August 01, 2014, 07:15:38 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.


Messages - infared

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 55
1
Lenses / Re: canon 16-35 2.8 II vs. WHAT?
« on: July 31, 2014, 06:59:27 AM »
I wish I had some ultrawide angle lens, say 16-35, but I don't have enough money because I recently bought 35mm 1.4L which makes me incredibly happy.

So the question is whether there is something really close to 16-35L. Don't say 17-40, this lens sucks because of its apperture, I need something faster, wider, lighter and sharper.
Do you need an autofocus zoom or would a manual focus prime do? If so, consider Samyang 14mm f/2.8. It is faster, wider, lighter and sharper than the 17-40/4L, and indeed wider, lighter and sharper although not faster than the 16-35/2.8.

...and much less expensive!  :D

2
Lenses / Re: canon 16-35 2.8 II vs. WHAT?
« on: July 31, 2014, 03:16:16 AM »
I have to agree with random orbits...The best native-mount ultraWA AF lens for a Canon FF is the new Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS.
I sold my Canon 16-35mm f2.8L II to buy one. The Tokina comes completely unglued in comparison  in any other focal lengths and it's 2.8 performance is worse than the Canon 16-35mm f2.8L II. Dave Douglas' "quick" comparison is EXTREMELY misleading. He makes one wonder if he perhaps works for Tokina??? Use The Digital Pictures' comparison tool and seek out other reviews about the Tokina and you will find that you are getting what you pay for there.
I am not opposed to 3rd-party lenses, though as I chose the Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art over the Canon equivalent..but right now, Canon's  new wide-angle zoom is the top of the heap if we are looking for the best sharpness and contrast....I don't miss the f2.8 at all...others may feel differently.

3
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO Sonnar T*
« on: July 30, 2014, 12:44:36 PM »
." I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!"
 
So darn true

This review compelled me to order one overnight and I tried it briefly yesterday. I hate MF lenses with my bad eyesight but this will definitely be a keeper.

PS: I am not going to read any more reviews of Zeiss glasses.

Bad timing.  Zeiss just contacted me to see if I would be interested in reviewing the upcoming Otus 85mm f/1.4.  I'm sure it will be a piece of junk  ;)

So I am ordering the current Zeiss 135mm (BECAUSE OF YOUR REVIEW!!!DAMN IT! LOL!). I can get it from Hong Kong for $1849 new...shipped.
The Otus can't be much better. How do you get any better than perfect, unless you add autofocus....Plus The Otus will cost $5000!!!

4
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO Sonnar T*
« on: July 30, 2014, 12:38:01 PM »
." I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!"
 
So darn true

This review compelled me to order one overnight and I tried it briefly yesterday. I hate MF lenses with my bad eyesight but this will definitely be a keeper.

PS: I am not going to read any more reviews of Zeiss glasses.

Ok..so I am selling  my Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 to finance the Zeiss 135mm. Since I bought it (Incredible lens!), I have acquired a 17mm TSE II and the new 16 -35mm f/4L IS. (Sold my 16-35f/2.8L to finance the new IS ...no regrets there!)....so I am not using the Zeiss 21mm...almost never...so, painfully I will let it go...
Now ...if I buy the Zeiss 135mm from Hong Kong I can get it for $1845 .00 shipped...so it will not cost me much cash outlay...sounds like a plan. ::) ;D ::)

5
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO Sonnar T*
« on: July 29, 2014, 09:21:55 PM »
 :o. I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!

6
PowerShot / Re: Canon Announces the PowerShot SX520 HS & SX400 HS
« on: July 29, 2014, 04:06:22 PM »
 ;D ;D ;D    WOW!!!! THIS JUST MADE MY WHOLE MONTH OF JULY  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
These product releases are REALLY getting incredible!!!!!!

7
Lenses / Re: Canon EF16-35mm F4 IS test
« on: July 28, 2014, 01:39:04 PM »
I see these two lenses to be complementary to one another. For me, neither can replace the other.
I have the new 16-35mm IS....love it...and I also have the (better companion IMHO because is has similar sharpness and contrast) Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 II.
Rounding it all off with a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II.
Yes..the first two lenses overlap...but I would generally grab one for much different shooting than the other...
Two different applications in my world.

8
Canon General / Re: When a Woman is Fed Up...
« on: July 28, 2014, 07:35:01 AM »
Oh..I must have made a mistake...I thought that I logged on to Canon Rumors...but somehow I ended up at Dear Abbey???  :o

9
Lenses / Re: Lenses in the 20mm range
« on: July 28, 2014, 01:01:52 AM »
The following are used on a 5DIII.
I own the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8, the new 16-35 mm f/4L IS  and the 17mm f/4 TSE II.
I would choose in this order for interiors:
1. 17mm f/4 TSE II (Canon Extender EF 1.4X III turns it into a very descent 24mm TSE)
2. 16-35 mm f/4L IS Zoom
3. 21mm Zeiss f/2.8

Like someone mentioned above...if you plan on using the lens for other things, buy the  new Zoom and be done with it!

10
Canon General / Re: When a Woman is Fed Up...
« on: July 27, 2014, 10:43:16 PM »
Ahhhhh...ain't love grand!   :o

11
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50 1.4 Art NOT bokehlicious?
« on: July 27, 2014, 09:29:39 PM »
Touchy subject, eh???  LOL!

12
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO Sonnar T*
« on: July 27, 2014, 03:26:38 PM »
The resolution of the Zeiss is truly amazing. All Zeiss lenses are not this spectacular but WOW that is amazing!
As usual GREAT Review, Dustin!   
The only Zeiss that I have in my kit is the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 and that is pretty impressive as well.

Dustin, are you still planning on reviewing the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art??...I think that you mentioned a while back that you were going to do a review and a comparison, right?
Maybe I missed it, I tried a search but could not find it.
Thanks!

Thanks for the reply Dustin...I thought you may be having difficulty picking up the new Sigma 50mm Art....
I have the older Sigma and I actually like my copy for what it cost and for the bokeh it gives me.... I think it is a cool lens for the price...but DEFINITELY has its flaws....The lens is positioned very well from a cost performance standpoint for what is out there IMHO...they could be found at a nice discount when I bought mine ...but for some reason it seems that the price has gone up to list recently...I think it may be because you are getting decent value for the money. It will be interesting so see what you have to say about it.
Also, I just sold my Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II to purchase the New Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS....  I really like the lens...A LOT...I am considering selling my 21mm Zeiss f/2.8. This new zoom is REALLY sharp!!!!!
Look forward to what you think of it when you review it!!!
Thanks for being here.

Two of my equipment suppliers made promises and then didn't have stock at the review time.  I have just had the original Sigma 50mm f/1.4, which I will do a brief review of (didn't particularly like it), and will do the newer Sigma soon.  I've got the new Tamron "superzooms" right now. (28-300mm VC, and 16-300 VC for crop).  I will be getting the new Canon 16-35mm f/4 IS and the Tamron 18-200mm for the EOS M mount next week.  I've got lots of lenses on the go for review right now, but the Sigma will probably be next.

13
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50 1.4 Art NOT bokehlicious?
« on: July 27, 2014, 03:09:58 PM »
Wow...I am considering the new Sigma Art...I am not worried about all of the obsessive insanity on this site about the AF capabilities....I am sure if I get a bad copy...I will just send it back.....
but after looking at Kai's comparison of the bokeh of the three lenses (Nikon 58mm & Canon 50L) with the popsicles....I am amazed at how much the bokeh suffers on the Art lens at the expense of incredible sharpness.
(kindof reminiscent of my Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II...its so sharp...I don't care... I rely on some primes like my old 50mm Sigma and my Canon 85mm f/1.5L when I really want to smear things up!!!)
I currently have an excellent copy original 50mm Sigma f/1.4 which I think is far superior in performance and build to the pathetic Canon 50mm f/1.8 and the Canon 50mm f/1.4 lenses.   I think that for the price, the lens I have is a real winner....
From everything I have read about the new Sigma Art while researching it online...Kai seems a bit off in his opinion on a number of statements.
Everything I have read says the build quality on the Sigma is quite good. I also think he understates the the level of sharpness that the new Art lens has over the Canon L and he does not even mention the superior contrast. I also think his dismissal of the Sigma Lens Dock is also ignorant as it is a very handy tool, I have at the very least updated the firmware on my 35mm Art lens.  For the cost of it ...I think it is a great little accessory with a great potential for tweaks and updates.
This bokeh report and the size of the new Sigma does give me some pause as I do have a very decent, already-paid-for 50mm with great bokeh and very good sharpness in the center.....hmmm..guess you just cannot have it all.
Does anyone know of a more "respected" review of the new Sigma where the bokeh is compared to some other lenses??
 I keep waiting for Dustin Abbott's review of the Sigma Art where I believe he promised some comparison with other lenses, like maybe the old Sigma and the new Otus???  not sure what he said..can't quite remember....but maybe he is having trouble getting his hands on one of the new Art lenses or something...... as they are a bit hard to get a hold on.... I am in no hurry... looking into this is all a bit of fun!!!!!

14
Lenses / Re: Selling my two Zeiss lenses. Your advice?
« on: July 27, 2014, 05:28:44 AM »
Sanj, I have found this to be the case with my Zeiss 21mm f/2.8, an incredible lens, which I bought for its true superiority over the Canon, 16-35mm f/2.8L II,  in both sharpness and contrast.  ...BUT after selling my Canon zoom and purchasing the new  Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS, I have the same dilemma as you...the image quality from the new Canon zoom is so close to my Zeiss that I (horror of horrors! LOL), am considering selling the Zeiss.  Same deal as you...the f/2.8 aperture just isn't enough that I find myself using it, and the IS and the AF on the Canon are making it my lens of choice.
There is that other reason not to sell the Zeiss, though....I get such real enjoyment out of just holding it and lustily coveting it.
The Canon pales in comparison there!   :o
Sanj...I also notice...eh hem....that you are holding on to your Zeiss 135mm f/2.0 which (according to Dustin Abbott's timely review), blows away the Canon counterpart for sharpness and micro contrast.  Very wise of you...as that Zeiss still has practical AND coveting qualities that are second to none!  8)
So...with that in mind it should be easier for you to pry your little fingers off of your 15mm and 35mm Zeiss's and let someone else have a little coveting time, at a discount...c'mon...you can do it...just close you eyes and hold you 135mm...that's a boy....... :'(

15
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO Sonnar T*
« on: July 26, 2014, 06:14:53 PM »
The resolution of the Zeiss is truly amazing. All Zeiss lenses are not this spectacular but WOW that is amazing!
As usual GREAT Review, Dustin!   
The only Zeiss that I have in my kit is the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 and that is pretty impressive as well.

Dustin, are you still planning on reviewing the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art??...I think that you mentioned a while back that you were going to do a review and a comparison, right?
Maybe I missed it, I tried a search but could not find it.
Thanks!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 55