September 02, 2014, 02:55:08 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 - Viggo

Pages: 1 ... 69 70 [71] 72 73 ... 136
1051
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II
« on: January 17, 2013, 12:38:46 PM »
Anyone still experience large sample-variation with the 24-70 mk2? I'll be getting one very soon, and wonder if it's still a need to buy three and keep the sharpest, or if if the differences are neglible?

I tried two copies from Crutchfield, Reikan FoCal showed 990ish in sharpness @ f2.8. Both copies were from 1st patch.

Nice, thanks for the input, then I know what numbers to look for also.

1052
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II
« on: January 17, 2013, 07:28:06 AM »
Anyone still experience large sample-variation with the 24-70 mk2? I'll be getting one very soon, and wonder if it's still a need to buy three and keep the sharpest, or if if the differences are neglible?

1053
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
« on: January 16, 2013, 10:16:50 AM »
Do you care about IQ?
70-200 II is not able to replace 85/135/200Ls in many situations...

IQ?  The 70-200 II is equal to or better than most of the primes in it's focal range in terms of IQ - basically, the differences are so minor as to be marginal in rigorous testing (charts/Imatest) and practically irrelevant in real-world shots.  The reason for the fast primes used to be IQ, shallower DoF, more light, and smaller/lighter (for a single lens, not the set).  At this point, for all practical purposes, it's down to shallower DoF, more light (debatable with a newer FF body and the excellent high-ISO performance) and smaller/lighter.

Which is exactly my reasons for getting primes in the first place, but now I see the 24-70 and the 70-200 mk2's and to ME the incredible AF-speed of the zooms along with equal or better IQ, I'm getting rid of some primes. I'm keeping the 35 and 50 as the shallow dof favorites and getting the 24-70 instead of my 24 f1.4.

As always the 85 L is incredible! but what good does that do when the AF just can't cope with tiny rapid movements or my kids walking across the floor, to get sharp images I need to get more dof, stop it down to 2,8 helps, why not then use a 70-200 instead.

The only reason for fast primes for me now is shallow dof. I get MUCH better indoor images at iso 400 and flash to the roof than with 1,4 and iso 6400....

1054
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

1055
Thanks for posting. I'm a bit surprised, checked the results over at TDP also, and looks like it is like this. Dissapointing.

1056
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..

1057
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

1058
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.

1059
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!

1060
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)

1061
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..

1062
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...

1063
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...

1064
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.

1065
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.

Pages: 1 ... 69 70 [71] 72 73 ... 136