August 23, 2014, 05:42:21 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 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 58
481
EOS Bodies / Re: A New DSLR Line from Canon? [CR1]
« on: March 12, 2013, 11:19:22 AM »
So is this the m with a viewfinder?
Will it take M lenses as its prime mount?

482
Lenses / Re: Zeiss 25mm f/2
« on: March 12, 2013, 06:04:45 AM »
Anyone have any experience with this lens?  I'm going to purchase a new wide angle and I haven't heard too much about this one.  I'm very familiar with this focal length as I frequently use the 24mm end on my 24-105L with my 5D2.

I want a good landscape prime that has other creative potential.  Probably gonna get this or the 21mm f/2.8.

Get the Zeiss 21mm...not only is it fantastic and worth the money..it will broaden your focal range of your existing lenses.
I have one...Its so good that I am now saving for the 15mm..another focal length that Zeiss REALLY nailed!

Some lenses Zeiss nails..some not...I would skip the 25mm.

483
If it were me, I'd stick with 5D3.  1DX and 5D3 got the same AF (almost).  As for low light performance, 1DX is just a little bit better.  I suggest getting 1DX only if more than 6fps performance is crucial to you.  Your macbook is also important since it is so good to edit raw files using mac.  If I were you, I'd like a good TS-E lens instead of the 35 though.  :)
I agree with this advice....EXCEPT the bit about 35mm. if you shoot a lot of product and architecture then, yeah get a TS-E...if not... save a bundle an get a better lens in the Sigma 35mm f/1.4. ...there is $1000 for a nice trip to use it on!

484
Lenses / Re: Bridge not sharp - why?
« on: March 11, 2013, 01:32:09 AM »
I have a Canon EF 70-200 f/4 L and a 5DmkII. I've used this setup regularly for awhile now, and I've come across something I can't quite explain. I recently shot this bridge in Oregon. I used a sturdy tripod (Manfrotto ballhead/tripod combo), so stability isn't an issue. Still, several of these images came out much less sharp than I've been used to seeing from this lens. It looks like motion blur to me, but like I said, I was using a sturdy tripod. I shot at f/8, and even one of the images at f/11 had this same issue. Shutter speed was 1/20 and ISO was 125, and autofocus was directly on the front of the bridge itself.  I can't imagine this lens is suddenly misfocusing so badly.

I'm at a loss. I ~thought~ I had all three legs on steady ground, but of course anything is possible, and it's possible one of them may have been in some soft ground, slowly sinking during that shutter time. I just don't think that's the case, though. I don't have any other explanations than this. Like I said, I'm used to getting much sharper photos with this lens.  I thought I would throw this question out to the many qualified photogs on here. I'm not a beginner, I'm just not sure what happened. Thanks in advance for your helpful comments and suggestions.  I'm posting an unedited, straight-from-lightroom- image.  You can pixel peep at the full version size here. (2.4MB file)



If you have IS make sure it is off adn hang weight on the tripod and make sure that the weight is not swaying to ad more stability...also...lock up the mirror....basically do everything in your power to make sure your equipment can do its job. If it looks like motion blur...it probably is....I know sometimes we all get caught up in the excitement of taking a great photo...and make mistakes...just try to eliminate all variables....

485
The MkII is a wonderful lens, I doubt you'll regret it.  If anything, you'll be selling the f/4 version.  Personally, I can see the utility of having the 70-200 II, and the 70-300L for travel. The latter made the 70-200/4 IS less interesting, to me.

Originally had the 70-200 F2.8 and then added F4 for travel (both IS).  Then I heard about the 70-300 and reluctantly took the plunge.  THinking of selling the F4 IS but it is a great lens.  Hard to decide which to let go.

I know I need to get on the 12 step problem, at least I know I have a problem - it is called GAS.

My advise is to eat Beano before each lens purchase...and you should be just F.I.N.E.

486
Canon General / Re: your scariest photography moment?
« on: March 11, 2013, 01:16:57 AM »
Every time I talk to my wife about purchasing new equipment.

Now THAT is scary!

487
Canon General / Re: your scariest photography moment?
« on: March 11, 2013, 12:06:36 AM »
WHOA..Jackson Bill...um....mooses are NOT small animals!!!

488
Canon General / Re: your scariest photography moment?
« on: March 10, 2013, 11:58:10 PM »
From wikidwombat:
"That IS impressive and you are officially mad!"
Yes....I have heard a lot of that...but I am just an old surfer dude...and could not have missed the opportunity of a lifetime....at least I came home with the goods! Phew! LOL! (Wait...I was at home?)

489
Well RS2021...in spite of the weight, the cost and whatever...I LOVE mine!
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8480/8216459097_07bf31bb1b_b.jpg
This is NOT a lens that I would pick for creamy bokeh....but anyone knows that after reading one review. There are many other lens choices out there for that. This lens is all about sharpness and speed...and it is GREAT at what it achieves best!

490
Canon General / Re: your scariest photography moment?
« on: March 10, 2013, 11:15:59 PM »
I rent an apt. on the beach in N.J. And stayed there to take photos when Hurricane Sandy made landfall.
Everyone else in the town evacuated...mandatory.  I stayed... So I got my shots:
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-_2ny649j2Ys/UObXeBrtvpI/AAAAAAAAAFM/za_i4r7hBW8/w480-h480/Sandy%2BOG%2BPier%2B1.jpg
..and then the fun began...it got dark....all power went down...the railings on the porches blew off...the dormer roof blew off...and there were waves going down both side streets on either side of the house as the ocean breeched the boardwalk and charged across Ocean Ave. toward the house, at the peak if the storm....It backed off just before the house was destroyed....oh...but what a RUSH!!! :-)
In the morning the pier was completely washed away. ....but I'd have to say I'd do it again in a heartbeat...and the prints are selling like hot cakes!

491
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deals: A Few Lens Deals at BuyDig.com
« on: March 07, 2013, 07:02:07 PM »
I would just contact them...use your credit card and give them a Ship-to address...shouldn't be a big deal...
GOOD PRICES!

492
Lenses / Re: So I decided to buy a Sigma zoom.
« on: March 07, 2013, 07:46:59 AM »
I think one has to choose lenses very carefully. I believe that owning perhaps fewer carefully chosen lenses of great quality is the way to go.  I own a Sigma 50mm f/1.4. Great lens...very happy with it.  I would also consider the new 35mm f/1.4...looks like a real winner..(looking forward to what the next Art Line lens will be), but, after all I have read..I would not buy a Sigma Zoom.... I would save my money and get a lens that really performs that I could truly create images with that would excite me and others.

493
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 85 f/1.2L II
« on: March 06, 2013, 08:37:30 PM »
I think the Canon 85mm 1.2 L II is a magical lense. It just gives you the colours and the bokeh with sharpness, even wide open (in the centre). I luckily shot one for about half the price listed, otherwise I probably would never bought one for 2k€. Now, after experiencing the lense I WOULD pay 2k€ for it. Why? After decades of having a lot of lenses from wide angle to longer zooms I just made a summaryline and asked me... what lense do you use very often and which one is hunting dust?

I got me catched on 85 1.2, 100 2.8 L IS and the Magic Drainpipe. Of course I like my other lenses, but you just can shoot with the Canonball and everything works out to be beautiful. The only thing I would criticise is the lack of wheathersealing and the sometimes annoying 0,95m minimumdistance.

This lense could be the REASON why someone should buy a Canonbody. And as I still use the 5DC, I enjoy the FULL step over the (otherwise fantastic) 85mm 1.8.

P.S. How can I change the camera in my profile? Damn ;)

Hey, vscd...just get a 12mm Canon Ext. Tube for when you want to get close. With the Canon tube I had no focus shift...(Had a Kenko and there was a ton of focus shift).  Ideally if Canon made a 7-10mm tube it would be better...because with the 12mm tube there is a gap from the minimum focus of the lens to the focus of them lens with the 12mm tube...but it isn't too much lost... It is definitely worth checking out.
Hope that helps.

494
Lenses / Re: Addicted to dof
« on: March 06, 2013, 07:49:00 AM »
The 85L has more OOF Blur at the same apertures compared to other lenses.... this is key for you.

Take a look at this: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-85mm-f-1.4-EX-DG-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx

The 4th pic down of his daughter holding a iron fence... hover over the different F values and you will see that F2, the EF85L has almost as much blur as the Sigma does at F1.4.  And we know Sigma is better than the EF 85 F/1.8...  You will have 2-3 virtual apertures left with the 85L (or should I say levels) to blur out the background more.

It is a very sharp lens even wide open. You will lose some AF speed but then are you also addicted to AF speed?

I would own one if I made money off this hobby...

So....K-amps...why is the Canon so much more "bokehlicious" at a given aperture, focal length and distance with similar (?) aperture blades? I recently read somewhere that there is another factor ( a revelation actually...that I was unaware of), affecting Bokeh....but I can' seem to recall what it was  ??? My memory fails me at times...
Nice article reference BTW!...I missed that one.

495
Lenses / Re: Addicted to dof
« on: March 06, 2013, 06:31:29 AM »
"Yes, the Sigma is pretty good. Myself and several other forum members are satisfied owners. Take a look at the review on thedigitalpicture where it spanks the Zeiss and the Canon f/1.8 -- it's second in image quality (and a close second) only to the 85mm f/1.2. AF speed on the sigma is quite reasonable."

I have all L glass and Zeiss...But I chose the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 as well..it performs perfectly for my needs...I am always pleased with the sharpness and the bokeh. I think you as a night-time street shooter would enjoy the Sigma..the focus speed is very good as is the bokeh..it is also mechanically refreshing to the two lesser Canon offerings, (did I really just say that about a Sigma product?!  :o).also..the cost..right now it can be had for $450 with rebate. Sigma is upping the ante ..their new 35mm 1.4 outperforms the big guns for much less money...I like to see more of this!
I skipped the 50mm L..to go for REAL shallow DOF..
I would not regard my 85mm f/1.2 as a street-shooting lens, though...but oh if you have the money and the patience for the slow focus and infinitesimal, shimmering DOF ...it can leave you speechless! This lens is pushing the limits of physics..and has tons of fringing...but LR cleans it up nicely.. Maybe try renting one and see for yourself...but try to move past the obvious difficulties of using this beast...it has great rewards for the patient explorers!!!
The beast also delivers incredible results @f1.4-2.0 and beyond, stunning actually.....it's slow on the focus though...in some cases, maybe better off with the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 or perhaps a Canon 135mm F/2L...alas..it's all a compromise!

Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 58