Just an old boat.
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.
Oh, and like many others, I think DxO's software is good (probably the best for noise reduction).
I'd argue for automatic distortion correction as well.
When I think of Ice I think of this Image I captured from a Helicopter in 2012 over the Ross Ice Shelf.
970 Klms Wide across the Face, 800 Klms Deep back from the Face, at it's thickest around 750Meters thick, at the floating face where this Image was take, 300 Metres Thick.
Klebnikov in the foreground, Helicopters were putting around 76 People from the Ship onto the Ross Ice shelf.
check the 5th paragraph
yes, we need to see some real tests but I think Sigma's likely got a lens they can be proud of.
... as I continue to cuss the inconsistent AF of a new, but past warranty EF 50/1.4
I looked at the review - very impressive at 1.4. It is the contrast between sharpness of focus plane that sets off the bokeh - aka EF 85 1.2.
However in the comparisons I looked up TDP crops of the Nikkor 58 1.4G. What's going on there !? Have you seen the price of this lens ? Nikon is currently like a child's spinning top just as it loses it's momentum; it wobbles all over the place.
Lucky for us Canon users that Zeiss are pushing the boundaries - 'cos Nikon certainly aren't.
Incidentally I believe the Otus is made in Germany; it's the other dslr 'Zeiss' lenses that are made by Cosina in Japan.
+1. Zeiss lenses are for the most part, made in Japan by Cosina. Meaning, you have excellent German lens design, being made by the Japanese who excel at high quality mass production. A perfect match in this era, in my books.I've been told that Zeiss and Leitz lenses are manufactured in Japan now and that these brand names are just licenses leased out by international trading companies that own those names. Is this true? Or, does Zeiss and Leitz still manufacture everything in Germany? Thanks
What difference would it make?
If Zeiss puts their name on it, I don't care if they had Aunt Mabel make it on Mars.
That's just my point. If Zeiss only exists in a leased name only then what's the hype all about. It's just another company trying to cash in on a former good name. My guess is we're all looking for the nostalgia in a new digital world. Reminds me of all the products being marketed today with names such as Polaroid and Bell & Howell.
Ugly and expensive...... just like the ex wife.
Why do you think, did Sigma for only for a f/1.4 rather than down to the f/1.2 of the Canon L 50mm ?
Because it's going to be 815g with f/1.4
The extra glass for top performance at f/1.2 would have been an overkill. I'm more surprised that Zeiss didn't go for f/1.2 considering they definitely had the budget.
My Canon 50 1.4 works fine, but doesn't get a lot of use, so I'm in no hurry.
But I would love to see a robust, sharp, contrasty, fast focussing 50 1.4 WITH IS.
Not holding my breath on that.
I think you're really missing the point of this lens. This isn't just some random 50mm lens that's maybe kind of good.
Read about the Zeiss Otus, and then imagine a lens that is 89% as good with autofocus. That's this lens.
The resolution data for the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART which has been verified by third parties indicates this lens is twice as good as anything other lens in it's segment with autofocus. In some cases this lens is five times better than competitors, that makes it good enough to make everything else obsolete.
For reference the difference between the worst superzoom available on crop, at it's worst setting and the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II on full frame at it's best setting is right around the same as the difference between this lens and it's best competitor.
This lens is a really big deal. Some people have been waiting for something like this for decades. It's the first standard focal length autofocusing prime with pro level resolution wide open.
The G1X-II looks to me to be a collossal waste of time and money for Canon development. If they had wanted to
hit a home run, they should have used M lenses, priced it at $499.00 and pushed it as a new mirrorless system.
Now they just have two turkeys on their hands and will have a hard time selling either.