September 21, 2014, 08:48:24 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 ... 69 70 [71] 72 73 ... 137
1051
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is a Peerless Performer
« on: January 28, 2013, 06:39:17 PM »
It's great no doubt, but I have to pay 3650 USD to get one, so I simply have to live vicariously through the people who own it ::)
Wow that is a lot for this lens. I only payed around $2300 US for a non-grey marketed copy. And living in Australia, I'm surprised I managed that.

And the 24-70 II is ALWAYS on my 5D mark III.  The only other lens I'd probably switch between (if I owned it) would be an 85 f/1.2L II

I know, that's norway for ya, but at least we hardly pay anything for healthcare  :P

I also paid 9935 usd for the 1d X. Loooooaaads of fun that was.. But I've put it to good use and it never dissapoints me.

1052
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is a Peerless Performer
« on: January 28, 2013, 04:24:49 PM »
It's the light fall off and the 'magic' of that aperture combined with that FL that captivates me. Granted I don't use it much but when i do, particularly for child portraits, it makes a huge impression. With the advent of the 24-70 ii, the 24L has become quite a specialized lens but I'm ok with that.

Couldn't agree more! I use it wide open to F2 when shooting my kids and it just makes the subject pop and f2 gives that slightly shallow and very pleasing soft feel. Sometimes is subtle, but it's there and I have used it a lot lately at 2.8 too see if I could live with that instead, but I really can't get the same feel, again, sometimes the difference is sublte, but it's there, and it makes a difference I reallyreally love.


1053
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is a Peerless Performer
« on: January 28, 2013, 01:28:04 PM »
In Sweden incl taxes   3016 USD
As a pro  2400USD  with VAT deduction
Theres in no problem to buy the lens from US but Canon Europe does not like to take care of the lens from US if something is wrong. And there are a 25% VAT of gods from  US if the lens are declared into Sweden in a proper way
So don't declare.  ;D

I actually have a friend from Sweden who travels to NYC twice a year. During every visit, he goes to B&H and packs his bag full of gear. He never declares it when he gets back home. Just walks through the customs with a smile on his face.

I've done that a few times, not myself, but buddies of mine travelling. The problem is, IF you get pulled over at customes it's YOUR responsibillity to prove to them that it has been either declared (if bought from elsewhere) or that you bought it in your country, Norway in this case. That means if I travel with a Norwegian-bought lens, used or new, and I get pulled over on my way back and can't provide a receipt from Norway for the item in question, I have to pay the taxes of NEW retail price. This is even if I buy the item used and it's 10 years old and it's still in sale. So I might save quite a bit with sneaking it in, but if I'm unlucky, it would cost through the teeth to keep it.

The other thing is you can't sneak anything in unless someone you know is actually going to BH, buy online and taxes are autmatically added, and yes, they add taxes to the SHIPPING costs as well.. Greedy bastards...

I shoot my 24 veryvery much between 1.4 and 1.8 and I've tried a 24mm f2.8 for the same type of shots, and it lacks that nice soft 3D-feel the f1.4 gives. However I could use both, because out shooting with flash or something I could change the perspective in 0.1 seconds by zooming and have much more options for my images.

It took my a while back in the day to realize that 24-70 isn't about getting closer, it's about changing the perspective. By then it was already sold.

1054
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is a Peerless Performer
« on: January 28, 2013, 10:03:07 AM »
It's great no doubt, but I have to pay 3650 USD to get one, so I simply have to live vicariously through the people who own it ::)

Just start saving up. I sold my Mark I on Craig's List for 1200 so the Mark II only ended up costing me 1k.

Yeah, only have no mk1 to sell. I was going to sacrfice my 24 f1.4 for it, but I just can't sell that hunk of glass, it's just too awesome iin a way the 24-70 couldn't be. So I'm starting from scratch  ;)

1055
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is a Peerless Performer
« on: January 28, 2013, 09:27:33 AM »
It's great no doubt, but I have to pay 3650 USD to get one, so I simply have to live vicariously through the people who own it ::)

Why so much? It doesn't cost that much..

But yes, this is the only zoom lens that i would actually use without thinking twice...it really is that good and i actually stopped using my primes for shoots because of this...i only touch my 85 now becuase that is still better than this :)

When you live in Norway it does...

1056
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is a Peerless Performer
« on: January 28, 2013, 07:30:29 AM »
It's great no doubt, but I have to pay 3650 USD to get one, so I simply have to live vicariously through the people who own it ::)

1057
Technical Support / Re: at what shutter speed you turn IS off?
« on: January 27, 2013, 02:34:01 PM »
If I shoot things moving in a steady pace and in pretty much one direction, like a runner or a car I keep it on, always. If I shoot hockey or kids or soccer I shoot with only vertical IS on (or off if I'm in portrait mode), that way I can snap the camera back and forth and not see that slight drag/delay in the VF but still have the benefit of some stabilising, absolutely helps predictive AF.

So it's not about shutter speed for me, but how the subject moves.

And as mentioned above here, 1/200s at 200mm rule doesn't work all that well with high mp bodies. I will always use 1600 or 12800 ISO to get fast speed rather than one step cleaner image with slight blur.

1058
I was absolutely going to sell my 24 f1.4 II for the 24-70, but after using the 24 more again for a period I just realized I could never ever part with it. Although I would also really like to have the 24-70, couldn't be further from each other, but it will take som saving, because, man..

Tried the 24-70 mk2 the other day and yes, it's seriously sharp, but I'm more impressed with the color and contrast compared to the mk1. BUT it isn't anywhere close to being as cool as the 24 f1.4  ;D

Anyway, glad to see DxO score it high since we've always agreed with DxO here on CR  ::)

1059
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: EOS-1D X Firmware 1.2.1 in the Wild
« on: January 25, 2013, 02:30:03 PM »
Oh yes, please, EG-S support!! and for ME it has nothing to do with MF or liveview focusing manual primes, although I might consider buying back the Zeiss 28mm f2 (faaantastically fun lens). It just has everything to do with being able to CLEARLY see where my 1.2 dof is put and when tracking to see when I need to push or wait. For composition it's absolutely crucial and although I have a feel for the dof, there are very small changes that could lift an image IF I could see. Holding the camera out from the eye in LV? No thanks...

1060
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
« on: January 24, 2013, 06:19:47 PM »
A small update so far.

No, the seller wouldn't take it back. I have his adress, phone number , name of parents etc so I have a few more cards to play if it doesn't work out ::) No, I will not accept a $2000 paperweight.

The lens is still under warranty so I have shipped it to Canon, arrived there today, so within the end of next week I will probably know what the damage is. The seller said he would split the bill if the fix isn't covered by the warranty after all, I however thinks he will pay the whole bill.

I went to my local shop and tried two other copies of the lens and they were both SERIOUSLY nice and VERY equal, so when it works I think I'm going to use it a lot.

On a side note I shipped away my 85 L today for the third time in 6 years. I  miss it already... ::)

1061
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS-1D X Firmware Specifcations
« on: January 22, 2013, 04:07:25 PM »
When can we DL?

1062
Lenses / Re: 135L vs 85L vs 70-200L II
« on: January 21, 2013, 03:56:19 AM »
I've had them all several times, and it comes down to one thing, what you shoot.

For when my kids were tiny and just layed there the 85 is true MAGIC, nothing comes close. But then they start to move a little bit and the slow 85-AF makes you want to throw it to the wall.

The 135 is creeamy and sharp even wide open, discreet and light. But for me I found that when I was in a situation where it wasn't too long, it was just to short.

The 70-200 have almost everything, blistering AF, with crazy accuracy, the HIGHLY useful (fullframe) focal length and fantastic IQ. The downsides is that it is a beast, heavy and long and forget discreet. But for me that haven't used zooms for years and years, I see now that I crop A LOT because I can't change focal. The 70-200 isn't as long and useless as one might think, it's actually a great indoor focal length for kids ( as they aren't 180cm).

If I could have whatever I want in the lens world, I would absolutely keep the 85 also, the 135 I find is in between what I want, always, so not for me. and the 70-200 is, now once again, a given and most used lens.

1063
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
« on: January 21, 2013, 02:47:31 AM »
Yeah, tried it first at 0 and it's sometimes a tiny high pitched squeak from the AF. Like it needs lube. IS on or off does not affect this. There's absolutely no sign of it being dropped, but that doesn't rule it out.

Thanks for the replies! Not quite sure what to so at this point, the seller wouldn't return it as he had already spent the money on a prostitute or some cr@p...

1064
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
« on: January 20, 2013, 10:58:56 AM »
@ Viggo - Unfortunately, it seems you may have gotten a dud. You say you bought this copy used, I wonder if the seller fully disclosed the motive behind sale?

Thanks! That is really what I wanted to hear also. I remember this lens as an absolute killer, but both CA and contrast and sharpness is only good at 70mm and useless at 200mm, so I rather it be a dud than me remeber too great things about it.

I've asked him if he would take it back, awaiting reply. But yeah, even though it looked as new, it must be a reason he sold it... I´ve never gotten a bad copy, at least not to this extent before, bummer...

1065
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
« on: January 20, 2013, 10:26:06 AM »
I got my 70-200 (bought used) the other day, and I'm really dissapointed. I have had this lens before and it was epic from start to finish, but this copy is nothing that compares to sharp. It is Reikan Focal adjusted to -8 at 200mm and -1 at 70mm, but even with LV it isn't sharp at 200mm. Does anyone else see or have seen this? Is it just my first copy that was insanely sharp or is this a dud? The first one I had I couldn't say it was less sharp than my 300mm f2.8 L IS (mk1) but this is worse than my 70-200 non-IS.



Top image is at 200mm lower is at 135mm. Please forgive the underexposure and noise, I was pi$$ed off and just shot a very repeatable and comparable shot. No NR, small amount of sharpening, same on both.

Pages: 1 ... 69 70 [71] 72 73 ... 137