April 19, 2014, 04:46:52 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 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 50
Yes! the 24-70 II is a special lens. The 24-105, while a fine lens, doesnt come close to comparison in image quality. Also low light focusing will be much nicer @ 2.8.  It is THE finest zoom in that focal length available.   .

I agree. I just did a lot of research on the 24-70 II...balanced against primes. I already own a 50mm f/1.4 Sigma and the  Canon 85L...so I was considering puchasing the Canon 24mm L & the new Sigma 35mm f/1.4 or the new Canon zoom.  Either way I would be spending the same amount of money.
I had sold my Canon 24-105 back in the spring to buy the new 24-70mm...but then there were all of the delays...and this GREAT Sigma 35mm appeared out of nowhere.  I was torn. The price of the new zoom really put me off.
In the end I bought the new Canon Zoom.  It is REALLY sharp and many times it is just great to have that zoom range in your hands an not be changing out primes. Way more interactive..with trade-offs.
The 24-105 is a good lens...but I was never WOWED by it.
Check out this comparison of it to the new 24-70mm II:
..from a sharpness and DOF the new 24-70mm blows the 24-105mm out of the water. (but the 24-105mm is a very good zoom for the money).
I LOVE primes....but I am a little wowed by this new zoom. Could just be the honeymoon period...but my feeling is that it is very prime-like, both in contrast and sharpness (even wide open)....and...unfortunately, you are DEFINITELY paying for that privilege! I do not think you would be unhappy if you bought this lens. I know that I am very content with the decision I have made.
(SteenerMe...I just noticed that U and I have almost the EXACT same range of lenses...no wonder I agreed with you! LOL.)

Portrait / Re: Portrait - Trying something new
« on: December 08, 2012, 10:38:04 AM »
So...if this is a shot illustrates the beginning of their marriage...can you now show me a shot that illustrates the ten-year point?  :-)
(somebody HAD to ask).

Lenses / Re: Quick decision help: canon 24 vs zeiss 21
« on: December 07, 2012, 12:45:55 PM »

Clicking on measurements, resolution, then field map, then going through the apertures, that is rather humorous.  Like the corners go that bad stopping down to F5.6.  Something ain't right there and surely that figures into the overall resolution score.

Yeah...like I said above...I am NOT a fan of DxOMark.   Everything they do seems questionable to me, but I thought I would throw that into the mix as there is not a lot of bench testing for the Zeiss out there. Just opinions.

Lenses / Re: Quick decision help: canon 24 vs zeiss 21
« on: December 07, 2012, 12:43:18 PM »
Argh, if only id had a few more hours to make my choice...Hopefully using it will make me feel better!

CJ, I think that there is no wrong choice here!!!! You did great!
I have the 50mm f/1.4 Sigma and the Canon 85 f/1.2L...had sold my 24-105mm f/4L IS back in the spring anticipating the new 24-70mm f/2.8II.  Well I was without a "walk-around" lens for a long time because of all of the delays and I was really balking at the price and mixed reviews...so I started to look perhaps purchasing the new Sigma 35mm f/1.4 and the Canon 24mm f/1.4L... . ..which would have filled that whole range in for me beautifully...(it would be approximately the same cash outlay for those two lenses vs the new 24-70mm)
In the end ...I bought the new 24-70mm f/2.8II.  I just do not want to carry all of that glass with the primes many times, and change lenses out. I am pretty impressed with the zoom... It works with what I have. I have a 5DIII so low light is becoming less of an issue.
I think that the Canon 24mm is an excellent lens.  I would still think of owning it and the Sigma...but I think I am
going to set my sights on the new Zeiss 25mm ZE f/2.8....That looks KILLER and would really round things out for me further.   Just wish I could have it all!!!!!!!!  It is great that we have so many choices though...That is never a bad thing...and if the rest of the new Sigma Artist Line lives up to the 35mm...there will many more choices down the line.
ENJOY your lens CJ. If I lived next door to you we could swap-out once in a while!!!!!!! LOL!

Lenses / Re: Quick decision help: canon 24 vs zeiss 21
« on: December 07, 2012, 12:04:30 PM »
OK, CJ...since the obsession of these lenses is totally consuming my day!!!! LOL... (I love it!)
I thought I would throw this into the mix from Roger at LensRental...(can we take anything seriously from a man who wears headgear like this? He looks like a Spanish Conquistador, no?)... I respect his opinion a lot. This is what he has to say about the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 ZE:

Lenses / Re: Quick decision help: canon 24 vs zeiss 21
« on: December 07, 2012, 10:45:05 AM »
This may help you choose:

Hey Norman...that comparison on the Digital Picture would appear to prove that the Canon is sharper than the Zeiss at f/2.8 (although the Zeiss sample is underexposed a little so it is tough to compare...but the Canon looks sharper).
That would go against everything I have read LOL!!!  Can we chalk that up to variation in copies????
Sometimes I just don't know what to believe.
I tried to find another good comparison like SLRGear but they have not review or tested the Zeiss.
I will check into DxO...but I am not a fan there....
Thanks for throwing that into the mix!  It should make CJ very happy with his choice!!!!!! I still love my Zeiss, tho.

For what it is worth DxO rates the Canon 24 much higher than the Zeiss 21mm on a 5DIII....
Hmmmmmmmm...... (LOL!)



Lenses / Re: Quick decision help: canon 24 vs zeiss 21
« on: December 07, 2012, 08:41:00 AM »
I own the 16-35mm II and the Zeiss 21mm ZE....all I can say is ...if the shot really matters to me I DEFINITELY pick up my Zeiss! The Zeiss is amazing...you just have to know if you can do without the auto focus. ....I need both and live with the obvious trade-offs when I pick up one lens or the other.
Sounds like you may want to trade in your 35mm and buy the new Sigma, too!  :-)

Lenses / Re: New Sigma 35mm f/1.4 for Canon getting awesome reviews
« on: December 07, 2012, 03:19:07 AM »
Can't wait to see the side-by-side with the Canon L 35mm. I have a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 that I am extremely happy with in performance and price point. (all my other lenses are L or Zeiss). Had read Roger's impression about the build and performance of this new 35mm and it seems that Sigma has upped the ante here!!!

Contests / Re: Gura Gear Giveaway!
« on: December 06, 2012, 06:56:37 PM »
I WILL win!

Lenses / Re: What's your dream lens
« on: December 04, 2012, 10:37:42 PM »
Of existing real-world glass I would love to own the Ziess 15mm f/2.8 ZE (but would like it to include AF)..
SOo I guess that would cost about $4000!?!?
.....of Fantasy Glass...I would dream to have a 15-35mm f/2.0, with AF and no distortion or vignetting that is as optically perfect as the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 (which I do own) across the entire zoom range. It should have 12 aperture blades, and I want ED, FD and lots of coatings, Nano Surfaces and anything else you can ad to make it sound important... And... let's make the body out of carbon fiber with titanium filter&camera mounts. Also, it should be no larger than the current 16-35mm II and be priced under $2000.Certainly, Santa's elves (German Division), can come up with one of those before Christmas! Most definitely.
Fun topic!

Lenses / Re: 17-40mm F/4 L or 16/35mm F/2.8 L I
« on: December 02, 2012, 06:34:59 AM »
You might glean a few well informed viewpoints from this piece from Luminous Landscape...

My feelings would be that the 5D3 sensor will punish the old 16-35 f/2.8. It was never a stellar lens at the best of times, performing only adequately on film bodies...let alone FF DSLR. I had one which was a constant disappointment. By contrast, the 17-40 which I have owned since they were announced in 2003 has been consistently excellent, currently spending a lot of time on a 5D3 body. Provided you accept that it can be a bit mushy wide open, keep in perspective that from f/5 it is a match for the 16-35 f/2.8II.

If I was in your shoes I'd be going for the 17-40. If you NEED f/2.8 save some more for the 16-35 f/2.8II.


I agree with PW, who brings up all of the very valid, meaningful reasons ...especially if you are comparing the 17-40mm with version one of the 16-35mm.

Also given that Canon is now enforcing its MAP, it's unlikely we're going to see the occasional drops in price that often come a half year or so after new product launches.

If I could get this lens for under $1,800, I would.  But assuming I could sell my current 24-70mm for ~$1,300, I'm not really willing to pump anymore than $500 into a focal length I already am perfectly happy with.  I'd rather get a new lens.

Well...I bought a 5DIII for $3499 6 months ago...and I have seen them selling as low as $800 less than I paid for it recently. I have never seen a camera body drop that much that fast ???......and since I just purchased a 24-70 II...I am expecting that to follow suit! :-)

Lenses / Re: Filters for 24-70 II
« on: November 30, 2012, 08:49:16 AM »
-B&W filter- i know this is off topic....But lately , i've been having quality issue with B&W filters. I've ordered the BW  .9 ND MRC f-pro from Adorama and found that there are small chip on the front glass and sometimes around the rim margin. I've returned it and ordered from B&H and had to return them 3 times due to poor quality. I've use BW filters before and haven't had any issues till recently. I can't seem to find one without a defect "chip" on the glass. I dont want to pay $150 dollar for a chip on the filter. I even requested that they check the filter before sending it out and they say they can't guarantee that it'll be done. I just received another replacement in worse condition than the previous one i had.  :-[. I'm thinking maybe they have these made in china or their quality control is getting bad.
Hammy...I opened two B&W MRC UV Haze this week, one for my Olympus 75mm f/1.8 for my MFT kit and one for my new (about to arrive TODAY!, can't wait, can't wait) Canon 24-70 II.  Both look prefect to me...I wonder if this condition is endemic with B&W's ND filters only???????? Did you write to their customer service?

Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: November 30, 2012, 01:59:23 AM »
5DIII and Zeiss
Where was this taken? Reminds me of a board-walk in Lytham (Lancashire, UK) near the windmill and boathouse on the green.

I shot this at Assateague Island, Maryland in  the USA.

Lenses / Re: how to test a new lens, particularly the 24-70L II
« on: November 30, 2012, 12:24:04 AM »

I know how you feel right now ::) :P :o ;D I was little skeptical about the sharpness of this when I placed my pre-order. Why? I tried 3 different copies of mrk I in the past, all three were soft.

I even took half day off from work just to wait for the UPS guy.

Hope you will get the BEST copy. Keep us updated.

Dylan...so how is your copy of the lens? Did you shoot any test charts on do any extensive testing?
(I am hunting John, my UPS driver, down in the MORNING!!! i know his route. LOL! He delivers to me at the end of the day..but I am afraid I will miss him cause I  have to sign for this, he cannot leave at my door). I want the lens for the weekend as my photo buddy and I are going on an overnight to our favorite shooting location and I definitely want this lens in my quiver to test it out!

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 50