August 01, 2014, 09:38:02 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 - Viggo

Pages: 1 ... 68 69 [70] 71 72 ... 134
1036
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
« on: January 16, 2013, 04:08:31 AM »
Once again I have decided to sell the 85 L to buy a 70-200, 5th time now I think ;D

1037
Thanks for posting. I'm a bit surprised, checked the results over at TDP also, and looks like it is like this. Dissapointing.

1038
Canon General / Re: 70-200 F2.8 mark I or mark II?!
« on: January 06, 2013, 03:38:12 AM »
Well of course the mk2 is wayway better in every aspect and not just a tad. But if you're like me it's a lens I hardly ever used and therefor completely stupid to pay that price for.. However I just the other day picked up a 70-200 2.8 non-is for $350 and then it suddenly is a super bargain an totally worth to own, even if I use it no more than twice a year..

Never missed the mk1 or the mk2 when I sold them..

1039
Lenses / Re: Oops, did it again !
« on: January 04, 2013, 04:36:35 PM »
Well, it's not exactly the same, but I had decided I wouldn't buy another lens for quite some time, but saw a a 70-200 f2.8 L for $360 and just bought it, who would pass? ;D

1040
Lenses / Re: Making the most out of a 50 1.2?
« on: December 28, 2012, 02:44:56 AM »
Yes, but how sharp 'p your 2470@ 1.2? ;D

And actually, the sharpest aperture of the 50 L is around 5.0-5.6.

1041
Lenses / Re: Making the most out of a 50 1.2?
« on: December 24, 2012, 05:57:48 PM »
To really make it useful, forget about every bad thing you've heard and shoot like any other lens. Yes it is pretty soft if you use it closer than 1 meter from subject, but I don't care, because the look and feel of closeup portraits for example is simply fantastic. Enjoy and congrats!

1042
Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]
« on: December 24, 2012, 07:46:10 AM »
Some photographers get the EF 14-24 f/2.8 for testing a few weeks ago.

Does "some" include yourself? So, how is it? 8)

1043
Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]
« on: December 24, 2012, 04:21:35 AM »
Compare a 1,4 to a f2? Well, the 1,4 let's in twice the light, do you want that and shallow dof as a result? The answer to that question gives the lens you want... add weatherseal too..

1044
Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]
« on: December 23, 2012, 05:13:17 PM »

The TS 17 was so soft I had to sell it, the af didn't work on three copies !! Useless...


Er... Sorry..TS E 17 is a manual lens ...trying to auto focus it is like trying to milk a bull? ;)

Did you actually think I owned the TS17 on a 1d X not knowing it's MF? Irony in writing is sometimes lost, apparently...

1045
Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]
« on: December 23, 2012, 04:49:31 PM »
Wow.. does it hurt to be so wrong?

And besides, not all moving people are like the elderly and very cold, you apparently shoot.

a better question would be.. does it hurt you.. to be so ignorant? the 50L is CRAP.. the 24L and 35L are kinda ok (you heard me! if they were in the sigma 35/1.4 price range.. they would almost kick ass.. but for double that? forget it!).. the 85L is the only sub 100mm L that kicks some serious ass..

The TS 17 was so soft I had to sell it, the af didn't work on three copies !! Useless...

1046
Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]
« on: December 23, 2012, 03:25:49 PM »
an f/1.4 wide-angle lens is NOT about speed. It is about the chance to get at least some halfway decent  bokeh at wide-angle focal lengths. An f/1.4 lens therefore can never be substituted by a slower lens with IS.

The real issue however is not IS or not IS, it is the fact, that all of Canon's current 1.4 lenses deliver SUB-PAR IQ wide open. NB matter whether they have a red ring or not. 24 L II, 35 L I, 50 non L. And the 50/1.2 L is a sub-par piece of cr*p as well by todays standards. A Sigma 50/1.4 runs circles around it. 

As far as 35mm fixed focals are concerned,  currently the only 35/1.4 in the entire market which is fully usable at f/1.4 is the Sigma 35/1.4.  At a street price wich is lower than the totally useless Canon 24 /2.8 IS and 28/2.8 IS and it beats the Zeiss Distagon 35.

And btw, I come from an entirely different usage situation:
* when I shoot handheld in low light, I ALWAYS shoot moving targets ... that is ... PEOPLE in motion ... 1/60s needed, nothing less. IS useless. :-)
* when I shoot static targets in low light, I ALWAYS use a tripod. IS useless. :-)

Wow.. does it hurt to be so wrong?

And besides, not all moving people are like the elderly and very cold, you apparently shoot.

1047
Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]
« on: December 23, 2012, 11:33:50 AM »
Need to wait and see if the 35mm beats the sigma.
As for the 14-24, too late I already sprung for the Tokina 16-28.

It is 100% certain the 35 L II will be weathersealed, THAT alone beats the Sigma for soooo many of my shots.

1048
Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]
« on: December 23, 2012, 08:53:43 AM »
The 35 L II, I am so seriously excited about that lens, seems the wait has been forever!

The savings account have always been there for it, lol. JUST yesterday me and my son wnet out in a crazy blizzard, we have those pretty much everyday now, the snow travels so fast it actually sticks to the windows. And I had no choice but to use the 24 (weathersealing) as the 50 was too narrow, the 35 would have been perfect... And, no, I coudn't have used a 24-70 as it was to thick snow and too poor light, I was at f1,6 @ 1/500s (freeze action, no pun intended) at iso 8000

Our national holiday is 17th of May, if it's here by then I'll be happy camper. ;D

1049
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D2 for a day after 5D3 for 6 months
« on: December 23, 2012, 07:53:34 AM »
I used my 5D2 the other day after not using it for a while, and honestly it seems like the images may be a bit sharper on the Mark II.  Not necessarily better, but sharper. 

That is one of the reasons I sold the 5d3 to get the 1d X, IQ really wasn't improved, except for color-accuracy, from the 5d2. It was more bang in the sharpness, and I love sharpness and detail, with the 5d2. Above 1600 iso the 5d3 is clearly better, but 100-400, I just liked the 5d2 much better.

But I also had this experience as my gf still uses the 5d2 for food-photography, and I use the 1d X, there is a slight difference between those two cameras, going back to the 5d2 feels like going in slow-mo ;D That being said, I always found the 5d2 extremely sluggish and slow even when new. After using the 1d3 and 1d4 (along with 5d1 and 5d2) the only reason being FF, I was sooo happy to see the FF 1dx announced. The 5d3 seemed like a better bang for the buck, but after using the 5d3 for four months and then switching to the 1d x half a year it's pretty obvious it isn't.

1050
Sorry for somewhat hi-jacking the thread, I tried the "Camera Standard" setting and I relly liked it. Is there a way to enable it by default?

Yes, set all settings the way you want the default to be, in down on the right until you see "sync" and "reset" and hold THE ALT-key and it will change to "Set Default".

Pages: 1 ... 68 69 [70] 71 72 ... 134