1
HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Post your HDR images:
« on: May 07, 2013, 03:51:22 PM »
Toronto
May 18, 2013, 07:45:53 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.
Pages: [1]
2
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 14-24 f/2.8L in Late 2013 [CR2]
« on: December 13, 2012, 07:54:37 PM »
As a point of reference, the Nikon 14-24 2.8, which is regarded by many as the sharpest wide-zoom in the world, is $2000.
3
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD Hands-On
« on: November 28, 2012, 09:36:15 PM »Thanks for sharing the article CR.
Just to clear up a few questions:
"Legendary image quality" - Probably a bit strongbut refers to the previous lens it replaces (at the price it sold for). Certainly not a reference to every lens Tamron has ever made, or a comparison to a 600L. If you haven't used the older 70-200mm, it was definitely sharp and contrasty but had a few drawbacks, namely focus speed. Simply put, it was slow.
Yes, the weather sucked. Toronto in November, what can you do? We plan to upgrade the review with some more shots as we get them, but wanted to give people a taste as soon as we could.
Who in Canada shoots the best lens reviews? We'll get the 70-200 in their hands.
Nice to see you guys coming into the discussion.
Thanks for the time spent on the review - I never decide based on one review alone anyway, but it's certainly a start.
As a fellow Torontonian, I concur about the weather.
4
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD Hands-On
« on: November 28, 2012, 06:24:01 PM »
As they write in the disclaimer of the article:
PHOTONews Canada is owned by Amplis Foto Inc. Amplis Foto Inc. is the distributor of Tamron lenses for Canada. The words are our own based on the lens we were provided by Tamron Japan.
Not to say there's an obvious bias, but I would check out a few more reviews before dishing out $1500
PHOTONews Canada is owned by Amplis Foto Inc. Amplis Foto Inc. is the distributor of Tamron lenses for Canada. The words are our own based on the lens we were provided by Tamron Japan.
Not to say there's an obvious bias, but I would check out a few more reviews before dishing out $1500
5
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions
« on: November 21, 2012, 04:22:28 PM »
That's more like it..
Well done Sigma.
I already own the 50 1.4 - now I'm just unsure whether I should keep it and own a 35 as well, or simply exchange them out.
Anyone have any thoughts on whether both primes get good use on a full frame - 35 and a 50? Or if they find it redundant?
Well done Sigma.
I already own the 50 1.4 - now I'm just unsure whether I should keep it and own a 35 as well, or simply exchange them out.
Anyone have any thoughts on whether both primes get good use on a full frame - 35 and a 50? Or if they find it redundant?
6
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM for Canon in Stock at B&H Photo
« on: November 21, 2012, 03:02:39 PM »im sure reviewers ave it but give them time to test it lol
Many reviewers get the lenses far in advance for the purpose of testing it and preparing their reviews, but due to legal restraints are forced to hold off on publishing the reviews until the lens is officially released.
Looking forward to seeing some any day now.
7
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM for Canon in Stock at B&H Photo
« on: November 21, 2012, 01:35:53 PM »
Shouldn't we start seeing reviews now that the lens is officially available for purchase? I can't seem to find any
8
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]
« on: October 30, 2012, 04:17:36 PM »
This is dumb. Dumb, dumb, dumb.
My only hope is that it takes the still high used prices of the original 24-70 down from $1000-$1200 to at least $800. I doubt it would have that effect, as the entire advantage of the 24-70 over the newer, lighter, and very sharp 24-105 zoom (which does rest at that $800 resale value)was the 2.8. Take away the quicker speed of the aperture and you have a lens that means a whole of nothing to a whole lot of people.
And say what you will about a cheaper version of the 24-70 - At F/4, I can't see it being cheaper than the 24-105, and there are very few people that complain about sharpness from that lens.
My only hope is that it takes the still high used prices of the original 24-70 down from $1000-$1200 to at least $800. I doubt it would have that effect, as the entire advantage of the 24-70 over the newer, lighter, and very sharp 24-105 zoom (which does rest at that $800 resale value)was the 2.8. Take away the quicker speed of the aperture and you have a lens that means a whole of nothing to a whole lot of people.
And say what you will about a cheaper version of the 24-70 - At F/4, I can't see it being cheaper than the 24-105, and there are very few people that complain about sharpness from that lens.
9
Software & Accessories / Re: Lightroom 4.2 update
« on: October 03, 2012, 02:59:46 PM »
shareholder?
10
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS M System Announced
« on: July 23, 2012, 02:43:11 AM »
So, $800 + an EF Adapter for $200 = $1000.
I'd rather buy a used 5D for $750 with a 40 pancake for $200 = $950.
That's just me. I get that they have different purposes, but for mine, that'd be the more preferable option.
Losing video and *perhaps* portability? But gaining a professional body and image quality for the same price.
This may have been a different story had the price been sub $400-500 with the EF adapter. As it stands now, it's a camera that doesn't know what it wants to be (my concern with Nikon's mirror less as well). I'm not going to dish out $1000. If I want to go the tiny point and shoot route I'd go with the s100 for $350
I'd rather buy a used 5D for $750 with a 40 pancake for $200 = $950.
That's just me. I get that they have different purposes, but for mine, that'd be the more preferable option.
Losing video and *perhaps* portability? But gaining a professional body and image quality for the same price.
This may have been a different story had the price been sub $400-500 with the EF adapter. As it stands now, it's a camera that doesn't know what it wants to be (my concern with Nikon's mirror less as well). I'm not going to dish out $1000. If I want to go the tiny point and shoot route I'd go with the s100 for $350
Pages: [1]