October 25, 2014, 05:41:32 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 - TommyLee

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
1
lens tip reported NO focus shift....so I wonder about this ...seeming....focus shift

just reporting here...

I stalled on this lens til the autofocus rumors fade..

my sigma 35 A  is absolutely perfect.....

I actually like the 35mm angle better..
but I hate to miss a great lens... if only I used 50 more...

does not fit in here
14L II,    35 sig,    85L II,   135L ....


2
my story...for what it is worth................

on my 5D3
.if I can get silly for a moment...
my sigma 35A is  91.52 % as accurate as my 35L (which I sold)...
maybe more so....hard to tell...... they both do/did well...

bokeh on sigma is .... 92.36 %    ....as good as Canon 35L was...
 and sig focus SPEED  is 90.03 %   as fast  as the 35L

wideopen sharpness......the Sigma is 122.45% better than Canon...
Chromatics performance.....116% over canon

I guess you can see my point about pixel/performance peeping...

.......

I had.... and worked with.....
 the old sigma 30mm f1.4 on a 20d 40d and 50d...it had to be coaxed (after one return to sigma for work)
...i.e.   pump the 1/2 press button...in servo or single shot...prep the lens for accuracy...this DID work...

the sigma 35 ...is different... it is ready...to nail focus  ALMOST as good as the 35L did....

further
I tried a 50L a number of times at the counter
and it was erratic enough, soft wide open.... and CA filled...that I avoided it
cost unimportant..
plus I like 35mm MORE than 50mm....for that view range...
==============

NOW.....
I ordered the sigma 50.... as soon as allowed
and also had a dock put aside for me for the new 50 and the owned 35 A...and coming 85mm f1.4 or whatever....

...after waiting and having first place in line... in town
...and after reading of focus issues.......I gave up my place and withdrew from the purchase..
....(it was about to arrive)

a small part of withdrawing... was about 50mm versus 35mm field of view
....mostly I did not want to put in some new work to get this new product functioning...if needed
but I got the feeling that this focus was possibly a trouble spot for the sig 50mm A.....

now I am not so sure.....
but no worries

I do know that no one had an auto-focus lens suitable for me
......... until the sig A was coming in...

35 A lens is a wonderful lens ...which i use as standard ...on the 5D3 all the time....
it is very good

I still wonder if the dock and the 50mm A  ... and some work ...would have been just fine..
but I love the 35A so much that I ....just let this all go..................................for now...

I think I am waiting out the field testing by everyone... thankyouverymuch

and I am usually first on a new lens...

==========
I think Sigma had to back-engineer the (35A AND 50A) lens....
but they had experience with their 30mm from the old days..


this is just my experienced comment...that may be similar to others....

I may still get the 50mm... but it is not compelling at the moment

I have 14L II, 35 Sigma,  85L II 
and 135L  .... as my prime setup   they are the best available for me....

(actually I recently sold 135L to a friend...but will likely buy one again... it is already missed
...but I am only talking about $100 different between new and used... a solid commodity...
...the 135L is like a Krugerrand in that respect...a known quantity...when it is in pristine condition)

so  I await the final conclusion here...and await the coming Sig 85mm f1.4 A  lens

and dream of a sigma 135mmm  I.S Arts lens........   or Canon 135mm f2L I.S.

we are playing out Sigma's latest  success story.... in slow motion here...I believe

Canon LET this happen...by inaction  IMO

...........

what a great forum this is....VERY useful...
I enjoy reading everyone's ideas and respect and  learn from them

TOM















3
Lenses / Re: Waiting for the 35 1.4L II
« on: May 11, 2014, 09:40:11 AM »
just my thought and experience....

have 14L II, 35 sig,  85L II ....
making kit small...in lens count... pounds are still high...ha!


I had 35L ...it was a great lens.... sold it ...got most of what I paid...

bought sigma 35 1.4 Art... sharper ...about same or VERY SLIGHTLY lower quality bokeh...
depends on background for each...
love it.....a better lens than the 35L I ... IMO

HOWEVER
I swore i would get 35L II .... if it measured up...well up and over the sig 35..
so I await Canon's move...
 they have a big fence to climb...but...we will see

I really want an 85 OS f1.4.... and/or 135 OS f2...from Canon or sigma.....

sup to them........

Tom

4
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Gets Reviewed
« on: April 05, 2014, 07:49:47 PM »
FINALLY a decent 50mm lens...

I will try this one...and I mean BUY it ...use it for 1/2 year...really try it out...
my 35 f1.4 is quite nice.. and the bokeh quality...
is about as good as the 35L(I sold)... sometimes a little busy..

but I am nitpicking on the 35 sigma...  a very nice lens

so,
if the bokeh on this 50mm is  reasonable...this lens will be hard to get....for a while...  IMO

---------------


now I want an 85mm f1.4 Arts lens...hurry hurry....

I am delighted... this 50mm is looking so good
I hear June availability...on the 50mm

TOM

5
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 135mm f/2 DG OS Art Coming? [CR1]
« on: December 16, 2013, 08:21:34 PM »
love my 35 sig A

have 135L ...it is great

if Sig makes one with OS AND has similar performance as 135L...
and ...for like $1,000....well...hello Canon   anyone in there?.... knock knock.....

will be nice to see what the 35L II looks like  in performance....  now that they retreated and redesigned and MAY reissue... to combat sig 35 f1.4...............

this Canon/sigma 35 f1-4 saga.......
is part of the hint/equation for the 135 path...how this is all handled....

I love my Canon lenses..
but the sig 35  1.4   is so lovely...   got my money back on the 35L f1.4.......

a 135 sigma f2 OS is JUST what I need....IFF it does the job right

TOm

6
had a 5D II and used it with my 35L and 85L II
nice gear all around...

then
when I got the 5D3...the lenses came alive .... all over the place....finally
accurate, more reliably sharper.... all points ar4e now useful....
(both cameras having been set up with MA)

then the sigma 35 replaced the 35L ... wow ...buh bye ...Canon
and the new SYSTEM with these 2  lenses is great... 
I love this pair walking the city as the sun arrives... ...the sigma keeps up with the 85L - IMO
I also carry the 14L.... it is nice...within its own limits

likely.... these two fast primes are the only stuff that works (for me) in low light of a bar / jazz club....
....and at the outer points too.... much better than the 5D II...
my 35 sig DOES work fast accurate and on outer points....

as for the 6D...have not used one... but I 'understand' the centerpoint is the reliable option..

my vote - for you - is for the 5D III

the two primes are the correct ones...
I also have the 135L...lovely,,,, but not the same ability as the 85L II... for what I like...

yes 135 is faster to focus ...and  better for some work... and with a flash ...likely beats the 85L..
but for those very low light ...special shots... the sigma the 35 and 85 and a 5D3  are where it art..

in my opinion

TOM

7
Lenses / Re: Is it still the time for the 16-35 ?
« on: October 27, 2013, 05:46:10 PM »
oops i forgot to write that my doubts are also because i take a lot of industrial photos to very big machines that the company where i work manufactures. Now i've the 10-22 but i've bought the 5D mkIII and i need to replace it.
I shoot :

10% landscape
20% travel reportage
30% event reportage
40% industrial photos

so the high distorsion of the 16-35 wouldn't be the best solution, but it seems the only one (counting also the big discount applied)

I had the 10-22 canon  and it was great
the 16-35 gives you the same picture but on a full frame....and same performance ...maybe a little better...  when I switched to FF from crop I missed the 10-22 and filled that longing
...in slightly better quality...but nearly exact view....with the 16-35 II

just sayin

TOM

8
Lenses / Re: 24-70 II with IS
« on: October 27, 2013, 09:51:52 AM »
as good as the Canon 24-70 II is...  a nice lens

the missing I.S.   ...is covered by 'errors and omissions...' clause in their insurance.

I bought and returned the 24-70 II ...almost sharp enough @ 70... not quite... for the price
BUT the missing I.S. just killed it for me.....
it would be used RIGHT WHERE the I.S. needs to kick-in.... so I get that shot....
silly not to have this available..

I will wait..
and that may include a new Sigma 24-70-ish  range too.......the 35 f1.4 wiped my (sold) 35L ....
Sigma knows how to please...

I believe Canon issued the non-I.S. first because it wouldn't sell...later
when the one with I.S. was available

just my thought

TOM

9
Lenses / Re: Is it still the time for the 16-35 ?
« on: October 27, 2013, 09:39:11 AM »
I have the 14LII,  sig 35 f1.4....  wow, yum, whoopee!
if you want aperture-speed and lowest distortion...they are wonderful

BUT
I kept the 16-35 II because it is also great
has more distortion but less chromatics  than 14L II
sigma is a class in itself...fagetaboutit Canon

the 16-35 II  really is the best, most versatile range to get that ultrawide bit included
look for a deal on a new one and add it...

if you want the next level of quality from...14-24 or what ever ...maybe...canon brings ...someday...
I believe you would do better from the two primes....
else
get the 16-35 II....I cant let mine go....

16-35 II and a 100 macro-L in a little side-case..
and I can tackle a whole city....crushing museums, bridges, tall buildings and people on the street...
just like Godzilla

you will likely get most of your money back because others also know this

Just my ideas

TOM

10
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II $1699 at B&H Photo
« on: October 16, 2013, 04:11:02 PM »
are you sure about this....?

see attached ....from your link

Add it to your cart then go through the checkout process, and you'll see the $1999 price.

I am assuming then that..... THE - additional (= $1699 total) - REBATE of $300 comes from a later pdf fill-in and send?   after purchase

thanks
if this is the case

NOTE: I suppose this means the I.S. version is getting ready?....

TOM

11
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II $1699 at B&H Photo
« on: October 16, 2013, 01:50:41 PM »
are you sure about this....?

see attached ....from your link....  10:51am wednesday

TOM

12
Lenses / Re: Sell my 85L for these two lenses?
« on: October 08, 2013, 01:20:13 PM »
As someone else has suggested, unless 2.8 isn't fast enough you may want to consider the 100L instead of an 85 - the Canon 85s, whatever other virtues they plainly have, suffer horribly from blueish fringing (different from the standard purple CA) wide open around pale objects that aren't quite in focus.  I've never seen that (or any other visible flaw for that matter) with my 100L, whose only flaw is one all macro lenses have - it doesn't focus fast if you switch suddenly from a close subject to a distant one (or vice versa).  And, thanks to its greater focal length and very short minimal focus distance, you can conjure up marvelous background blur that gives the 85L and 135L a run for their money (for all I know all this is true of the non-L 100mm macro too).  Its advantage over the the Sigma 85mm lens (which is otherwise excellent - or at least the copy I rented was) is greater mechanical consistency - i.e. you will be less likely to need to return it.  The 100L's advantage over all the 85mm and other 100mm lenses for Canon is that it has IS, which can be useful.

As for 35mm, I've not used the 35mm L.  The 35mm IS is excellent, as is the Sigma. both of which I rented when they were new.  The advantage of the former is its IS; the advantage of the latter, aside from the obvious speed factor, is its superior performance with regard to coma - which matters if you do much shooting in low light where there are small, bright points of light; this is nicely shown in the respective reviews at lenstip.  (Unable to decide which one's relative advantages mattered to me more, I procrastinated until the ridiculous short-lived Adorama price reduction on the 28mm IS occurred and bought one of those instead - it's excellent too.)

yes...I agree..............
 by the way...the non-L macro performs pretty similar to the L - I.S. version

my DO-ALL kit is a 14mm II, sigma 35 f1.4 (one of the best performing lenses I have owned) and the 100L because it does so much...
MAYBE the 135 f2 or maybe the 85L II ... but these are specialized and yes they are great..

but to go for a walk in Portland, Paris or Chicago... I want ultra wide (14),   ultra-fast normal(35 sig) and maybe a bit of telephoto from the 100L macro...  for a close up museum or flower shot
these do most of what I need....and have nearly flawless delivery

14L II has removable fringing but NO distortion, Sigma has NO ISSUES IMO, 100 macro is not as fast aperture  as ...say ....85L or 135L but ...as stated here ...can get close and MAYBE derive more back-blur than the other two teles... 100L is plenty fast to focus... if you dont ask it to go from 8" to 100 feet in an instant..and back again

the kit is small...
but
if really small is wanted try 14L II, 35 I.S. and 85/100 non-L(but they have fringing wide open..)

I.S. becomes very useful on the 100mm length... with no optical issues IMO
nothing touches the 35 sigma ...that has autofocus...

I await Canon's re-attempt at a re-release ...another try...with a 35mm L   II   ....
of course the price will be 2-3 times the sigma....


13
Lenses / Re: Sell my 85L for these two lenses?
« on: October 07, 2013, 09:34:46 PM »
first off ...the 85L mk I is pretty good  and   compares fairly well to 85 f1.8....
of course except for the extra aperture of the 'L'

I would guess you would enjoy the quicker focus of the f1.8....

it is nice to have a little  more than f2 aperture.. but the performance wideopen should be examined carefully .... as to purple fringing....which the L has also....
check out  some review sites on this
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/419-canon_85_18_5d
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/154/cat/10


ME...I would maybe choose the 135 f2
.... or maybe even the excellent 100 f2.8 L   macro  for some more versatility...


I cant speak to the Sigma 85mm, but hear it is quite good
-----

on the 35mm choices.......

I STRONGLY advise the Sigma 35 f1.4 OVER the 35L.
the sigma is sharp from the start @ f1.4... and much better performance/cleaner than the 35L
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/848-sigma35f14eosff


one last note:
 the canon 35 f2 I.S.  is quite good also...and about the same physical size as the 85 f1.8
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/847-canon35f2isff

maybe those smaller TWO would address the issue of weight you mentioned...
a pair of f2 lenses  about the same small size/weight

I say ...get the 35 f2 I.S.  or Sigma 35 f1.4  OVER the OLD 35L

14
Lenses / Re: Good, relatively cheap prime that work well across formats
« on: October 05, 2013, 03:12:16 AM »
I personally love the 35/2 IS. I shoot a lot at 35 and 50 which is roughly (yes, 35mm at 1.6x not exactly 50, but 50ish) what it would give you transitioning between a crop sensor and full frame. As I've stated before in another thread, it is a great deal at $549 after the recent price drop.

It is the fastest lens with IS next to the 200/2, has modern optics, and is actually on par with the L at f2 with regard to resolution. If you are willing to spend a few hundred more, there is always the Sigma 35.


+1   a perfect choice between the two 35s

there are reviews of 35 sig and 35 f2 I.S. .....in my opinion... the best lenses avail that work on FF(35mm) or 1.6 crop(50mm+) ... either are the top choices ...

15
I say the 70-300L

a good range... and seems to be a sharp lens...I dont have it
had the non-L.... it was pretty good...even at 300mm.....but the range was VERY useful..
and it matched with a second (or third) lens for travel very well..

you seem to want reach... that 70-300L likely does better than most for that

I am SURE the 70-200 II is too heavy
IMO it is almost a specialized lens because of the weight.. it is a real fine optic and a problem solver...but is truly 'baggage' sometimes
unless that is specifically what you use and want regularly(does ok with 2xTC too)

frankly the 35L and 70-300 cover a lot ...
add a less expensive 14mm (I prefer the 14L II) and these three do a ton of work on a trip
(or a fisheye)
I wouldn't enter a big city - as a tourist - without 14mm or 16mm...... gets a tall building in a single bound...and if you have the 70-300, you can reach waayy up those bldgs and bridges...to grab a gargoyle...
---------

70-300L

Tom



Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9