October 01, 2014, 12:42:58 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 - Policar

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 28
46
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next for Cinema EOS?
« on: June 09, 2014, 11:15:18 PM »
If they don't get something out at Photokina to compete with the GH4, I suspect most of the low budget indie crowd will consider Canon dead in the water, and start migrating, unless they've already got too much invested in glass and already have a 5D Mk III.

Low budget indie crowd is generally shooting Alexa.

There's low budget, and there's LOWwww budget. My low budget crowd thinks I'm big budget with a 5DIII setup   :)

What content are you producing and for what client? For low end corporate it's absolutely a viable solution, but do those clients care about 4k vs 1080p or do you and are you looking for the opportunity to sell 4k to your client so you can try it out?

The issue is the GH4 might be great in terms of IQ, but the C100 is the rock steady wedding videographer/event videographer camera with amazing ergonomics and battery life and ease of use. (And the C300 one step above for low end TV/high end corporate.)

Canon can charge more and deliver less because they're targeting "pros" who care more about return on revenue (and have a revenue stream) than hobbyists, who care about image quality but don't have the cashflow to justify the expense. The C100 is a joke spec-wise as is the 5D Mark III for stills. Both are market leaders. They're easy to use and affordable enough, but too expensive for hobbyists to buy (unless they are committed, I guess).

47
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next for Cinema EOS?
« on: June 09, 2014, 10:16:41 PM »
If they don't get something out at Photokina to compete with the GH4, I suspect most of the low budget indie crowd will consider Canon dead in the water, and start migrating, unless they've already got too much invested in glass and already have a 5D Mk III.

Low budget indie crowd is generally shooting Alexa.

48
Canon General / Re: Let's confess our disgusting perversions
« on: May 23, 2014, 11:19:35 AM »
I'll start confessing mines.
 
In spite of the huge efforts made by the Research And Development Departments of most companies belonging to the Photographic Industry, aiming to offer us better products,
 
1) First of all, I don't dislike lens flare. I must be a true fetishist in this field, because I like the "flare effect" seen in digital cartoon movies (e.g. Pixar's "Up").
2) I don't dislike vignetting. I could be defined a moderate pervert with respect to vignetting, because I don't add it deliberately to pictures.
3) I don't dislike a reasonable amount of noise in pictures. Again, I don't add it where there's no OOC noise and I don't underexpose my pictures in order to get the maximum possible noise, so I guess my therapy shouldn't be so extreme.
 
And what about you, my fellow friends from CanonRumors? Are you shameless enough to confess that sometimes you like something that's not technically perfect?

I heard JJ Abrams likes lens flares.... Read the Kaminski document to get an idea of someone who loves weird grain (shooting 800T stock outdoors instead of 50D, for instance) and of course he destroyed Panavision's lenses and set the gate weave off to get the Saving Private Ryan look. I forget who it was that baked film stock in the oven.

Lots of large format shooters use old lenses for a soft look. Technical perfection has its place but is very boring. The shift from a focus on "look" (the old 135mm f2 AIS Nikon is optically poor but has amazing bokeh) to a focus on how well something performs on charts belies a trend in photography... No one cares about composition/subject/art anymore and now we are just getting people trying to shoot banal stuff with sharp corners... so boring.


49
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Landscape Filters
« on: May 05, 2014, 05:08:22 PM »
Nice "landscapes."

I use polarizers all the time. Never for landscapes.

Takes the glare off water and foliage just like it does windows.

Just wait for the right light.

50
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Landscape Filters
« on: May 05, 2014, 03:15:47 PM »
Nice "landscapes."

I use polarizers all the time. Never for landscapes.

51
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Landscape Filters
« on: May 05, 2014, 11:09:28 AM »
Don't bother. GNDs are tacky and you'll outgrow them fast. Same with polarizers.

Find good light, capture it.

52
Lenses / Re: Canon IS Primes for landscapes?
« on: April 19, 2014, 10:42:00 AM »
90mm TS-E.

Wide angle landscapes look terrible.

53
Lenses / Re: New 50mm Sigma ? There are other options !
« on: April 12, 2014, 10:25:48 PM »
Still far from apochromatic with significant bokeh fringing.

Still has major onion bokeh.

Still want it.

Otus does look.... classier.

54
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Available for Preorder
« on: April 12, 2014, 02:47:00 PM »
...
So to get the single greatest improvement in a class of lenses for only $949 is the bargain of the century. Canon or Nikon would have charged you $3000.
...

To summarise, if Canon want to come out with a killer 50/1.4 lens that will replace their current 50/1.4 (and maybe 50/1.8), it needs to be:
1) cost less than $949 so that it is cheaper than the Sigma 50/1.4 Art
2) deliver better quality images than the 50/1.2L
3) provide at least IS and possibly weather sealing

... wait, no it doesn't ... all that Canon's next 50/1.4 lens will need is this:

1) a red ring around the lens.

and people will buy it in preference to the Sigma, regardless of price or performance.

It also needs to autofocus consistently, something Sigma's 18-35mm f1.8 and older 50mm f1.4 can't claim to do.

Bokeh looks clinical, not as soft as the old 50mm f1.4. But clean... Kind of want this lens.

55
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Gets Reviewed
« on: April 10, 2014, 02:00:39 PM »
". does anyone actually care about the corner resolution at f1.4? "

Well, yeah.. The whole point for me considering the Sigma over another 50 L, is the ability to compose off center and preferably all the way out in the corners with nice resolution and ideally, same IQ as the center.

Fair enough.

56
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Gets Reviewed
« on: April 09, 2014, 03:37:03 PM »
I haven't tried the 18-35 yet but I found my 70-200 2.8 L2 was not very well balanced for my liking.  Very sharp, definitely.  A bit of CA in FF corners but not bad.  However, i found the bokeh to be quite unpleasant in many situations.  I've been getting a more agreeable balance of sharpness and bokeh from an older Tamron 70/200 2.8 but it's missing such niceties like OS and fast precise AF.

I'm keenly looking forward to seeing some bokeh specific tests of these new fast 50s.

Bokeh on 18-35mm is a mixed back. Clean color, slight onion effect, but overall pretty good not too busy.

I like the 70-200mm II but must admit... older lenses are smoother.

57
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Gets Reviewed
« on: April 09, 2014, 01:32:11 PM »
Don't see how this could be viewed as anything but a winner if it comes in around $1,000 USD. Zeiss is better wide open across the frame - that's hard to do and you pay for it. But for 1/4 of the price this performance looks to be awesome.

Is better or measures better? Zeiss used to be known for sacrificing resolution for micro contrast... the Zeiss look was "punchy." Sharpness isn't a matter of resolution extinction; it's a matter of area under the MTF curve and the Sigma appears to have higher MTF at low frequencies so better acutance overall.

Are there any photos taken with this or just test charts? Zeiss has a near apochromatic design with the Otus and yet they manage smooth bokeh, which is unreal. Smooth bokeh is usually associated (as with the old Sigma 50mm f1.4 and my beloved 135mm f2 AIS Nikkor) with spherical aberration and spherochromatism so the "pure" color of the Otus along with the soft out of focus falloff is really unusual and does impart a unique "look."

Who is actually shooting low light landscapes with high frequency detail at f1.4 and then printing huge... does anyone actually care about the corner resolution at f1.4? No. Acutance matters more, but still not as important as bokeh and CA. Sharpness is clearly on par with (subjectively probably better than) the Otus and FAR exceeding others. It's the rest that will be interesting to see... Including AF performance.

18-35mm f1.8 and 70-200mm f2.8 II IS both have surprisingly good bokeh and not much spherochromatism... this might be a nice complement for those two. Hoping...

58
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Gets Reviewed
« on: April 06, 2014, 07:19:24 PM »
P.S. I hope Samyang will join the fast 50 competition soon.

Partly agree ... that Samyang makes a 50mm prime.

However, I hope they produce a relatively slow f2.8 lens without the trade-offs required for f1.4 to f1.8.

I am very, very happy with my Samyang 14mm f2.8, even though it is fully manual. I have little interest in their faster 35mm and 85mm lenses with f1.4.

My "vote" would be for Samyang to have a full line-up of very affordable, very sharp, fully manual f2.8 prime lenses, such as 24mm, 50mm, and 100mm (about doubling each step from 14mm, and skipping "intermediates" like 20mm, 28mm, 35mm, and 85mm, which also would duplicate their existing FL's).

I have to say that I respectfully totally disagree with you!  ;)

For me, those kind of lens wouldn't have much of a market. I think it would be much more interesting for Samyang to produce very fast lens, for instance a 50mm f/1.2 or f/1. I personally can't find much use for a f/2.8 standard prime and even then, you can easily find old manual lens on eBay that are plenty sharp at f2.8 for less than 100$, sometime even less than 35$!

“The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art is the most exciting lens we’re likely to review this year."

I got rid of all my 50s largely because they are so boring.  If this is the most exciting lens they're likely to review this year, it's going to be a pretty rotten year.

They should review the Tamron 150-600.  That lens has 10 times the excitement of yet another 50mm prime.

I also have to respectfully totally disagree with you!

I am sure that I am not the only one for whom the 50mm is a personnal favorite, and I would even go as far as saying that in is one of the most complex FL. You might dislike it, as any lens of any FL are just tools, I have no problem understanding this, but I would never qualify it as boring. Disliking a certain tool for your craft doesn't mean it is bad per se, but rather that it is not for you. I am sure a look at Henry Cartier-Bresson photographs would convince you.

If he thinks it's boring it's likely because he's on APS-C. 50mm is my favorite focal length on FF for sure, and I would wager most people's.

But on APS-C it feels around 80mm... this no-man's-land that is just too short for portraiture and there's no sense of depth from either compression nor from natural space rendering. Just flat and boring. You can take a great photo here, but IMO 50mm on APS-C is boring and difficult to make work. On FF it is almost certainly the most interesting focal length, agreed. My 50mm f1.4 Sigma and 50mm f1.8 never leave my 5D III even though I have all those fancy L zooms and UWAs and nonsense.

24mm is also ok, as is 35mm. Very fond of 135mm. 200mm nice too. 100mm is nice, also for macros.

59
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Gets Reviewed
« on: April 06, 2014, 06:06:12 PM »
“The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art is the most exciting lens we’re likely to review this year."

I got rid of all my 50s largely because they are so boring.  If this is the most exciting lens they're likely to review this year, it's going to be a pretty rotten year.

They should review the Tamron 150-600.  That lens has 10 times the excitement of yet another 50mm prime.

Are you on FF or APS-C? 50mm is kind of a no man's land on APS-C but IMO it is the most useful focal length on FF.

Agreed that the quest for perfection is a little boring when it comes at the cost of rendering, but if the Otus were affordable and had AF, it would not leave my camera.

My current 50mm f1.4 Sigma would be my favorite lens were it not for the dodgy AF.

60
Technical Support / Re: Battery stuck in 5D Mark III
« on: April 05, 2014, 08:25:05 PM »
Had to pull confusingly hard (it was REALLY stuck in there), but everything is back to normal, battery is ok and fits normally again.

Bizarre! But yay.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 28