April 23, 2014, 08:09:17 PM

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 - wickidwombat

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 270
16
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Lens survey - your favorites, and your most wanted?
« on: April 13, 2014, 03:18:02 AM »
i cant wait to try it on the 11-22 since its got IS it might be a tad better than the 22 for macro

Didn't get around to using that yet, other that a quick bench test at my desk to shoot the wallpaper pattern.  The IS should help, but that will be offset by the loss of 2.5 of stops.  The working distance will still be around an inch with the 16mm extension tube, half an inch with 26mm of extension tubes for 1.39x magnification, or an inch and a half with the 10mm extension tube for 0.66x magnification. It should be interesting.

but i'd be wanting to stop it right down anyway for DOF so the IS is better at 22mm the 11-22 should have similar magnification to the 22 with the tubes

17
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Lens survey - your favorites, and your most wanted?
« on: April 12, 2014, 06:56:17 PM »
i cant wait to try it on the 11-22 since its got IS it might be a tad better than the 22 for macro

18
Lenses / Re: 2014, the year of the lens...but for whom?
« on: April 12, 2014, 04:04:03 AM »
135L f/2 IS plz :)

Yeah, but at what cost?

Double the $$$s compared to the current offering me thinks ;)
that would still be cheap, I think maybe an f2.8 IS might be that but if it were f2 it would be north of 2k

19
Lenses / Re: Help with choosing a wide angle lens
« on: April 11, 2014, 10:28:26 PM »
the 16-35 II is the reason i still love the 1.3 crop APSH sensors it gives you a nice 21-46 mm effective range at f2.8 which was considerably better than the 24-70 mk1 its a fantasic wide to normal combo then second ff body with a fast 85 or 135 or the 70-200 f 2.8 work really well together

20
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Grip with integrated Arca Swiss plate review
« on: April 11, 2014, 09:00:31 PM »
cool i like it, gonna keep an eye out for it

21
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony Alpha a6000
« on: April 11, 2014, 08:50:12 PM »
I thought I had better add (to avoid confusion) that the poor high iso performance seems limited to the jpeg files
Thanks for posting the images ... I agree about the jpeg files, even the a7/a7R suffers the same issue with jpeg files ... I think it is the in-camera jpeg processing that is screwing up the images in my a7, somehow Sony is not able to work out a good in-camera-processing system for those jpeg files ... but the raw files are great ... so, I suppose a6000 also suffers from the same issue.

yeah it's a pain since my dad has no interest in raw but i've told him to shoot raw and jpg then i can process any shots he likes for him from the raws.

but with LR the iso 6400 raw shots clean up pretty well and are totally useable just need quite a bit of NR added. its pretty much on par with the EOS-M at 6400 for raw except the extra resolution helps the a6000 keep a bit more detail after NR so processed images are probably a tad better if pixel peeping.
Not pixel peeping you cant tell the difference.

22
i could be proved wrong but it was tamrons old super zooms that led me to hate the brand, of course they could pick up their game but really the best superzoom available is still the canon 28-300 L and its a beast, a close second is the nikkor 18-200 VR II which is crop only, it will be interesting to see what canon bring to the next gen 18-200 because the existing one sucks.

Anyway I am no longer a tamron hater as the 150-600 is absolutely stunning. but with superzooms there is alot of physics working against them.

23
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Gets Reviewed
« on: April 11, 2014, 08:42:20 PM »
B&H sent an email yesterday saying it can be pre-ordered for $949

24
got an email from B&H yesterday with preorder price of $949!


25
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: How to Annoy a Photography Snob
« on: April 10, 2014, 10:13:18 PM »
I lost all respect for Ken Rockwell after reading this:

http://kenrockwell.com/ri/WhereDoBabiesComeFrom.htm

I know he, in his weird way, was trying to be "funny"...but so many things just go over the line in that page. When reading his photography pages, and when you see him in the few YouTube videos he is in, you get the feeling is a crass, arrogant buffoon...but when you read his "Where do Babies Come From"...you realize he's everything you fear he is...then you throw up.

I don't even bother to click on links to kenrockwell.com anymore...all I ever see now is...where do babies come from... T_T T_T T_T T_T T_T

This actually makes me accept that a couple of countries Ive lived in has internet censorship. He must have been drunk.


unfortunately for me china didn't block that now i will never un see that either  :'(

26
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony Alpha a6000
« on: April 10, 2014, 09:41:53 PM »
and for some perspective here is a 5Dmk3 iso 8000 100% crop


27
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony Alpha a6000
« on: April 10, 2014, 09:34:13 PM »
I thought I had better add (to avoid confusion) that the poor high iso performance seems limited to the jpeg files
the raws seem pretty close to the EOS-M possibly a little less noise and the high resolution helps a bit.

here are a couple of 100% crops of unedited raws from the a6000 and EOS-M at iso 6400


28
this will be softer than a marshmallow....

Would that be a new marshmallow or a 3 month old marshmallow?

a fresh one....
old ones go hard

29
Lenses / Re: canon 16-35L MK 1 vs. samyang 14mm
« on: April 10, 2014, 07:32:01 PM »
the 16-35 is still a great versitile lens for so much more that just landscapes i love my 16-35 mk 2 and its a lens that goes everywhere with me.

you could always just get the 14mm for astro use.

30
Lenses / Re: canon 16-35L MK 1 vs. samyang 14mm
« on: April 10, 2014, 07:20:30 PM »
astro kills the 16-35 option as it suffers from coma, even the mk 2 does
so the samyang 14 is a better bet however it obviously is not as versitile as it has no zoom
but if you are only interested in the wide end then look at dustins review of this lens in the review section
it looks pretty damn good. just be carfeull if you buy used as there are older versions that are optically inferior to the newer ones. but they are so cheap buying new should not be an issue.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 270