October 23, 2014, 12:59:05 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 - cid

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 19
16
Lenses / Re: wide angle needed
« on: September 06, 2014, 04:00:47 PM »
I'm in love with the Zeiss 15/2.8, but it comes at a steep price. I wanted the very best UWA lens for landscape and architecture, and its quality is undeniable.

That said, I've heard amazing things about the new 16-35/4. I'm sure it's fantastic, and far more versatile than the Zeiss 15.

Good luck!

yes, Zeiss 15mm is my dream UWA lens, but as said, the price is too high right now  :-[

17
Lenses / Re: wide angle needed
« on: September 06, 2014, 03:58:47 PM »
I wasn't happy with any of the Canon wide angle primes or zooms a year of so ago, so I bought a mint condition Zeiss 18mm f/3.5 for $999.00.  Couldn't be happier, and it fulfills all your requirements.  Now that the new Canon F4 zoom is out, it would warrant serious consideration.  For my needs I see no reason to change from the Zeiss to the new Canon zoom, as the images I get from the 18mm are excellent.  I use it on a 6D or a 5D Classic. 

nice to hear that, I just checked at local store web site, they have both of them, so I can compare and I still have to go there to get loose zooming ring fixed on my 24-70  ;)

18
Lenses / Re: wide angle needed
« on: September 06, 2014, 12:22:34 PM »
The Zeiss 18mm f3.5. I'm surprised nobody has suggested it yet. Small, light lens with Focus Confirmation, great IQ and the best build quality you can get:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Zeiss-18mm-f-3.5-ZE-Distagon-Lens-Review.aspx
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/655185-REG/Zeiss_1762_827_Distagon_T_18mm_f_3_5.html
Go for it! ;)

very nice option, I'll check the review and maaaybe even in local store  :)

19
Lenses / Re: wide angle needed
« on: September 06, 2014, 04:47:33 AM »
17-40L if your budget is under 600$. @ F/8 it's just fine.

16-35 F/4L is the best option at the moment. Sharp, IS, and relatively inexpensive. The zeiss 15mm would be negligible in IQ, perhaps better micro-contrast but really pricey.

TS 17mm if your really into landscapes and got the budget for it.
from what I have seen zeiss is top for me, but pricey, right now I'm leaning towards 16-35 f/4, 17-40 is not really interesting for me since it's old lens and new 16-35 is much better and not so much more expensive...

buuut back in my mind there is still possibility of new UWA presented in photokina  ::)

Depends on how much you rush for it. If (and that's a big IF) such lens is announced at Photokina, it will take weeks, perhaps months to get it on the shelves. If you do not have the need for f/2.8, I'd go for the 16-35/4L IS if I were you. It complies with the requirement list you originally posted quite nicely IMHO.

I'm fully aware of that it won't be available immediately...

20
Lenses / Re: wide angle needed
« on: September 05, 2014, 12:44:38 PM »
17-40L if your budget is under 600$. @ F/8 it's just fine.

16-35 F/4L is the best option at the moment. Sharp, IS, and relatively inexpensive. The zeiss 15mm would be negligible in IQ, perhaps better micro-contrast but really pricey.

TS 17mm if your really into landscapes and got the budget for it.
from what I have seen zeiss is top for me, but pricey, right now I'm leaning towards 16-35 f/4, 17-40 is not really interesting for me since it's old lens and new 16-35 is much better and not so much more expensive...

buuut back in my mind there is still possibility of new UWA presented in photokina  ::)

21
Lenses / Re: wide angle needed
« on: September 05, 2014, 12:38:02 PM »
If you're looking for a zoom, the 16-35 f/4 L IS is probably your best bet.

If you're looking for something different, you may want to consider the Voigtlander 20mm f/3.5 Color Skoppar II.

It's the lightest and smallest UWA on Canon as far as I know, it's not too expensive (got mine used for 300€), got a great build-quality, manual focus with focus confirm and electronic management of the aperture... Not the sharpest you can find though (probably somewhere between the 17-40 and the 16-35 f/4), but it's good enough for me.

Djaaf.

I have checked on Voightlander, but for me it lacks sharpness, if not it would be winner for me

22
Lenses / Re: wide angle needed
« on: September 05, 2014, 10:07:46 AM »
Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L fits in with what you describe. The new canon 16-35mm F4 is also very interesting.
TS lens is very tempting option, but not sure I want it right now ... first I would like to have something easy and quick to use, simply said for travel  :)

EF 16-35mm f/4L IS sounds like what you're looking for.   The TS-E 17mm if you want the movements and will have time for tripod and setup. 
Yes, right now I'm leaning towards 16-35mm, but I was interested if there are any other interesting options to consider

23
Lenses / wide angle needed
« on: September 05, 2014, 08:58:09 AM »
hi gyus, straight to my problem, recently I found I'm missing some nice UWA lens...

my requirements are:

  • nice build quality
  • focal length somewhere between 15 - 20mm (the wider the better)
  • AF is not necessary - but at least focus confirmation would be nice
  • sharp
  • price - the lower the better (but it doesn't mean 15mm Zeiss is not an option)
  • weigth - again the lower the better, it's intended for travel use



24
Post Processing / Re: Favorite lightroom & photoshop addons
« on: September 04, 2014, 09:44:13 AM »
I have tried a lot of addons..
Now I only got Nik Collection, RadLab and Replichrome (I and II).

https://www.google.com/nikcollection 
http://www.gettotallyrad.com/replichrome 
http://www.gettotallyrad.com/radlab 

thank you for sharing

25
Post Processing / Re: Favorite lightroom & photoshop addons
« on: September 04, 2014, 05:02:47 AM »
Check out the free presets from http://www.ononesoftware.com/products/
Topaz ReMask is one I couldn't live without.

thanks for sharing  :)

any other interesting (free) presets/plugins?

26
Post Processing / Re: Favorite lightroom & photoshop addons
« on: September 03, 2014, 03:27:28 PM »
I have been very happy with Enfuse for both exposure stacking and focus stacking.

I just had a look on it and it looks sweet, thank for sharing!

27
Canon General / Re: Another Northrup - Canon vs. Nikon
« on: September 03, 2014, 01:13:50 PM »
All bullshit aside, he's not wrong.
Nikon's bodies are better...

Based on?  Better AF with more cross-type points spread further over the frame?  Faster frame rates?  Better implementation of Live View?  Ergonomics?  Viewfinder magnification?   

the problem is that lot of people consider sensor being whole body and compare only those

28
Canon General / Re: Another Northrup - Canon vs. Nikon
« on: September 03, 2014, 12:16:05 PM »
That was nothing more than a 25 minute infomercial.

Knowing that going in, I didn't waste any time actually watching it.

sad think is that he's trying to look serious and professional

I'd like to know where/how he got the (relative) numbers for sharpness of lenses? :o

equations like
22MPx of 5D mk II * 1.0909 + kit lens = 8MPx
where 1.0909 is some magic number so he can say D800E has 50% more resolution
looks too funny to be taken serious, but if someone does nothing (like John Snow  ;D) then he could get convinced it's the way it really works

It comes from DXO's perceptual sharpness value, aka turn all the resolution data from a lens into a single number.  The best part is that he spends 1/2 the video using those numbers as the basis for all of his comparisons and then in the second half he has a section where he looks at a specific lens, and comes to the conclusion that even though the perceptual sharpness number looked incredible for a certain lens, it turned out to be unusably soft.  Oops.
nice to know that   ??? I wasn't even able to watch it till the end...

29
Canon General / Re: Another Northrup - Canon vs. Nikon
« on: September 03, 2014, 09:31:01 AM »
That was nothing more than a 25 minute infomercial.

Knowing that going in, I didn't waste any time actually watching it.

sad think is that he's trying to look serious and professional

I'd like to know where/how he got the (relative) numbers for sharpness of lenses? :o

equations like
22MPx of 5D mk II * 1.0909 + kit lens = 8MPx
where 1.0909 is some magic number so he can say D800E has 50% more resolution
looks too funny to be taken serious, but if someone does nothing (like John Snow  ;D) then he could get convinced it's the way it really works

30
Post Processing / Re: Favorite lightroom & photoshop addons
« on: September 03, 2014, 09:11:40 AM »
VSCO and NIK!

do you mean this?

if yes, which package do you preffer? could you also provide some samples?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 19