I used to laugh when I was reading about a 135mm f/1.8L IS as my 135mm f/2.0 L is superb!
But lately I am wishing for a 135mm f/2.0L IS...
But lately I am wishing for a 135mm f/2.0L IS...
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.
Ex. 1mm-5200mm f1.2 is usm STM p an cake...lolYou forgot to add: L, Macro, TS-E
You can use evaluation metering so as to take into account the focusing point and weight it more. But YES, it will NOT be exactly the same. You do have to use 1D series for what you want.Is it possible to get it to meter using the selected AF point instead of the center of the frame?Nope unfortunately not thats the realms of 1D bodies only
Tran,Whatever suits you. I just mentioned the latest M bodies. I do hope that their shutter is inaudible. I think that was the case with the old ones. But it's just a thought I have no personal experience. An inaudible shutter is very helpful for street photography. I agree that the size factor is important here. Leicas, Fuji X-Pro 1 and the new Sony do indeed have the advantage here. I would prefer the Fuji system for the cheaper price relatively to Leica and the exchangeable lenses relative to Sony. But I guess if Sony looks like a small compact it is even a better stealth camera.
The Leica M 240 is the new Leica (people were calling it the M10 before it was released).
24 MP CMOS sensor with no AA filter + live view and focus peaking + external EVF via hot shoe.
The thing is, while high end DSLRs can approach the IQ of the M system, they require careful matching of lens to body.
D800E + Nikon 50mm 1.2 or Zeiss 50 is being touted as "close" to M9 + Summicron 50 but you also have the weight and bulk to consider.
I hate shooting street in dangerous places where Canon or Nikon shouts cop/reporter to the locals and I have to rush shots or get the hell out of the area quickly (and yes, I have used 5D MK3 + 40mm pancake but it is still too awkward for me).
This hasn't happened when I shoot with the Fuji.
If Fuji had a FF equivalent, I'd go with it but right now there is only Leica or this new Sony in the small FF game.
I used to wish that, but then, I woke up.I wish I could say "Go for the uber sharp 14-24L", but..
The 17-40 is rubbish, and the 16-35 is more of a workhorse for photojurnalists. Sharp at the center but lousy edges and corners.
If I were you, I would go for the Zeiss 21mm, or for the 17mm or 24mm TS-E.
Personally, I'm waitng for canon to release a better UWA-zoom for landscapers. I don't care if it is 14-24, 16-35 or 17-40. I just want it to be razor sharp across the whole frame.
+1....razor sharp at f2.8 + IS for handheld slow shooting.
I think I'd be tempted to get a pano setup that I can use for all my lenses rather than something that is so specific. A pano setup would also allow one to get an AOV wider than the shift limits of a lens.+1 That's why although I am aware of the TSE collar I didn't get it. It's much better to spend the money on a generic solution.
Actually, apparently you're supposed to shift the camera, not the lens.Yes but to do that the lens and NOT the camera must be steady. So the lens has to be fixed to a tripod somehow. In order to do that you need a special Canon TSE Tripod Collar from HARTBLEI.
I like both sharpness and ...noise (It does not seem bad for ISO4000, but that's me). However, is this a screen capture at 100% from DPP? DPP uses the jpg file for high quality view as far as I have found so actually the noise is higher in raw.Those settings don't make any sense to me... and why is the bird & his wing not frozen at 1/4000? And not in focus at f/5.6 with a focal length of 400mm?+1. I am less than impressed with the noise on my 5DIII. I find the 22mpx enough for me, but expected far better low noise performance. Using Topaz denoise doesn't help much either. OTOH the problem is probably behind the Camera.
Here is an example 1/4000s, 400mm F5.6 ISO4000, its easy to see in the two squares. Now thats
at ISO4000, so obviously at anything higher its worse. In this case when I tried Topaz denoise
(the example here is the BEFORE state) it worked pretty well.
So, is this too much noise? And its not in the darkest parts
I may be wrong, but shooting this at 1/1600th, f/3/2 since it's 400mm focal length, and iso 100 - 400 depending on time of day, seems like could be a quick and easy solution to take care of all your noise problems, to me anyway... At ISO 4000, you're just asking for issues IMHO... No offense intended...
I am looking to purchase either the TS-E 17mm or the TS-E 24mm.No matter which of the two you choose you will enjoy the results. Unfortunately you will wish the other one too
I'm greatly leaning towards the 24mm. First, I already have the 14mm L II for when I need something super wide. Second, I also like the idea of being able to use filters without having to buy into a Corkin or Lee system.
Can anyone with experiences with these two lenses give me any feedback or suggestions?
Thank you in advance!
How about a better battery?OP has already said that the battery was the original one. How better than this?