August 22, 2014, 09:34:54 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 - gigabellone

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Will vintage lenses help me find the way?
« on: January 10, 2014, 04:12:01 PM »
+1...if you not in hurry, wait for x-mas holidays. BH has great deals on EF and L lenses.

I'm envious of the low prices on camera gear in USA. :D
I think that the shipping costs and customs fees would nullify any savings.
And i can't see myself staying for a whole year with just a 28-135 and a nifty fifty.... :P

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Will vintage lenses help me find the way?
« on: January 10, 2014, 06:26:25 AM »
In the end i have decided to drop the idea of getting vintage lenses. Good ones are as expensive as EF lenses, plus the cost of adapters. I'll be picking up a used Canon EF 28-135 next week for 200€. It covers almost all the focal lengths i'm interested in (except 24mm), and i'll be able to sell it with few (if any) loss. Thanks everyone for the advice. :)

Lenses / Re: New lenses ($6800 budget)
« on: January 04, 2014, 08:59:45 AM »
1) I think your 50/1.8 is good enough. If you're after large apertures, get either the 50 or the 85 1.2 L. The 85 is a better lens, but it might be slightly long on a crop sensor.

2) The Tamron 17-50/2.8 is a decent performer at a bargain price (300€). If you want image stabilization and faster focus, i would suggest the Canon 17-55/2.8 IS USM.

3) The Canon 100/2.8 Macro USM is a good lens at a fair price (around 500€). The 100 Macro L IS features a stabilizer, weather sealing and rounded aperture blades for 800€ (with 100€ rebate in Italy, check your local Canon site). For double that price you can get the Zeiss 100/2 Makro Planar.

4) I'm afraid there is nothing similar for crop sensor. The 24-105/4 is slightly better, but its wide end it's not that wide on crop cameras.

5) You already have the 70-300. If you want a longer zoom, the 100-400 is your only choice. If you want bigger apertures, you must blow your entire budget on a big white prime, like the 300/2.8.

Lenses / Re: Which one should I get?!
« on: January 04, 2014, 08:31:28 AM »
If you want to try the 14mm focal length and don't mind manual focusing and mechanical aperture, the Samyang/Rokinon 14/2.8 could be a good choice. It is sharp and with negligible optical abberrations, except a hefty distortion. It also costs a fifth of the money needed for the Canon counterpart.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Will vintage lenses help me find the way?
« on: December 31, 2013, 09:19:49 AM »
I think I am reading the OP in that they have/had some EF-S lenses that covered a number of focal lengths.  What lenses were they, and we can point you to a few equivalent tools. 

The idea of getting some vintage lenses to use is mostly misguided.  They don't have the coatings and current technology to make use of what the 6D can offer - and if nothing else it will find any and every flaw.  The reason to use vintage glass is to go fully manual or to achieve a 'look' out of camera.  If this doesn't match up with what you want, stick to what you can afford in the current line up.

It's hard to look at the same focal length day in and out, but there are a number of cheap zoom's that can scratch an itch.  Based on what I saw on your blog, a 17-40mm f4, 24-105mm f4 and/or 70-200mm f4 lens should be in your future - cheap even in euro's and you will sell again when upgrading later on for a net-zero cost.  You've spent over 1,600 Euro's on a camera, and it's only as good as the glass you put in front of it.

I've got nothing against primes. I have four of them. But, for someone with a new body and one $100 lens, I feel that a good walk-around zoom is the most economical beginning point. I've done manual focus and primes for 30 years or more, mostly because that was the only choice I had when I began taking photographs. I'm am so over that.

But, if you are talking primes, I can't imagine not having a 24 or 28 mm wide angle and a 100 or 135 mm short telephoto at a minimum. Just those two lenses will set you back more than the street price of a 24-105. I just think it is bad advice to suggest someone load up on a bunch of outdated manual focus primes when they can get a perfectly functional all purpose zoom that will help them learn the craft first.

As you have correctly guessed, i had a T2i with 3 lenses: 18-55mm/3.5-5.6, 50mm/1.8 II, Sigma 10-20mm/4-5.6. The kit lens and the Sigma were sold, and now the T2i with the Tamron 17-50mm/2.8 is for my family to use. I got the 6D a month ago, purposedly bought without the kit lens. F/4 is kinda slow, i knew i wouldn't want to trade the fast aperture with the zoom. I took pictures with the nifty fifty and i discovered i don't like the focal length much. I always feel i'm leaving something outside the frame, and head and shoulders portraits show a not so pleasing distortion.

Renting gear is not an option here in Italy. So it came to my mind that maybe buying cheap vintage lenses, using them for a while, and then reselling, was a cheap way to test many different focal lengths. I have no real interest in vintage lenses.

With the budget i set for my next lens purchase (1500€), i could get the 24/1.4 L, or the Sigma 35/1.4 and the 24/2.8. How did you choose your primes before buying them? Did you always start having a zoom first, and then got the primes based on the experience with that particular focal length?

Vintage wine will help you find the way.

How come it didn't came to my mind? This one is even cheaper than a Red Ring! :D

Re: Will vintage lenses help me find the way?

No, but L lenses will, no matter which one you pick.  Beware of the L addiction, though... symptoms include red rings, improved upper body strength, and the occasional marital troubles... ;)

Yeah, the plan was to test the focal lengths, and then getting Red Rings in those i liked the most. :D

Third Party Manufacturers / Will vintage lenses help me find the way?
« on: December 24, 2013, 09:39:57 AM »
I switched to a 6D some weeks ago, and i'm really loving my new toy :D . However, i only have a nifty fifty to go with it, and now i'm starting to crave for another toy (some of you here call this condition G. A. S. :D ). I'm a gearhead, but i'm also budget-conscious, so, before spending big bucks on L glass, i was considering the plan of getting some cheap vintage primes and adapters to see which focal lenghts would fit my needs. I know nothing about vintage lenses, and the variety and quantity of lenses is a bit overwhelming. I can borrow a Zeiss Planar 1.4/85 with adapter from a friend, so i got that focal length covered. Can you suggest me some cheap 24mm, 35mm and 135mm primes?

Glad to hear it!  How wide of a lens?

In the last days i persuaded myself that the 24L would be the perfect lens for me. 24mm should be wide enough for landscapes, and its large aperture will help a lot in low available light and open up interesting creative possibilities. I think it can cover most of my shooting needs: landscape, travel/street, full body portraits.

I played with my new toy today, and i must say i'm really impressed. It's light, but feels solid. The shutter is quiet, and it's easy and intuitive to use. And i can't believe how clean the pictures look at iso 4000 and over. The AF is good enough, it didn't disappoint after all. Now i only need a good wide angle lens and a sturdy tripod. :D

Just to let you all know, i placed my order for the 6D, i hope i'll be able to play with it this week end. :D

Lenses / Re: Lens dilemma for night sky
« on: November 25, 2013, 06:05:51 AM »
I don't know if this is going to be of any help, but my choice for this kind of pictures will be the Samyang 14/2.8. According to this review, it is a decent performer, and the price is very low compared to UWA from other manufacturers.

Lenses / Re: Lens dilemma for night sky
« on: November 20, 2013, 06:45:23 AM »
If you want to have good star images in the corners you will have to stop down most (all wider) of the lenses for one to two stops, sometimes even 3. So the argument to save money when using at 2.8 optic instead of a 1.4 stopped down to 2.8 is not correct since the 2.8 optic needs to be stopped down again to at least 4.... I even stop down fantastic lenses like the 135/2, the 200/2.8 or the 300/2.8 and 500/4 since you benefit a lot in quality when doing this in astrophotography!.
Maybe you're right, i never used these lenses and i can't swear by it, but if we can trust DxOMark, it looks like the two lenses behave close enough to make a 1000$/€ price difference look a bit of an exaggeration. Check the images attached to this post, i'm looking for a wideangle too, and i need some feedback. :)
The other benefit of the Zeiss 21mm, other than being tack sharp wide open at f2.8 is that it has a hard infinity stop. Sooooo much easier to set in the dark than fiddling with Live View to get focus on an AF lens.
I agree with you, the Zeiss 21/2.8 is the best at astrophotography, but MF makes it a very specialized lens.

Lenses / Re: Lens dilemma for night sky
« on: November 20, 2013, 04:15:06 AM »
I haven't tried it myself, but I heard the Canon f/1.4L II is good for star shooting once stopped down to f/2.8, as coma issues subside at that point.

If you have to stop down to f/2.8 you might as well save a grand and buy the 24/2.8 IS, which is quite good straight from maximum aperture. Unless, of course, you need f/1.4 for other works.

Lenses / Re: Lens dilemma for night sky
« on: November 19, 2013, 05:28:36 PM »
Have you considered the Samyang/Rokinon 14/2.8? It looks like it's very sharp and woth very low chromatic aberrations and no coma. I'm considering it myself as my night sky lens. I think that the 17-40/4 might be a little too slow to photograph stars.

Lenses / Re: Trying to decide on a prime for landscape photography
« on: November 18, 2013, 03:24:50 AM »
I never owned any of the lenses you mention, but i'm looking for a landscape prime myself, so i can share the results of my research with you. :)
MTF charts show that the 17-40 is good enough when stopped down to f/8-11, so i think you're fine with it when shooting landscapes and long exposures. However, if you want take pictures of stars you're going to need a fast aperture and decent sharpness. The 24/1.4L is the center, but somewhat disappointing in the corners when used wide open, showing low sharpness and high vignetting. It also shows coma when shot wide open. Stopping down to f/2.8-4 improve things a lot, but if you're stopping down to f/2.8, you might as well save a grand and get a 24/2.8 IS that boasts decent performances right from the fastest aperture. If you need the fast aperture for creative purposes, nothing can touch the canon L.

There's a brand now Zeiss 15/2.8 that's getting lots of praising reviews, but it costs something in the whereabouts of 3000$. The other Zeiss lenses show good sharpness in lab tests, so they are worth a thought, if you can get over the fact they don't have the autofocus.

My considerations: the 24/2.8 IS is a good all-arounder, delivering good performances in all the fields of interests at a fair price. If money wasn't a concern, i would have bought the Zeiss 15/2.8 as a dedicated landscape/starfield lens, and something else for street and handheld low light photography.

My first DSLR was a 550D and I now have a 6D.  The 550D's auto focus does not compare with the 6D's, regardless of how close the specs look on paper.  The 6D's AF is faster and more accurate.

You really need to try a 6D out yourself to see if it performs to your expectations.  If you can't rent one where you live, do you know any other photographers who would loan you theirs for a few hours or days?  Is there a local retail store where you could do hands-on comparisons with other bodies?
many people seem to hate the 6D AF system but it is actually very reliable at least the center point is.
the center AF point of it is more sensitive than any AF point of the 1DX , the 5D3 or my D800E.
I tested my D800E vs my 6D vs my D600 vs rented 5d3 in lowlight , the 6D actually handled extreme lowlight best, no contest here.
the 6D's actually usable ISO6400 combined with the killer lowlight AF make it the best lowlight compact SLR ever from any maker.
that alone makes it worth it and I think it is the best value camera ever made for hybrid photography, I just have to wait ML to come up something amazing for that camera to make it really the hybrid camera.

I'm starting to think that focusing on center point and then crop the picture in post-production would be the lesser, and acceptable, of two evil, the other one being spending a 1000€ premium to buy a camera with a very complex autofocus system that i'll never be able to use at 100% of its capabilities. I'll take some more time to think about it, but it's most probable i'll bite the bullet and get the 6D.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4