of my favourite general-purpose lenses. I've shot entire weddings with just this lens (by choice, too! The shootsac had other lenses, but it's just so darn versatile!). Despite being a "kit" lens, this lens is quite sharp and has reliable autofocus. The IS is very handy, too. If Canon made a 24-105 f/2.8 IS, I'd probably sell most of my lenses and then carry the f/2.8 and a 2x teleconverter.
  • Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8 L I. A wedding photographer's best friend. Most photogs I know use this with a 70-200. Great combination. That being said, I've never been "wowed" by the image quality. The image quality is very good, but I can see why people are willing to upgrade to the new II version.
  • Voigtlander 28mm f/2.8 (pancake lens). This lens is brand new. It was released less than a month ago. It's entirely manual focus, and it's extremely small and well built. The image quality in the center is really sharp and with decent contrast. The corners are soft and show vignetting wide open. Despite being less than perfect optically, the lens's small size, wonderful focus ring, excellent build quality, and great center sharpness make it fun to use.
  • Canon EF 50mm f/1.4. I think this is one of the best values in Canon's lineup. The build quality is better than the 50mm f/1.8, and the focus ring feels really nice. That being said, I've worked with people whose copies had the AF motor die, which is apparently a common problem. The image quality is quite good, which is what you'd hope for when shooting with a fast prime lens.
  • Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS I. This big, heavy lens' versatility makes up for its sometimes awkward size. The IS and AF work well in my copy, and I'm generally pleased with the image quality. I bought it used, and it was worth the price. That being said, if you have the budget, consider the II version. It's noticeably sharper and will quickly sell if you ever have to part with it.
  • Canon EF 85mm f/1.8. I love this lens for photography. It's a great portrait lens. Sharp, fast AF, unobtrusive size, and reasonably priced. That being said, I find the focal length really awkward for video. For photography, this is probably the best value in Canon's lineup - even more so than the 50 f/1.4.
  • Nikon 180mm f/2.8 ED (manual focus). I use this old lens on my Canon's with a cheap adapter purchased from ebay. We often shoot with second or third shooters who don't have long lenses, so this is a great lens to lend them on wedding days during ceremonies. The image quality is really quite good, and it's very solidly built. My biggest complaint for video is that it doesn't come with a tripod collar, which means you tend to get lens shake in your footage whenever you pull focus.

  • Sigma 24mm f/1.8. Reasonably sharp. Quite versatile because of its macro abilities and large aperture. It's a large lens, and I found I didn't use it enough to justify the weight in my shootsac. Most importantly, my copy had terrible backfocusing. Even after sending it back to Sigma for repairs and then micro adjusting it to match my bodies, it was still unreliable. I bought it used and sold it at a significant loss. Sigma is notorious for poor quality control. Sigma makes some great glass, but make sure you test the lens yourself with your camera before you buy.
  • Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II. Fairly sharp wide open and better stopped down. For it's price, it's a great little lens, but it's poor build quality and tiny focus ring may get on your nerves. If you can afford it, go for the 50 f/1.4.
  • Canon EF 50mm f/2 macro. This is probably the sharpest Canon lens I own. It has excellent image quality. Unfortunately, the build quality is quite poor. After using the lens only four or five times (always indoors), the focus ring has started to grind and turn awkwardly. I'll be sending it in for service. I also find the focus ring uncomfortable to use and difficult for focusing on distant objects (it's made for macro work). After this one's back from Canon, I'll be selling it.

Pages: [1] 2