April 17, 2014, 07:21:25 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 - kevl

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon 85mm f/1.8
« on: January 24, 2014, 04:38:13 PM »
Here's a very good review of both the 85s showing where each is stronger than the other. Not surprisingly the 1.2 is demonstrate-ably better in very key areas. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWCpAVslmCg

2
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon 85mm f/1.8
« on: January 11, 2014, 06:30:37 PM »
Kevl you know what? That was rude of me. I'm sorry. Let's get back to how the lens works shall we? You're clearly a fan of the 85 1.8, show us some of it's strengths and any possible weaknesses you've encountered after owning it for so long. Admittedly I've only had it off and on over the years, so never had a chance to put it through every available usage scenario.

"for so long"?

I've only had it for less than a month. I have no doubt that it will not last as long as the 1.2 will.

The lower build quality and the chromatic aberration are the only weaknesses that I am aware of. The build quality would be an issue if it were double the price but it truly isn't at the current price point. The chromatic issues come out instantly in Lightroom so they are almost meaningless to me as well. Would I prefer them not to be present? Of course.

Is the 1.2 probably a better lens? If it was not then it would be very oddly priced...

BTW I have many loves and passions in my life, thanks for asking. 

My new 85mm 1.8 is something that I am truly beginning to love. I used it for a number of the less important images at my first wedding of 2014 last Saturday and I have to say I wish I would have used it for many of the most important ones because it performed brilliantly. The focus is quick and accurate and it is much more sharp than is needed. I used it at 2.8 because that is where my confidence level is with it right now. I have used for a couple of couple's photo sessions at 2.8 and I'm getting a 95%+ hit rate with it. I'll be using it at 1.8 next week with some couples but in my home testing I've seen no issues at all at 1.8. I just didn't want to come home with a bunch of missed shots from the wedding. :)

If there are weaknesses other than that then the review might have brought them up... it doesn't have a red ring and it doesn't have the "magic" of the 1.2. I'm sure that's true on both counts... however, the lens is brilliant! The 1.2 isn't something I would even consider now that I have the 1.8 and I was in a toss up between which to get. I needed a good 85 and now I have one.   

3
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon 85mm f/1.8
« on: January 06, 2014, 10:27:59 AM »


I was hoping your "LOL's" were because those cons were mostly jokes (sarcasm) but I see it was lost on you. No problem, you're right in your observations and I certainly *don't* think the 85 1.2 is worth the extra money (I haven't bought one) but I do compare the two because focal length is an obvious comparison tool. I did mention I compare it more in line with the 50 1.4, 40 2.8 and other "like-class" lenses.



I don't know what your copy of the 50 1.4 is but my 85 1.8 makes my 50 look like it is constantly out of focus. They have similar chromatic issues though. 

4
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon 85mm f/1.8
« on: January 06, 2014, 10:26:03 AM »
clartephoto, more great shots, thanks for sharing.  It's nice to have you on CR.

The guy in the review can say that his images with the 1.2 are more magical... OK.. thanks. I wonder how one would quantify that. Could it be that when one drops $2,200 on a lens that they feel obligated to feel it is full of magic?
Have you used the 1.2?  If not, how can you say he's right or wrong?

No I have not used the 1.2. He is the one reviewing, how can he prove himself correct? What does "magical" mean? It is a meaningless statement and therefore completely unhelpful as a "review." It would make a lovely Tweet though...

Quote
The 1.2 lets in more light for sure, I'm not convinced it is sharper, and if focuses slower.

I don't mean to be rude but this is one of the least helpful reviews I've ever seen on a reputable camera website.
LOL back at you - the old "I don't mean to be rude" preceding the rude statement.  Saying that doesn't make it any less rude.

I'm sorry you were offended, perhaps it was rude of someone to call this article a review...

5
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon 85mm f/1.8
« on: January 01, 2014, 04:43:03 PM »
I have to LOL at this review.

I just purchased this lens for $319 at B&H. I shoot with a 5D3, 70-200 2.8L, 24-105L, and a 50 1.4. My verdict on this lens? It is brilliant.

I don't expect it to match a lens that costs nearly SEVEN TIMES AS MUCH. The fact that there is so much debate on this subject tells me I'm not just drinking the koolaid the lens it truly brilliant.

The guy in the review can say that his images with the 1.2 are more magical... OK.. thanks. I wonder how one would quantify that. Could it be that when one drops $2,200 on a lens that they feel obligated to feel it is full of magic?

The 1.2 lets in more light for sure, I'm not convinced it is sharper, and if focuses slower.

As the reviewer put it the only cons to the 1.8 are no hood included and it doesn't have a red ring on it. I've got two red rings, one is brilliant the other is OK (guess which? lol). I'm not sure I have thought about the ring on either of them in more than a passing way ever.

I don't mean to be rude but this is one of the least helpful reviews I've ever seen on a reputable camera website.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: July 10, 2013, 04:06:38 PM »


It is about time 40 megapixels became the new normal for DSLR's..... Progress marches on....


I don't know any pros who want a 40MP camera as their primary body. It may be nice for specific jobs but it will simply cost me money in harddrive space, and backup costs, for my Wedding and Portrait business model. The largest prints I normally sell are 24x36. My 5D3 eats up enough space as it is. A friend of mine shoots sports professionally with a 1D MkIIn with 8.2MP and he has no issues.

If I need to make large prints I enlarge the image in Photoshop, and this just got even better with Photoshop CC. For most businesses we don't need, or even want, a large MP camera.

I'd like to have it for play time, but I'm a long way away from ever paying the price of a pro body to get large MP to play with.

Anyway, I'd LIKE to have 40MP for cropping freedom... I just wouldn't want to have to pay for the harddrive space.


Hard drives..... Time marches on there too....

First hard drive I bought for work was $10,000 for a 10 megabyte drive.... Last week I bought 24 4terrabyte drives at $250 each.... That's 100 terabytes for $6000..... Quite a drop in price per byte.... This is 7 orders of magnitude... That's like buying a mansion in 1980 for $1,000,000.00 and in 2013 buying a better mansion for $0.06



LOL this is going to be rude... and your point is?

If you're spending that much on harddrives for your photography business and you want a large megapixel camera you're dealing with the wrong company here. You should visit http://www.hasselbladusa.com/


7
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: July 09, 2013, 04:52:33 PM »

Not sure about a 5DIV. The last product cycle up to the 5D3 was 3.6 years. What could be a good reason to release an upgrade after two years?

Yeah, I can't see them replacing the 5D3 so soon. It is hugely popular, and extremely competent and will remain so. Replacing it too early will simply devalue the line.  I also don't see them replacing the 1Dx next year.

We'll see a 3D high mp camera and a cinema camera.. at least that's my expectation.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: July 09, 2013, 04:49:00 PM »


It is about time 40 megapixels became the new normal for DSLR's..... Progress marches on....

I don't know any pros who want a 40MP camera as their primary body. It may be nice for specific jobs but it will simply cost me money in harddrive space, and backup costs, for my Wedding and Portrait business model. The largest prints I normally sell are 24x36. My 5D3 eats up enough space as it is. A friend of mine shoots sports professionally with a 1D MkIIn with 8.2MP and he has no issues.

If I need to make large prints I enlarge the image in Photoshop, and this just got even better with Photoshop CC. For most businesses we don't need, or even want, a large MP camera.

I'd like to have it for play time, but I'm a long way away from ever paying the price of a pro body to get large MP to play with.

Anyway, I'd LIKE to have 40MP for cropping freedom... I just wouldn't want to have to pay for the harddrive space.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Spec List
« on: June 27, 2013, 03:43:30 PM »
IF Canon doesn't tack an extra $1000 onto the price I think I have found my second body. If it is priced properly.

10
I haven't heard anything about red focus dots... please please please be in it!

11
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk III Firmware, any news?
« on: April 02, 2013, 11:01:52 AM »
I was just coming here to ask the same question. Wedding season is coming and shortly I won't have any choice but to attempt to focus on people dancing in near complete darkness. Common red focus point illumination!

12
Pricewatch Deals / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS Preorders
« on: November 06, 2012, 08:46:06 PM »
I'm not overly happy with my Sigma 24-70 IF EX DG APO because it takes a maximum micro adjustment of +20 to get it in focus (and it is still slightly out, if I could adjust it to +21 it would be perfect). Yet if Sigma starts releasing weather sealed excellent lenses at prices that match the previous generation of Canon L glass then I'll be buying their products instead of this new batch of Canon lenses. I need a few more lenses to fill out what I want to do professionally, so I'm in the market with a reason to buy.

13
Pricewatch Deals / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS Preorders
« on: November 06, 2012, 07:15:00 AM »
I don't believe this lens takes the place of the 100L.

Exactly. It may be much better than you would normally get with a 24-70 but it isn't going to replace an actual macro lens. Like someone else said above this feature is a perk for someone paying $1,000 for a lens, not an incentive to pay $1500. A used 100L macro will server the buyer MUCH MUCH better.

This may seem like bashing, but if your photography work includes macro shots and you don't have a bag that can hold your macro lens then what are you thinking??

This lens seems like a prosumer type lens that is simply over priced. Would it be good at video for pros? Sure... but before I paid a premium for this lens I would put the money into a stabilizer and fly all of my lenses instead of paying for IS in this one lens.

Just my thoughts but here's another lens that will make me look at products other than canon, and used canon lenses. 

Kev

14
I got very excited when I saw the news, but where is the AF point illumination? Uncompressed HDMI is cool and all but AF Point illumination in AI servo has become VERY important to me since I have started using that mode almost exclusively.

15
The 1Dx is a high ISO monster! Perhaps I need to remortgage the house so I can upgrade from the 5D3 to the 1Dx.

Frankly, the 5D3 did an amazing job in that photo too. Color shift doesn't bother me too much because I always play with that in post even if it looks good as shot. So no color shift wouldn't even save me on workflow.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4