sigma 18-35 f1.8
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.
I just want to be sure I understand everyone, if a camera takes good and bad photos of a subject with not setting changes it's a AFMA problem? I would think that it would be consistent.
that´s all fine but fact is overall the 7D MK2 get´s a lot of bad press.
no matter if it´s justified or not this will make an impression on customers.
only three example:
you can say what you want about DXO but it carrys a lot of weight as you can see.
if canon does not counter that, the reputation is gone. if it´s not already too late.
And another vote for the little voigt.
It's a fun lens. Simply using it is a pleasure, the manual focus thingy is not really an issue (especially when shooting landscapes, just set it at the infinity hard stop and be done with it...).
Resulting photo looks good too. f/3.5 to f/5 is not really the sharpest in the corner but it's manageable. f/5.6 to f/11, the lens is excellent across the frame.
On starry skies, it's not that good though. You'll get visible coma on the outer third of the image.
There's also a bit of CA from time to time, but that can be removed easily. Almost no flare though.
I've been playing with it for the last year or so and it's still one of my most used lens.
FYI, I have the dock and I did my best to put it to good use. But it never changed the inconsistency. How do you set a value, when the deveation from measurement to measurement goes from -15 to +15?
Canon crop is still worse than everyone else when it comes to color noise (and the 5D III and 1D X are still worse than the D810).
If you get the 6d you don't have to get a 24-70. Maybe the 16-35 f/4 plus your 50 and your 70-200 makes a great kit?