September 16, 2014, 05:48:12 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 - infared

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 61
256
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M2 Specs Revealed?
« on: December 02, 2013, 05:13:42 PM »
Sorry ...but I just have to laugh.  No mention of a VF for the new M?
Look...I have an extensive MFT kit to complement my Canon FF Kit... I have been researching picking up an Olympus E-PL5 as a second MFT body.
1. VERY small.
2. Can be fitted with the BEST EVF out there...Olympus VF4
3. 8 frames per second
4. Incredibly extensive small, fast,  prime lens selection...(all lenses actually including zooms)
That is just a few of the bests on the M-system..and the E-PL5 is one year old...and I bet that it focuses faster than the new M??????

I am looking at all of the other manufacturers...what the hell is Canon doing in the area of innovation??????????
I think that is a really valid question at this point.

you do realize it´s just a rumor yet?
like my latest rumor.... canon is only making popcorn from 2015 onwards.

why not getting your heartattack when the specs are really out?   ;D

Not having a heart attack...quite the opposite...I am laughing my ass off at the ineptness of the "photo giant"......Mirrorless is such incredible tech to make cameras smaller and lighter...Canon could have an unbelievable small light "system" by now...but nada.......so.. in the meantime carrying my E-P5 EVERYWHERE and creating images! I will skip the popcorn....thanks.   :-)

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3730/10980970415_2cfcc82226_o.jpg

257
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M2 Specs Revealed?
« on: December 02, 2013, 03:18:11 PM »
Sorry ...but I just have to laugh.  No mention of a VF for the new M?
Look...I have an extensive MFT kit to complement my Canon FF Kit... I have been researching picking up an Olympus E-PL5 as a second MFT body.
1. VERY small.
2. Can be fitted with the BEST EVF out there...Olympus VF4
3. 8 frames per second
4. Incredibly extensive small, fast,  prime lens selection...(all lenses actually including zooms)
That is just a few of the bests on the M-system..and the E-PL5 is one year old...and I bet that it focuses faster than the new M??????

I am looking at all of the other manufacturers...what the hell is Canon doing in the area of innovation??????????
I think that is a really valid question at this point.

258
Canon General / Re: So what have we bought this Black... Er, Weekend?
« on: December 01, 2013, 07:25:46 AM »
Could someone explain this black friday thing?
To the non Americans like me.
Must be something like a sale, US- nationwide.... every friday?
Thanks a lot!
US is a Capitalistic Society.
Thanksgiving Holiday which is always the last Thursday of November, creates a 4-day weekend for most and this weekend is approximately one month before Christmas Holiday (the LARGEST marketing and sales-of-merchandise event of the year).  The marketing people created Black Friday (keep sales numbers in the black, not in the red) on the Fri. after Thanksgiving (which many have off from work and are free to shop) as the Official Opening of the Christmas Buying Season. (No Christ in Christmas there).  Cyber Monday is the Monday after the weekend and again it is a trumped-up merchandising day that entices people to buy more products on Monday (which most people do not have off from work?..guess you are shopping at your employer's expense!).
It was ALL created by Republicans!  ::) ::)
Hope that helps explain.

259
Canon General / Re: So what have we bought this Black... Er, Weekend?
« on: December 01, 2013, 07:11:24 AM »
NOTHING!
I am so proud of myself!!!!    :P

260
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXOMark: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4
« on: November 27, 2013, 08:37:09 AM »
Though I don't like Zeiss

What's wrong with Zeiss?

I always group them with Leica who produces inferior cameras with over priced policy.
But I hope Canon should respond to this like Nikon with their 58mm (and lost unfortunately)

Can hardly call that a "response" from Nikon...    ::)

261
EOS Bodies / Re: This is the Way a White Camera Should be Done
« on: November 26, 2013, 09:50:21 AM »
In your post, if you are referring to the EVER-SO-UGLY-AND-PRETENTIOUS 1932 gold-plated Leica that was auctioned off in Hong Kong...it only sold for about $620,000, (estimates for the auction, were at about $1.2million, I believe), ick...I don't get it...I guess it is valuable, but not an object that I would enjoy looking at.
I like white cameras, love them (don't own one at the moment, but I have had two white MFT cameras in the past).
Although the red is a little much..the black kind of counters that, so I think that this is a really smart looking camera.
The renovator in Tokyo did a kickass job on the overhaul....Hey...it is something different!!!!!

No they are referring to this one http://topnews.us/content/259066-leica-m-camera-co-designed-apples-jony-ive-fetches-1805000-sotheby-s-auction
Oh...for a GOOD cause as well!  My mistake...I LOVE this Leica...more than this Canon P. Plus, the Leica is up-to-date.

262
EOS Bodies / Re: This is the Way a White Camera Should be Done
« on: November 26, 2013, 09:10:39 AM »
In your post, if you are referring to the EVER-SO-UGLY-AND-PRETENTIOUS 1932 gold-plated Leica that was auctioned off in Hong Kong a couple of days ago...it only sold for about $620,000, (estimates for the auction, were at about $1.2million, I believe), ick...I don't get it...I guess it is valuable, but not an object that I would enjoy looking at.
I like white cameras, love them (don't own one at the moment, but I have had two white MFT cameras in the past).
Although the red is a little much..the black kind of counters that, so I think that this is a really smart looking camera.
The renovator in Tokyo did a kickass job on the overhaul....Hey...it is something different!!!!!

263
Lenses / Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« on: November 23, 2013, 11:11:18 AM »
May we never speak of Ken Rockwell at Canon Rumors again.


Please...no....NOOOOOOOOOO......We enjoy bashing him far too much!


264
Lenses / Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« on: November 22, 2013, 04:41:43 AM »
 :) ;) :D ;D >:( :( :o I have to admit...those are some real "masterpiece" images KR uses to portray and review such a "masterpiece" lens.  8) ??? ::) :P :-[ :-X :-\ :-* :'(

Didn't know that the lens existed...but I know less about it now. :-0

265
Lenses / Re: More Mentions of 2014 Being the Year of the Lens [CR1]
« on: November 19, 2013, 08:39:08 AM »
......ta,p,tap,tap,tap......um...Canon....we're ALL here....waiting...(as the photography world explodes around us from all other manufacturers).   Yawn.

266
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: November 19, 2013, 08:16:07 AM »
I think that it is fantastic that Zeiss has made this lens!  I guess it is very difficult to make a great normal (for FF) lens...no one has until now.  I cannot afford this lens...but I would love to have the opportunity to view some prints made from it by a skilled image maker.  That would be exciting.

267
Lenses / Re: 16-35 2.8L II - Is it really THAT bad ?
« on: November 18, 2013, 06:34:04 AM »
Hi everyone,

I currently own an old 17-35 f/2.8L which might be about twenty years old...I'm quite satisfied with the sharpness, in the center, even at f/2.8 it makes the job.
I'm concerned by a strange occurrence : when shooting with a strong backlight, i have some kind of de-contrasted circle in the center of the frame. Like a white haze. That's ugly and ruins my shots.

That's why i was wondering about getting the 16-35 II, which is two versions younger than my 17-35 and is supposed to be better. But, reading the forums, i often notice than no one is really happy with his 16-35II. That's why I need your help to determine how better the 16-35II is compared to my 17-35. If it is real better, i'll get it sooner than if it is not that better.

So i need you, 16-35II users, to tell me how good/bad/disappointing it is. Is it a pleasure for you to take it, or you only use it when you NEED an ultra-wide and it 'makes the job" ?

Are you, like me, waiting for a 16/18mm f/1.8 Canon prime ?

Thanks

I have the 16-35II..it's very good "for a zoom"...but doesn't touch the IQ of my 35mm sigma f/1.4 or my 17mm TSE...or my Zeiss 21mm f/2.8...NOT EVEN CLOSE.......but it has versatility and fast autofocus.....everything in photography has trade-offs. What we are ALL waiting for is a 14-24mm to compete with the Nikon!  ::)

268
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 Distagon
« on: November 14, 2013, 11:22:03 PM »
The Zeiss 15 is a wonderfully sharp Lens, I bought one a while back after seeing some of Sanj's Images with this Lens, love it, but. It's damn heavy, which you can live with, it's manual focus of course, again you can live with and I actually have grown to like Manual Focus Lenses again after buying this lens, but, what just seems dopy, is the non removable (without a lot of very scary effort) dumb assed Hood.

I eventually went and purchased the 17TSE (with the Wonderpana Filter Holder, so now I can use the 17 with all my Lee Filters, Yippee), now very seldom do I take the Zeiss out, I'de love to put the Zeiss 15 into my Underwater housing to replace the Canon 14f2.8 L II, but the dumb assed Hood precludes that. There isn't any doubt though that the Zeiss 15 is a much better Lens in all departments than the Canon 14, except for the dumb assed Hood.

LOL!!! (Once again....What kind of hood do you have on that $3000 lens?). Funny post!

269
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 Distagon
« on: November 14, 2013, 06:38:05 PM »

[/quote]

I have been told since doing my review that there was an earlier version of the lens that lacked the UMC element as a part of the optical formula and was significantly inferior to the newer version optically.  That being said, I went and checked Bryan's lens sharpness tool again and his does say UMC.  His chart shows a significant difference between the 14L and the Samyang, particularly in the corners.  But his results don't seem to match that of other very reliable reviewers, and doesn't agree with my own results, either.

I don't know how to account for his results.  I think Bryan is a great reviewer, but I don't feel like his chart results reflect my own experience.  His results show that the 17-40L is sharper at equal apertures, but I just dumped my own 17-40L because the results were so inferior to my Rokinon.

Look at these two links from ePhotozine:

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/samyang-14mm-f-2-8-ed-as-if-umc-lens-review-19621
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-ef-14mm-f-2-8l-ii-usm-lens-review-23412

Of particular interest in their sharpness testing; it unquestionably shows the Samyang as sharper (than the 14LII), even in the corners.  Anyway, I can only chart it up to either sample variation or reviewing differences (which illustrates why it is important to read multiple reviews and then form your own conclusions).
[/quote]

I checked out that comparison on ephotozine....WOW...interesting ...I had read about the Rokinon(or whatever!!! LOL..as lens by many names..I am already suspicious!)...and the review was not good..and I dismissed it..I am too serious about my photography...but it is great to know that this is out there.... I am going to tell a friend about it.
I totally agree with what you said at the end above...read up as much as you can...get the lens and test it out to make sure....It is all a lot of fun!  Thanks for all the great info..as usual.

270
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 Distagon
« on: November 14, 2013, 04:51:49 PM »
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=794&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=769&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

Here is a comparison to the Rokinon/Samyang.

The Zeiss is a tad sharper at 2.8, but they are equal by f/4. Though this could be due to TDP having a bad copy.

The Zeiss also has a bit less distortion, but it's also 7% less wide so it's not apple to apples.

I definitely don't see $2,600 worth of improvement.

"The Zeiss is a tad sharper"....LOL..based on the corner resolution in The Digital Picture comparison tool,   I would think that you may be able to shoot sharper with a plastic lens rather than the SamYang...at ALL apertures... I don't think it is worth $359.  ...but hey whatever makes you happy...you are smiling!!!! Maybe around f/8 the SamYang is tolerable.  :P

I don't know what to make of Bryan's review and/or charts (he has never actually reviewed the lens), although I have been told that there are two variations/optical formulas (older and newer) of this lens, but my own review along with that of others say that the new version is in fact basically as sharp as the Canon 14L and is one of the sharpest wide angle optics available for a Canon lens. 

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/532-samyang14f28eosff
Roger here at Lens Rentals says that he is a big fan of the lens and that it compares favorably with the 14L.

I've used about five different wide angle options, and the copy of the Rokinon that I have is so much sharper at all apertures than anything that I have used before that there is no comparison.  I have no doubt that the Zeiss is better still, but as it is about 10x the price...

P.S.  The Rokinon blows the Canon "L" wide angle zooms away in sharpness in every detail.

So Dustin...I believe you...do you think that The Digital Picture is using the same lens that you have or something different???? I  also, really respect Roger at Lens Rental...Did you pay $359 for your lens? ....and it is sharper than the Canon???? REALLY?

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 61