March 01, 2015, 06:16:04 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 - jasonsim

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 16
Lenses / Re: 50mm 1.2L vs 35mm 1.4L for events photography...
« on: April 24, 2013, 11:41:09 PM »
+1 Sounds like advice from an owner.

I do a lot of event work with a 5D3/70-200L 2.8II and a second 5D3/50L. I love the 35L but once I shifted to the 5D3s, the 50L is just about the best lens for me. It's my standard carry when I go for one rig. Great portrait focal length, pure cream bokeh and now, with the AF of the newer bodies... it's killer combo. For event work it shines, and gives the unique 50 perspective... great for photojournalism. The 50mm 1.4 is ok, had the same experience Random Orbits... cheap build and if your making money can take a crap on you when you need it.  It also hunts in sketchy light. Not the 50L though, locks on and its built like a tank. Love my 35L too but it now takes a back seat and with the new Sigma, I'd be checking it out too. I own  3 Siggys and the all perform flawlessly and are built well, so the 35 is looking like something I might need to try.

I'll probably keep the 35L until after the 35L II is out for a while and the prices soften.  I mostly use it for portraiture and as a walk around lens, so I don't need it to be critically sharp into the corners because my subjects aren't in those locations anyway.  Most people know that the 24-70 II is sharper than the 35L, but according to TDP, it is also sharper than the Sigma 35, so in either case, the user that is concerned about sharpness the most will opt for the 24-70 II in either case.  Canon's next generation primes should be able to beat the 24-70 II.  If not, then Canon will lose potential sales because more people will opt for the 24-70 II rather than buying a few primes with higher total sales within that focal length range.

I have the 24-70mm II and the Sigma 35mm f/1.4.  Both are great, but have to disagree that the 24-70 II is sharper at 35mm than the Sigma at 35mm.  If you compare the IQ from both at f/2.8, the Sigma has an edge in center and mid frame sharpness.  This comparison can be seen at the

And the Sigma is two full stops faster; makes a big difference in the bokeh department. 

I went with the Kirk replacement foot for the 300mm II.  It is basically the same design as the RRS with the middle part cut out of it.  Makes for a nice place to stick a finger to reassure oneself that the foot is securely in the hands.  It works very well with the RRS Lever clamps.

For my 600mm II I went with the RRS replacement, since it has the extension going back which helps balland the lens; especially when equipped with a 1Dx and 2x III extender.  The new telephotos are not as front heavy, so need that extra on the back end of the foot.

Best of luck with your new 300mm II, no matter what foot you get!  It is an amazing lens!

Lenses / Re: 50mm 1.2L vs 35mm 1.4L for events photography...
« on: April 23, 2013, 11:51:55 PM »
You might also want to check out the new Sigma 35mm f/1.4 "Art" lens....  rivals the 35mm f/1.4L....

+1, I would definitely recommend the Sigma 35mm f/1.4.  You can probably get the Sigma 50mm also...the price of these two Sigma's is about what a 50L costs new. 

Lenses / Re: EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Available Mid 2014?
« on: April 23, 2013, 01:35:06 PM »
Perhaps Sigma will be out with their new 120-300mm f/2.8 OS Sport lens before long and throw in a 2x converter with it. 

I personally got tired of waiting and got the 300mm f/2.8L IS II: cheaper and works a charm with both v3 teleconverters.

After reading through this thread, I got inspired to take my 16-35mm with me over the weekend to a Tae Kwon Do tournament that my children participated in.  I'm glad I took it, even though I only used it for a few shots.


Just sold my 50mm L and might need to sell my 135L.  I'd definitely consider a Sigma 50mm Art lens and a 135mm f/1.8. 

Lenses / Re: Street Photography 35mm/50mm + DC?Help
« on: April 18, 2013, 06:11:51 PM »
I'd probably go with #4.  Sigma 35 f/1.4, Canon 50mm f/1.4 & 85mm 1.8. 

I think you will find the 50L to be a little disappointing...I did.  I just sold it and got a Zeiss 50mm f/2 Makro-Planar ZE lens.

Kind regards,

Third Party Lenses (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) / Re: Sigma 35mm f/1.4
« on: April 16, 2013, 11:23:18 AM »
I am loving my Sigma 35mm!  I thought I would not get another 35mm prime, after selling my Canon 35L off last year.  I sold it because I used it seldom and had just got a 24-70mm f/2.8L II.  However, at the price I was able to get the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 for (I had Amazon points), I could not pass it up.  I have been very pleased by the results, which I will say are better than what the Canon 35L was able to do.  This thing is bloody sharp at f/1.4L and resistant to harsh flares and chromatic aberrations.

Some samples taken on my 5D Mark III:




Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon Refurb 400mm f/5.6L $910
« on: April 11, 2013, 11:27:38 AM »
Folks, if you already have a 100-400mm or 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, then stick with what you have.  I actually had all three of these lenses and, well, kept only one.  The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II is so sharp, I don't see much difference between it and the 100-400.  When using the 1.4x III or 2x III, the image quality is suburb.  Stop is down one stop and it gets a bit better.

Here are some I took last Sunday using the 2x III (two at f/5.6 and ISO 3200 on a 60D, last one at f/8 ISO 640). None of these would have been possible using the 400mm f/5.6L.  My shutter speed was 1/200s or longer.



Kind regards,

To the OP...isn't the new Sigma 35mm f/1.4 the one that can be configured via a computer without having to send the lens to Sigma?  I thought it had the ability to adjust front / back focusing issues until you get it correct. 

As others have also said, there is the MFA available on the 5D III itself.  One or the other should fix it, but I'd prefer to fix it on the lens. 

Kind regards,

Lenses / Re: Which Lens to buy
« on: April 04, 2013, 08:52:08 AM »
If you really must have a lighter DSLR to travel with or just as a back-up, the 6D would be it.  But learn about it's weaknesses, before you buy.

If you want something lighter, that gives DSLR quality output, I'd consider the Sony RX100.  The images and dynamic range coming from that camera are truly excellent.  It can also slip into a shirt pocket.

Kind regards,

Software & Accessories / Re: Gitzo, Really Right Stuff or ???
« on: April 04, 2013, 08:40:08 AM »
I'm curious - when do you remove the center plate?

As for G-locks, that's Gitzo-locks, so who else do you think would have them?  ;)  The 'gravity' part is marketing speak, as far as I can tell.  They state, "The higher the load applied vertically to the leg, the stronger the lock," but that would apply to any threaded fitting.  I find the RRS leg locks easier on the hands when opening/closing them, because of their shape.

Interesting that you call out the feet, though.  I like the idea of spikes covered by the rubber feet, vs. having to change them out (and having to pay extra for them).  Having said that, I've only rarely needed to use the spikes I have - the teardrop feet on the RRS legs are significantly wider, and shaped so that they contact the ground even at wide leg spreads.  If I do need to use the spikes, the RRS ones are significantly longer and dig deeper (the threading is the same, though - so you can add RRS feet/spikes to Gitzo legs and vice versa).

Both are excellent products.  Differences are degress of excellence, both will serve you well. 

This is really the bottom line - you can't go wrong with either.

I don't remove the plate very much at all, but it does give the option to use an optional column much like the RRS.  Just the swap can be made without tools.  The larger feet I was referring to, that come with the new systematic tripods, look like this:

I use lots of RRS product and you are right, any of these tripods will be great.  I have and use the RRS monopod.

Kind regards,

Software & Accessories / Re: Gitzo, Really Right Stuff or ???
« on: April 04, 2013, 01:29:25 AM »
I'd go with the Gitzo.  But the RRS are excellent legs too.  I have three Gitzo tripods and none have ever failed me.  The newest is a Series 4 GT4542LS.  I use a RRS BH-55 on it along with a full Wimberley Gimbal v2.  The Gitzo Series 4 is rated for 55 pounds and that is probably conservative.  it have larger diameter legs which reduce vibration.  It has a center plate that can be removed without tools.  It has 1.5 inch metal spikes built in...the rubber feet snap in over the spikes.  It comes with the large wide feet so the tripod wont sink in sand (think beach).  It has g-locks.  Most of these items are either missing from the RRS tripods or come at an extra expense. 

I also like the fact that Gitzo's are carried by most reputable / serious camera stores the world over.  So if I need a replacement part, it will be a whole lot easier to get. 

Neither, get her a Sony RX100.  Or just let her choose her own camera. 

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D2 refurb or new 7D as backup to 5D3?
« on: March 21, 2013, 11:37:13 PM »
I'd just keep the 5D2 or exchange for another.  As a backup, if your 5D III craps out during a wedding, you will still have another FF to continue with.  You won't have to think about your focus lengths and deal with the 1.6x crop.  The files coming out of the 5D2 are much cleaner than the 7D.  The 7D has great files up to about ISO 3200. Beyond ISO 3200 the 7D raw files get harder to clean up (noise reduction).  The 5D2 is much better in this respect. 

If you have a need to a second back-up body for doing something like sports or wildlife, then I'd recommend a 7D.

Kind regards,

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 16