March 01, 2015, 06:35:55 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 - brianleighty

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 20
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon 5 Layer UV, IR, RGB Sensor
« on: June 27, 2014, 01:21:07 PM »
Nobody's brought it up so I'll mention it. Isn't the timing on this interesting in that Canon just released a new version of DPP that isn't backwards compatible? Maybe the new RAW formula is already in the software?

One big bummer is nothing as far as settings seems to transfer between the two. Not even simple things like exposure or check marks.

Are you saying that doing an edit in DPP3 (e.g. curves & WB edit, and star-rating) doesn't show in DPP4? :o
My edits are coming over fine  :)

For the DLO module, I wish they had the old 400mm f/2.8L IS USM in there too, like the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM.
Yeah, everything I've tried so far isn't coming through. Haven't tried star ratings or looking at my curves but simple stuff like color that are in the picture style aren't coming over. Maybe I'm doing something wrong but the Canon site does say recipes don't transfer between the two so I'm guessing that's where Canon is storing all that stuff in the file :(

Performance seems pretty good in the new version. That was one of my big pet peeves with the old version was if you opened a folder with 1000 photos it would just hang for like 30 seconds to a minute doing stuff. Now it's pretty much instantaneous. The actual exporting is actually a bit slower. I did 10 photos in the old version and it took 1:57. The new version took 2:21. I'm not seeing any differences in image quality but it's possible it's there. One big bummer is nothing as far as settings seems to transfer between the two. Not even simple things like exposure or check marks. It's hard for me to want to switch unless they at least put in support for the 5D mark II. But I'm glad to see they're at least moving in the right direction. Just needs a little more work hopefully.

Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens
« on: June 11, 2014, 07:23:33 AM »
Sigma isn't a publicly traded company.

Lenses / Re: On 400 USD budget for zoom lenses
« on: May 05, 2014, 01:21:48 PM »

For some reason this costs a lot more at B&H.
Why this?
f/2.8- you want as much light as possible for the smaller sensor.
17-50- this is a nice standard zoom range.
VC- you want vibration compensation when recording video.

Plus, it is a very nice and well-regarded lens all around.
Keep in mind the VC is optically inferior to the non-vc version:

Hopefully they do at least 15 or 20 percent off coupon. I want to get another flash but the current 25 off 250 and 50 off 500 is pretty bad compared to the other deals lately. If anybody has any incite into this I'd be interested to hear.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Good Deals On Circular Polarizers
« on: November 13, 2013, 07:45:08 PM »
Just bought a B+W 77mm one:

Looked at camelcamelcamel and it looks like it's pretty much at the lowest level it's been at. I'd wait if I thought there was going to be a sale but like I said, I never see any deals... at least not for good ones :)

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Good Deals On Circular Polarizers
« on: November 13, 2013, 06:41:28 PM »
There are so many counterfeit ones out there that its hard to identify a truly good deal.
I'd like to find a 82mm one, I have some 77mm ones, but 82mm seems to be the new standard.
I will stick to B&H, Adorama, or other reputable dealer and avoid anyone with "Wonderful" deals that seem too good to be true.
I expect to see some one day specials in the next 2 months, the problem is to spot them in time to jump on them.  Perhaps signing up for sale notices at some of the major manufacturers outlets??
Let us know if you find a deal.
BTW, The price seems to be $150-$250 for good ones, but there is a $11.95 special on Amazon.  Maybe this is one of those that ruins the front element on some lenses due to rubbing.   :)

Yeah I saw that one too :) The polarizer I have now isn't aweful. It's a tiffen but it doesn't have any coatings on it so any flare at all and it quickly looses a lot of contrast. I've spent some decent money on gear so I don't want to put something cheap in front of it. Thanks for the advice. I wish there was something like canonpricewatch for polarizers.

Pricewatch Deals / Good Deals On Circular Polarizers
« on: November 12, 2013, 10:27:10 PM »
So I always see deals for Cameras and Lenses but nary a deal for circular polarizers. I'm looking to upgrade to a better polarizer but would like to get a good deal if possible. Anybody have any good deals they know of?

Lenses / Re: Dust in refurbished lens from Canon
« on: November 02, 2013, 08:44:39 PM »
Here's another extreme example of lens damage and dust inside the lens, and how it affects image quality ;)

Good of lensrentals to answer.  I guess they didn't point you to Roger's blog?

Thanks. I read those before but it's been a while and for some reason I thought those were focused on a different aspect of things. The lens is sharp (tested against the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II and while a little bit behind held up well at f/4. The lens I'm returning is actually a TINY bit sharper than the other but I bought that one with the 15% off coupon so the $30 difference isn't worth it. Plus the lens I'm keeping is from this year so it also has the new Canon lens cap with the pinch in the center which I've to say I'm really liking much better. Thanks for everyone's help.

Lenses / Re: Dust in refurbished lens from Canon
« on: November 02, 2013, 09:06:06 AM »
It is up to you. But since you posted, I guess you want to return it.
So return it
Not necessarily. I just wanted some reassurance this is normal and I shouldn't worry about it. Thanks for the input everyone. I'm shooting a wedding this weekend. If I don't notice anything in the pictures from that I won't worry about it.

Lenses / Dust in refurbished lens from Canon
« on: November 01, 2013, 11:55:54 PM »
Alright, so I ordered the Canon 70-200 f/4 L non-IS. Actually two as I did not realize I couldn't cancel an order and I had a 20% coupon that I wanted to use. Anyways, so I get both lenses and inspected them. The outside is fine other than some dust I was able to blow off with my blower. Looking through both of them though they both have a pretty good amount of dust in them. I'm trying to decide whether it's worth paying to ship it Canon to have them take it apart and clean it or not. I was hoping one would be clean at least and I could keep that copy but they both have it. I've taken some shots and I'm not seeing anything. Perhaps I'll have to shoot at f/22 at MFD and see if I can see it. I asked lens rentals their thoughts and this is what I got back in reply:

Its hard to say what you might be seeing without a visual but it sounds like either dust or cleaning residue. Most used or refurbished lenses will have a light to moderate amount of internal dust. If they aren't very noticeable, chances are they will never affect your images. There is also a good chance that Canon has opened up the lenses to be repaired at some point and left residue on the elements from cleaning them. This is not ideal, but again will probably never affect image quality. If you are uncomfortable with what you are seeing I would bring it to Canon's attention with some photos of the spots on hand.

I wanted to get everyone's comments on what they thought I should do. Thanks.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Gets its Price
« on: November 01, 2013, 11:48:56 PM »
I second that. The Sigma 85mm 1.4 is no match for the 85L, especially not for the bokeh (yes, there is more than sharpness, even if I think the Canon is sharper @f1.4).

@Radiating:   I really like what Sigma is doing at the moment, but keep the feet at the ground!

I got the 85 1.2 in. Man that things heavy! It's been a while since I shot with the Sigma but what I'm seeing just in test shots tells me this lens is better than the Sigma. How much better? I don't know but I'd definitely say better. I'll have a better idea after this weekend but I can see why people snob their nose at the sigma. But I can also say the Sigma isn't a bad lens. The Canon just has "that look" and I can see why if you've got the money it might be worth it over the Sigma depending on how you're using it and needs.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Gets its Price
« on: October 29, 2013, 10:35:13 PM »

You're living in the ancient past. Sigma's primary motivation now is image quality not price.

Sigma has been releasing lenses that blow their competitors out of the water in quality at around or slightly below their competitors prices:

If you have any doubts take a look at these real world samples:

Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 vs Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 @ f/2.8

There's no comparison, the Sigma is in an entirely different league of image quality. Their 35mm f/1.4 is likewise better:

And their 85mm f/1.4 is both sharper than Canon's 85mm f/1.2 II, and has much less purple fringing (the f/1.2 II has so much you can't even correct it automatically, which is why I use the Sigma)

Sigma makes a better lens that Canon does. Sometimes much better, this is the new Sigma.

I would be very surprised if the 24-105mm OS wasn't marginally better and I'd be very happy if it blew the Canon out of the water like they did with the f/1.8 zoom.

You sure about the 85mm 1.2? I've rented the 85 1.4 and it's a good lens but from what most say the 85 1.2 is still better. The main reason why it's a good deal is the faster AF and being half the price. I'm renting the 85 1.2 for a wedding this weekend so we'll see what I think of it then. The 85 1.4 is a little older than the 35 and 18-35 though so perhaps an indicator of the direction they were heading in. It'd be nice for them to release an "Art" version of it with some minor updates.

Lenses / Re: Sigma 35 1.4 vs Sigma 18-35 1.8
« on: August 29, 2013, 09:37:10 PM »
That is a great deal on the 35.

I took the rented 18-35 on a trip to Chicago and shot roughly 500 pictures, 300 of which were keepers.  I haven't processed any of them yet, as I'm waiting for Lightroom to release a lens correction profile.

My copy seemed to hunt a little, especially in low light.  Keep in mind I shoot on a 60d, so not the greatest autofocus to begin with.  I did like the range a lot; I have a 17-40L so this was pretty close in terms of focal lengths. 

I've been thinking a lot about switching to full frame, and thought maybe this lens would convince me to stay with crop.  No conclusion so far.  I wanted to love this lens, and I still could, but I won't know for sure until I get a chance to process all my shots.

You know Bryan mentioned that it CAN be mounted on full frame, just has a ton of vignetting at the wide end. Curious how well it would do but it's still an interesting lens if the outer quality isn't too bad. Heck the 35 2.0 canon is aweful on the outside on full frame and if it was for the focusing on it it wouldn't be too bad :)

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 20