March 02, 2015, 06:30:11 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 - risc32

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 36
when you say the zeiss is the sharpest wide open do you mean zeiss macro f2 at f2-vs- the L's at f1.2? This reminds me of what Roger at "lensrentals" found during his big 50mm roundup. If you don't care to find that info and read it, i'll give you the short answer. The Zeiss(s) have nothing on the L or the 1.4 or 1.8 for that matter. In fact the Zeiss 1.4 is probably the worst performer i can think of off the top of my head in regards to the commonly tested lens areas. but you don't have to believe me, I've seen it perform poorly at maybe 4-5 of the top lens reviewing sites. search it.
  But if you just want a solidly built MF 50mm lens that you can take pics with, at any price, that's certainly the Zeiss. If you get one that is calibrated properly, unlike the 21mm Brian from "thedigitalpicture" had. I know it's hard to believe, but for that much money, and with no AF complications to deal with, and all those "papers" with people signing off on them, they still get stuff wrong.

  Oh, and the Zeiss 85mm is also a poor performer in the traditional areas of performance. Easily bettered by the canon 85mm 1.8 and sigma, but it's all metal, and you have to MF,  so that's got to be worth something?!

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon ever move into the Medium Format space?
« on: February 23, 2013, 04:17:54 PM »
i don't think they will ever go into the MF arena.
also, isn't 135, 35mm? I think the last time i looked, my 35mm film said 135 on the box. did you mean 120?

Lenses / Re: Canon 35 2.0 IS vs Sigma 35 1.4
« on: February 23, 2013, 09:45:31 AM »
that shot of the cowboy looks much like the stuff i've seen from the canon 50L. When the stars align just right, or wrong, things can look bad, but in my exp the sigma is just fine in the bokeh department. As i bet the 50L is also. actually, i'm not sure i've ever seen decent bokeh from any leica lens, but that's another topic.

my take on the canon 35mmL v2. it'll won't be released anytime soon, it'll cost somewhere north of 1800 US, it'll be just slightly better than the sigma and have weather sealing.

another thing is the build, the canon 35mm IS isn't really built any better than the old 35mm f2, and that wasn't very good.  personally, i would have a hard time speeding that much money on it, esp with the great build on the sigma, but i stand by my first recommendation of choosing the lens based on your subject matter's movement, or lack there of.

Lenses / Re: Canon 35 2.0 IS vs Sigma 35 1.4
« on: February 22, 2013, 08:48:01 PM »
REally, this is easy. if you are shooting things that move in low light get the sigma. if it's low light and it dosen't move go for the f2 IS. If you shoot both and you can't justify buying both, you'll have to decide what is more important to you. That is, would you prefer Higher ISO shots of moving things or higher iso shots of stationary things? I wouldn't worry about bokeh or sharpness, they are both very good.

Also, don't believe that the sigma is bokeh defective. I can show you examples of the canon 50L and 85L that are a mess. There really isn't much in it with these sharp 35mm lenses anyway, and the sigma is just fine. I've been shooting my Sigma and LOVING it since it hit the streets.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Black AF points...NOTHING + Spot-meter?
« on: February 17, 2013, 08:24:07 PM »
Why does everyone complain about the black ad points? News flash! You can disable them not to all appear at once or just show a few ad points! It doesn't bother me on the 7D or 5D. Spot meter, I can understand, but really, the black AF points can easily be avoided!

they, we, dislike how it is all but impossible to see the AF points in a dim environment.  personally I can't understand the spot metering thing, but if it was my bag, i would certainly like to see it as an option.

EOS Bodies / Re: What if the rumored 5Dx is actually a 4D?
« on: February 15, 2013, 08:37:23 PM »
i don't have any use for sRAW either. when i'm shooting sports or something like that where i might crank out thousands of shots i shoot jpg. i dial it in, and shoot jpg. if i had the memory card space, wanted my camera buffer to bog down(that could mostly be fixed with a fast card), and had time to fool around on a PC i'd shoot this stuff in RAW. but obviously people differ. that's cool. options are cool.
  honestly, the only reason i came to this thread is because the title reminded me of a scene from a "revenge of the nerds" movie. the characters are stoned on a deserted island and ...... "what if cat, really spelled dog?"
  yup, i sure am something....

EOS Bodies / Re: $1200 7D vs. $1800 5D II?
« on: February 14, 2013, 10:36:29 PM »
normally i would just ask if you want fast(7d) or slow(5dmk2) ,but the fact that you want some sort of weather tough camera should eliminate the 5dmk2.

Lenses / Re: Considering the Zeiss 21
« on: February 10, 2013, 08:52:33 PM »
the zeiss has a hard infinity focus stop so i would have guessed that manual focusing for astro work couldn't get much easier. It's got complex distortion, and color shifts at the corners of the frame, and according to at f2.8 and smaller the canon is at least as good or better. But of course the canon can go 4x as fast if needed. actually, go to 16x9 .net? and see the old canon 24mm 1.4 match the zeiss, and that's from guys who think mounting a nikon 14-24 on your canon is reasonable!
 I had a 17-40 and 16-35. now i'm rocking a samyang 14 and it's pretty cool. wish it had a hard infinity focus, and electronic aperture control, but i'm managing. old school focus distance guessing at f2.8 on moving targets in the dark is actually working pretty well. i have no doubt there are dogs out there, but mine 14 is better than my 16-35 and 17-40 were. (IQ wise that is)
 That all said, it sounds like you have some money to spend and don't mind having a few lenses at what i would consider very close focal lengths, so maybe you should pick up a zeiss. either way i doubt you'll lose much money on the deal, and that way you'll know for sure how you feel about it.

Canon General / Re: anyone had someone over their shoulder on a job?
« on: February 07, 2013, 08:23:19 PM »
I think some of you aren't understanding what i'm talking about, and also my reasoning for posting this. I'm not worried about people getting in my frame while i'm shooting across the crowded room. I expect that. and i'm okay with people getting in their shots after i got mine. I'm usually using an off camera light with a modifier, so it's not like there shots are even going to be close to mine no matter what they do anyway, so i don't really care. but even while i'm shooting and the shoulder shooter is saying "don't look at me, look at his camera" 1/2 of them still look at her. During this last shoot the lady pestering me came over after the ceremony and even asked me if i had 4 aa's she could borrow for her flash. I didn't as i was eating batteries like crazy because the place was a blackhole, but really... you want to borrow bats? 

Canon General / Re: Physical Ailments From Heavy Gear
« on: February 06, 2013, 08:04:47 PM »
My brother used to shoot weddings and commercials with a shoulder mounted video cam has some back and neck problems to this day as a result. my camera gear weighs me down, but no problems yet.  if canon decides to make everything out of carbon fiber, i'll be all in.

Canon General / anyone had someone over their shoulder on a job?
« on: February 06, 2013, 07:15:40 PM »
At nearly every wedding i've done lately i've had a friend, or aunt or whomever of the bride/groom basically acting as the lead photographer. Perhaps it's just by shear chance but they are always ladies. They also are either part time wedding photographers, or they mostly do portrait work, or they work with kids. It drives me completely insane. I'll be taking formal shots and half of the people will be looking at me and the others will be looking at the lady with the big nikon. When I go to weddings i'm not working I don't even bring my camera. And the few times I do, i sure as hell don't go fooling around during the formals, and I certainly don't grab the bride/groom and whisk them out the the reception for a bunch of posing shots.
  this happens to me all the time. I know what i'd like to say to the interloper, but i don't think it would go over very well. Anyone else exp this behavior?

Canon General / Re: The need for backup equipment for paid jobs
« on: February 06, 2013, 07:02:27 PM »
I have the same exp as you at weddings chilledxpress. Someone tracks me down nearly every wedding i work, and the story is pretty much just as you described. one camera, one or two lenses, a flash, a website, and maybe a few months shooting, time to turn pro! Sometimes it's an uncle or grandfather who just want to have a little chat, and that's cool, but many times it's someone about my age(35) or younger ready to go big.

I also won't get a canon 50mm 1.4 due to all that i've heard about it's reliability.

Actually, i have a much larger peeve.... time to start a new thread.

Lenses / Re: Which 50mm (with AF) is best from f/1.4 - f/2.0?
« on: January 27, 2013, 02:56:19 PM »
i know this is about to become another 50l-vs- the world thread, but my vote would be for you to get either the canon 35mm or sigma 35mm, and crop your way to 50mm if you like.

Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?
« on: January 26, 2013, 03:39:26 PM »
electronic motor control of the aperture blades.(100% electrical contacts between the camera and lens)
wide, high quality lens selection.
fast AF.
option of using nikon, and other glass with adaptors.
ergos-a quick look at the back of their flash units makes much more sense to me than what is on nikon gear.

 that all still applies, but when i moved into the canon system i would have also said that nikon's camera offerrings where a joke. that's not so now. now they have their act together, but then, they were pretty bad. (digital up until the D3) i now have a 1n, but when i REALLY shot film i used a pentax so i can't say.

Also, canons look very nice. they are smooth and modern, nikons look like tractors. 

Lenses / Re: Ultimate giclée lens?
« on: January 26, 2013, 03:25:14 PM »
I doubt you're going to find anything noticeably sharper, no matter what it is. I think you'll have to wait for a high MP camera body. Or i guess you could look into stitching, possibly with a longer macro lens.

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 36