September 18, 2014, 05:51:10 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 - Rick

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
1
Will I have to wait until Photokina 2016 for the Otus 21mm?

2

Do I but the Sigma 14-24mm OS which takes 82mm filters, although all my other lenses take 77mm filters, and also lose 13° of angle of view compared to the Canon 16-35mm f/4? I think not.

I'm sure these lenses will be good for others, but I will skip them for now.

Well, yes, but it's easy to get excellent lenses in the 24mm-35mm range. 

35mm yes, 24mm not so much.

3
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50 f/1.2L Goes Missing at Canon Germany
« on: July 31, 2014, 01:56:10 PM »

Introduced in 2007, the EF 50 f/1.2L has seen its share of controversy due to a design that can lead to focus shifting in certain situations for a lot of photographers. </p>


I think the controversy began when folks attempted to use the lens in ways not consistent with its design.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon
« on: July 23, 2014, 03:20:20 PM »
Unlike many Google translations, this one is a bit more readable...

I note the comment that the 16-35 mk2 was good for APS-H ;-)

The multiple aspheric lens surfaces allow them to ease some of the compromise between reducing distortion and field flatness. The two front lens elements make quite a significant contribution to this and will likely be seen again in new ultra wide zoom designs.

I still want a TS-E14 though ;-)

Actually, I was going to ask someone to translate the translation. :)

I have often made the assertion on DPR that the 16-35 II was designed for APS-H because 1.) it was introduced alongside the 1D III and 2.) the edge/corner performance obviously was not up to FF standards MP counts of the time period notwithstanding. Of course, I was criticized for this viewpoint (which I still hold). It looked to me like the interviewer made the reference to APS-H but the interviewees did not touch on the reference.

5
The United States does not seem to be one of the supported countries.

6
EOS Bodies / Do what?
« on: May 28, 2014, 07:00:56 AM »
Bare in mind that the 5DIII resolves nearly as much detail as the D800. It's only the top end optical resolution of a few of the worlds sharpest lenses which can allow the D800 to out resolve the 5DIII and even then, there isn't much between them.

1.) I have both cameras, and the D800E clearly produces more of the fine detail that renders an image more realistic (if all of the resolution-saving techniques are used and the image isn't bludgeoned to death in PPing).
2.) This resolution differential can clearly be seen when using any lens in my bag and most Canon, Zeiss, Sigma et al lenses in current production.
3.) This resolution differential can clearly be seen in downsized images (as small 1800x1200 px for instance).
4.) Many folks "clearly" do not care about or even see the fine details in the natural world.

Now, whether or not "clearly" equals "nearly" is a probably matter of observational skills.


7
Zeiss announced the first ZFs, 50/1.4 ZF & 85/1.4 ZF, Jan 1 2006, and then announced 4 more in Oct 2006 for Photokina, the 35/2 ZF, 25/f2.8 ZF, 50/2 makro ZF & 100/2 makro ZF according to news stories over at DPR. If Zeiss follows the same pattern and announces an Otus 25/2.x at Photokina, I'll soon be buying my first $4k+ lens. Sure, no guarantee that the same pattern will emerge but a fellow can dream. Zeiss may be more cautious rolling $4k lenses than they were releasing $500 to $1k lenses  back in the day.

I think the news is out on the Sigma 50 ART, no cigar for competing with Zeiss wide open.

8
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Gets Reviewed
« on: April 06, 2014, 12:43:06 PM »
Sigma's famous statement: it wasn't looking to surpass Nikon and Canon, but rather the Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 has a way to go judging by the graph in the review. I would have expected the FF graph to look like the 7D graph based on this bragging. The Otus' whole thing is sharp corners at f1.4. That's expensive to achieve.

You don't seem to know how to read the graph or what a typical graph is. This lens actually has LESS falloff in resolution between the center and corners than the Zeiss Otus, and 3 times less falloff in corner resolution than a typical competitor.

SLRGear hasn't reviewed the Otus, your statements are baseless.

SLRGear brought up the Zeiss in their own comments.

9
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Gets Reviewed
« on: April 06, 2014, 12:40:29 PM »
We don't have a true side by side test yet.  Based on these results, I still expect the Otus to be sharper, corner to corner at f/1.4.  To get anything close to a side by side test, the Sigma 50 A is similar at f/1.4 to the Sigma 35 A in the SLRgear test.  I actually think the 50 A is a bit better. 

But here is a link to the Otus vs the Sigma 35 A both at f/1.4:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=917&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=829&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

The Otus is clearly sharper corner to corner when compared to the Sigma.

So, yes, the Sigma is blasting Canon and Nikon.  Excellent, IMO, but it likely is going to slide in slightly behind the Otus, which is nothing to sneeze at.  Considering AF, price point, etc....the Sigma will likely end up in more bags than the Otus.

EDIT---just checked Lenstip.com.  They have the Sigma 35 A and Otus 55 very similar at f/1.4. 

If the Otus is better than the Sigma 50 A, I doubt it is by much.  This review is a very good start for the Sigma 50 A.

Could you post a link to the lenstip.com comparison where you are getting your information? Sight unseen, I would bet the house the Sigma 35 is nowhere close to the Otus 55 in the corners @ f1.4 which is what my original point was and still is and is regarding the Otus @f1.4. SLRgear will confirm my assertion once they review the lens. However, comparing a 35mm to a 55mm lens dumps a disadvantage on the wider lens. Even a comparison of the 50mm ART and 55mm Otus will give a slight advantage to the 55mm lens (all other things being equal).

Stopped down a bit, the other competitors will catch up, then one has to decide if the other Zeiss characteristics are worth $4k.

10
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Gets Reviewed
« on: April 06, 2014, 12:13:10 PM »
Sigma's famous statement: it wasn't looking to surpass Nikon and Canon, but rather the Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 has a way to go judging by the graph in the review. I would have expected the FF graph to look like the 7D graph based on this bragging. The Otus' whole thing is sharp corners at f1.4. That's expensive to achieve.

You don't seem to know how to read the graph or what a typical graph is. This lens actually has LESS falloff in resolution between the center and corners than the Zeiss Otus, and 3 times less falloff in corner resolution than a typical competitor. On top of that it's as sharp in the corners wide as most 50mm lenses are stopped down in average resolution at f/2.8. For all intents and purposes it's tack sharp on full frame in the corners wide open. All lenses have some sharpness falloff in the corners, the Otus has significant drop, but for both lenses we are talking about being ridiculously sharp in the center and nearly ridiculously sharp in the corners. The Sigma is 2-5 times sharper than any other 50mm prime with autofocus in terms of average resolution, so the whole image is very clear.


You're also missing the point of their quote. The Sigma 50 A is not competing with canon or nikon it's competing with zeiss and makes Canon and nikon obsolete. That's the point of the quote, and that's what they accomplished.

Dude, you are embarrassing yourself.

11
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Gets Reviewed
« on: April 06, 2014, 07:11:30 AM »
Sigma's famous statement: it wasn't looking to surpass Nikon and Canon, but rather the Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 has a way to go judging by the graph in the review. I would have expected the FF graph to look like the 7D graph based on this bragging. The Otus' whole thing is sharp corners at f1.4. That's expensive to achieve.

12
"Not alpha, not beta, nor zeta, just a bleeding edge that happens to work for me. It might work for you or it might not. (note that my standards are fairly high, so what I call bleeding edge, others may call semi-stable or whatever)"

These Magic Lantern disclaimers are about as unstable as ML hacks.

13
Pricewatch Deals / No way I am going back to mail-in rfebates
« on: March 03, 2014, 09:21:56 AM »
No way I am going back to mail-in rebates. I'd rather buy refurbed or used.

Nikon still provides Instant rebates.

The way I heard it on DPR through a dealer who was posting there, the dealers have to submit the paperwork in an Instant Rebate and they ran into all of the same problems that consumers run into with the mail-in rebates and there was a rebellion among the dealers and Canon went back to a mail-in rebate on the most popular lenses - the Ls. No way am I going to wait up to 8 weeks for my money back or put up with the "designed" nitpicking of the rebate vendor.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: UPDATE: EOS M2 Not Coming to North America
« on: March 01, 2014, 10:17:16 AM »
Waiting until a model sells out that historically hasn't sold well to bring in something that might actually sell briskly? Almost makes Canon-sense except that Canon didn't actually say this.

15
Lenses / Re: Review: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 Distagon T*
« on: February 27, 2014, 02:07:46 PM »
I haven't purchased this lens since I am not interested in this FL, but, when Zeiss releases the Otus 21 or 25mm, I'll be all over it if it stacks up to the 55.

From the perspective of someone who is interested in the Otus concept but doesn't have the personal experience with one yet (and I'll defer to those who actually own one), the main draw to the product is its sharpness across the frame @f1.4. I see no reason why an Otus (assuming identical optical goals for all future FLs in this series) can't be used at f1.4 on a landscape with infinity distance across the frame and get acceptably sharp corners (judging from samples distributed by Zeiss). Even if one had to stop all the way down to f2  :), this will keep diffraction well at bay.

OTOH, @f5.6, if one wants to save $1k, an A7r with an FE 55mm ($3k), appears sharper than the Otus/D800 according to a comparison tool over at DPR (I think they got the raw numbers from DxO).

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6