July 29, 2014, 09:21:00 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 - Invertalon

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12
1
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS
« on: June 30, 2014, 06:35:41 PM »
Loving this lens... By far the best UWA Canon has (I have owned/used the 14L II, 17-40L and 16-35 II)

Some from me:

5D3_3339.jpg by invertalon, on Flickr

5D3_3474.jpg by invertalon, on Flickr

5D3_3434.jpg by invertalon, on Flickr

5D3_3462.jpg by invertalon, on Flickr

5D3_3456.jpg by invertalon, on Flickr

5D3_3426.jpg by invertalon, on Flickr

5D3_3404.jpg by invertalon, on Flickr

5D3_3395.jpg by invertalon, on Flickr

2
Lenses / Re: EF 16-35 F/4L IS corner samples & comparison
« on: June 23, 2014, 07:42:54 AM »
This lens looks phenomenal... So happy mine arrives tomorrow. I am sure it will easily become my most used lens, no doubt.  I am even debating to sell off my 24-70 II and switch to a 35L and 85L combo instead...  ;D 

3
Lenses / Re: Filter for Tamron 150-600?
« on: June 12, 2014, 12:26:35 PM »
Even though I am a pro-filter user for ease of cleaning and such, I would avoid one on this lens for a few reasons.

1.) Generally, super-telephotos run into issues with filters at times (see 100-400 and even the 400 f/5.6)

2.) Expensive... Expect to pay $100 or more for a good 95mm filter. The lens itself is only $1000, so your paying nearly 10% of the lens for a filter.

3.) Being Tamron and not Canon/Nikon, if you did damage front element and require replacement I am sure it would be about the cost of your 95mm filter. Canon may charge $200-300 for a front element, but I don't see Tamron having such a high markup on a lens.


If you do get a filter, I really like the Hoya HD's if they come in that size... Otherwise, one of the B+W MRC filters.


4
Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm Art on Canon 50D Focus issues
« on: June 03, 2014, 09:45:39 AM »
Prob the Sigma, not the camera...

5
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8 IS II - Difference between 2012 and 2014?
« on: June 03, 2014, 09:44:56 AM »
I would not doubt if the IS unit has been updated... There was quite a lot of issues with it. I had three personally that failed near the beginning. Recent units have had no issue.

6
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS Sample Images
« on: May 20, 2014, 12:52:39 PM »
Vignetting at 16mm looks quite good... Much better than the 17-40, from what I can tell. This is good, as when I use the 17-40 for commercial work I generally work in low light situations and stop down only to reduce vingetting, not really increase sharpness.

This lens is looking so good. I am glad I got my pre-order in very quickly at two different vendors (around 6:45am EST the morning they went up for preorder on B&H). Can't wait!

Plan to sell my 17-40 which is only a few weeks old after this weekend...

7
Reviews / Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« on: May 06, 2014, 06:05:18 PM »
I sold my 35L due to lack of use and tried the 35 IS as a cheaper alternative. Only lasted about a week before I decided to sell that off as well.

I find the 35L a better lens overall. The f/1.4 IMO is better than the IS at f/2. IQ is better on the 35L in the center, edges probably similar or better on the f/2 IS stopped down.

Weight is nice on the f/2 IS, but the 35L is really not heavy by any means.

Both are great lenses, but if I got a 35mm again it would be the 35L for sure before the f/2 IS.

8
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens
« on: April 22, 2014, 11:17:52 PM »

With that much trouble, one has to wonder whether the problems are with the lenses or somewhere else ... like the camera or the "driver".

Trust me... It is Sigma. When all of my Canon glass works perfectly in terms of AF and all (4) sigma lenses are all over the place, I think I can rule out operator error.

Optically aside from the one decentered one, they were amazing. The AF though is a whole nother story... Also note, two copies of the Sigma was on one 5D3 and the other two on another. So I can rule out the body as well.

The 35L nails focus. When it misses, it may be slight but usable. The Sigma misses by a mile at times. Makes no sense. With my commercial work I can't risk that just for sharpness. AF is very important. It's not like I didn't try though.... 4 copies over a year or more? It's not like I gave up after one...


9
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens
« on: April 22, 2014, 10:39:29 PM »
I just tried my 4th... Yes, 4th copy of the Sigma 35... I have written Sigma off at this point. I tried, but I just could not deal with the AF.

The first two I tried right when the lens came out... MA changed heavily indoors vs. outdoors... 0 MA near to far outdoors, +10 required indoors. Was a PITA.

Fast forward to last week, I tried another. Copy 1 seemed to work fine indoors vs. outdoors but was decentered... OK, just get another... I have had plenty of Canon lenses that I needed to exchange.

Got the replacement, indoors to outdoors is perfectly fine (thankfully). However, the AF is just way too darn unreliable. Some shots are so far OOF you wonder how the camera ever thought it was right. Yet the next photo be perfectly sharp, the next somewhat soft, sharp again, way out of focus the next, etc... Mostly near infinity focus it had these issues.

I just slapped my 35L back on and sent the Sigma back home for the last time... Until Sigma can have even better AF, the Canon options are for me.

10
Technical Support / Re: 5Dmk3 grip rubber coming loose
« on: April 09, 2014, 05:21:46 PM »
My first grip start peeling around the shutter button area... Sent in under warranty and they replaced the entire BG-E11. I have been using the replacement for a year or so now, and its now bubbling in a different spot. I was debating about seeing if I can buy the grip material and 3M template they use and re-applying myself, or just waiting until it peels off completely and just reglue it. Either way, pretty disappointing.

11
My spring was replaced in my 24-70 II long ago, under warranty. Got the lens back from a repair and when the focus ring was turned, it would make a "spring" noise... Like boiiiiing!

Sent it in and they spoke with the engineers in Japan as they had no idea... And they wanted to be sure before they tore the lens apart... A month later or so, they got the part from Japan, replaced it (still the "old" spring, according to the repair... but this was probably before the fix) and the lens is fine. Interesting to see what it was though now!


12
The info for SURE should be posted. Companies should not hide design flaws and have the customer pay for their mistakes in engineering and design. If we get this information public, Canon and other companies may be more open to doing the right thing and doing these types of fixes free of charge.

13
Lenses / Re: Ordered 300mm 2.8 II; tips/suggestions
« on: March 31, 2014, 09:50:31 AM »
I did! I go to those parks so often and have used every other lens by now, so I wanted a new perspective... I have done ultrawide, standard, fisheye, telephoto... So I needed super-telephoto!

 I did get quite of a lot of attention, but none of it bad at all. In fact, I may get future work at one park because I had the 300 mounted and the advertising/marketing guy stopped by and talked with me. So that was cool considering it is what I focus my work on anyway!

But we went for Mardi Gras at Universal Orlando, and the performers loved it. I always got a priority of their attention over others, even when I was far away for framing.  Was quite cool!

14
Lenses / Re: Ordered 300mm 2.8 II; tips/suggestions
« on: March 31, 2014, 07:36:34 AM »
Having purchased this lens myself a few weeks ago many people were suggesting new bags, tripods, tripod heads, etc... Once I got the lens, I needed nothing! I hand-hold it primarily, so no need to upgrade the foot or anything like that. My Manfrotto ball head supports the lens just fine as-is if my tripod is used.

My Lowepro 400AW bag loads my 300 II perfectly when attached to the body (plus 1.4x III extender) as long as the hood is reversed. Along with 2-3 other lenses on top of it. Very happy about that!

So once I got the lens, that is all I needed. I guess if you want a good support system or something you would, if you don't have already, but the lens is really not bad to lug around. I used it as my walk-around on my recent trip to Florida at the amusement parks and at times hand-held it for 6+ hours straight without any issues.

If anything, I would just recommend a good strap... I like the op-tech ones, they are comfy when supporting larger body/lens combos. FWIW, I am using a 5D3+grip.

15
Lenses / Re: 16-35 II vs what?
« on: March 24, 2014, 06:42:32 PM »
I had the 17-40L for quite a while before recently upgrading to the 16-35 II... Sure it is quite sharp at 16mm wide open in the center, but overall, I prefer the 17-40L. Much better value for the money.

I think the 17-40L is sharper, honestly... Between the 2-3 17-40L's I have used and the two 16-35 II's... Maybe the corners go to the 16-35 II, but overall I think the 17-40L is every bit as good if not better. I think 40mm is better than the 35mm between lenses.

If you need f/2.8, go for 16-35 II... If not, the 17-40L is every bit as good.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12