April 18, 2014, 06:06:23 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 - lol

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 32
I don't consider myself to be strong, as I have rather thin arms and never do any exercise. But I have lugged the older 120-300 EX OS around and can hand hold that for a day. No, it isn't as easy as the 100-400L, which itself I thought was heavy until I got used to it. Maybe using this kit is weight training for my arms!

Lenses / Re: Sigma 24-70 f/2 OS HSM Coming? [CR1]
« on: July 30, 2013, 12:35:06 PM »
Maybe for the class of lens it is, it would be considered heavy. But it would still be nothing compared to something like a 300/2.8, and I have carried those around for days. Hand held too. No 'pods.

Lenses / Re: Sigma 24-70 f/2 OS HSM Coming? [CR1]
« on: July 30, 2013, 07:42:12 AM »
I find this lens a bit hard to believe, although of course I hope it is true! For a given quality and build level, there is a trade off between aperture and zoom range... to go a whole stop further at the same range as other lenses in its class without sacrificing quality is a big task. To me, it would be more believable if the zoom range was shorter at f/2. Perhaps a 2x zoom range, but I'll leave it to others to speculate what they may choose as the actual focal length range in that case.

Sigma, if you do it, please get the zoom ring the right way around.

Explained in article.

 Roger, after tearing down both OS versions of the 120-300, said it appeared that elements in these lenses could be interchanged. The optical design seems unchanged. When questioned about this, Sigma replied that the 120-300 "S" has 2 FLD Glass elements instead of one. FLD glass has performance equal to fluorite, which is excellent.

So 2 FLD elements instead of one so better IQ.

One major problem with that... if you look back to the older one, Sigma says that has two FLD elements, and further references to this can be found in various reviews like at photozone and lenstip. The only way this unspecified source at Sigma could be right now is if Sigma were originally lying about having two SLD elements. Doesn't add up.

I'd speculate it could still be down to sample variation, especially if Sigma have tightened up their build quality.

As an owner of the older EX version, I find it curious that TDP claim the new one is "sharper". All the info we have suggests nothing has changed optically. Lensrentals even pulled them apart and the optical modules appeared identical. Is this "sample variation" at work?

EOS Bodies / Re: 7DM2 as a FF? Hmmm...
« on: July 22, 2013, 01:44:23 PM »
Note the date on the linked rumour - it's from over a year ago! Far before the 6D existed, and you could say the current 6D fits in where they describe the 7D mk2.

I've asked before, and I'll ask again - has there been any precedent for Canon to change sensor size within a model series? I can't see any successor to the 7D name being anything other than APS-C. If they change the sensor, they change the name too. On the "1D style body" noises, same question. Have they ever done radical changes in body size/shape within a series? Ok, the 60D may be slimmed down a little from the 50D and earlier, but that's in another direction.

To me, I find it hard to believe whatever will be called a 7D mk2 to be anything other than a normal body (non 1D style) with APS-C sensor. If they do make something that different, it will be called something else and not be a 7D any more! Have the mythical 3D for example.

Lenses / Re: What's your oldest Canon EF lens?
« on: July 22, 2013, 11:06:04 AM »
I don't have it any more, but I used to have an EF 300mm f/2.8 which dated from November 1987. It looked it too, being "well used". Got the Sigma 120-300 OS now and that does everything it did and more.

Software & Accessories / Re: PC Monitor for photo editing
« on: July 21, 2013, 08:12:27 AM »
There is a middle ground between cheap sRGB and the top end ultra wide gamut monitors like DFM described. Way back in 2009 I bought and today still use a HP LP2475W because it was a wide gamut monitor. I can't remember the specs exactly, but it easily covered sRGB and most of ARGB too. Price at the time was around £400, which even then was above the mass market models but I wanted the colour range. It did require a fair bit of tuning to get it just right. Out of the box it was incredibly bright. Whoever decided on those defaults must have been using it backlit by direct sunlight at the time. With tweaks including running it though a Spyder 3, it still gives me a good colour and dynamic range.

Since I'm still happily using that monitor I've not looked to see what's similarly available today, but I'd be amazed if there weren't similar models now.

EOS Bodies / Re: The Canon EOS 8D Rumors [CR0]
« on: July 17, 2013, 04:36:47 PM »
This reminds me, in Thom Hogan's article on what does the 70D mean?, he refers to the 7D successor as the 8D. I thought this was just name fail on his part (Nikon style +1 to the 1st digit) with him forgetting the mk n+1 convention of Canon. Or could it be he knows more than he's saying?... nah, I'd still go with name fail.

Lenses / Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« on: July 03, 2013, 05:12:23 PM »
The 70-300DO has its uses, at the right price. I'd say the biggest reason for thinking about it is the small size. If you don't care about size, the Tamron 70-300 VC USD seems to get decent reviews, although you will have to put up with a backward zoom.

Back to the DO, while I had it basically there's two tricks to getting the best out of it. 1: avoid shooting into light and 2: stop down to f/8 where possible. Sold it in the end and got a 70-300L, much better but bigger too.

Lenses / Re: The ULTIMATE Canon lens
« on: June 25, 2013, 04:33:50 AM »
Can you hand hold this?

EOS Bodies / Re: Is This the EOS 3D?
« on: June 17, 2013, 05:02:52 PM »
Random thought: if it was a 2D/3D, what could it be? The high MP model? If so, that background looks like a nice load of detail to use it on.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS
« on: June 13, 2013, 02:05:30 PM »
I really didn't care about a mk2 as I assumed they're almost certainly going to make it a twister. But if they're going to do another push-pull... I feel my wallet twitching!

I think "original" in this context was the first OS version, since the latest one is said to have the same optical design as that.

Purely speculation: Even if the optical formula is the same as the older one, they may be making it with better tolerances and thus may get better results from that.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 32