August 01, 2014, 12:23:00 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 - Aglet

Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 61
EOS Bodies / Re: Moving to 6D from 5DII
« on: December 13, 2012, 07:47:38 PM »

I think the move would depend on what you were shooting. If your AF isn't having to track moving subjects, and you're using low ISO's I doubt there will be much difference unless features such as the electronic chromatic aberration correction improves overall IQ.

But if you were shooting moving subjects and needing to use high ISO's my guess would be that this camera is in a different league to the MK2.

I'll keep my 5D2 for now. 6D does not look like enough of an improvement at low ISO where I use it to be a compelling up/side-grade.  OTOH, I need to look at some shots to see what the noise structure is like on the 6D.  If it doesn't have the heavily banded noise my 5D2 adds to low ISO shots then it might be worthwhile for me to migrate to it as a low cost FF EOS body.  Or just keep it around for well-lit studio shots where I won't ever have to push its files.
As it is, I have other, superior performing low ISO FF bodies to use when I need utmost IQ.

Third Party Manufacturers / New Nikon 70-200mm f/4 VR hands-on
« on: December 12, 2012, 02:45:01 AM »
Just picked one up today, had a bit of time to play with it indoors.

First impressions are very good.  It handles well; zoom and, more importantly, focus rings operate very smoothly with slight damping and very little dead-play from one direction to another so MF is quite usable (~150 degrees end to end) and much better than on the f/2.8 version I passed on because of sticky MF feel.

AF is quiet and fast, especially when the 3m and beyond limiter switch is on.  AF accuracy in low light, using center (cross type) AF point on a D5100 body was spot on at all distances between MFD of about 1m to about 8m I had available.

The VR (optical stabilization) worked very well also, getting pixel-sharp handheld shots at 200mm and 1/15s with no problem.  I suspect it could go even slower and still maintain a reasonable keeper rate.

Still have to do stop-down focus shift tests, check the bokeh, CA and corner shading on FF but so far, so good.  I'm looking forward to putting it to more tests and then shooting some real subjects with it.  The smaller size and reduced weight are pleasant changes from hauling around the big 2.8 glass. (altho the new Tamron 2.8 is interesting and will be considered as an option for my F-mount systems)

I did not opt for the very pricey OEM tripod mount.  I'll wait until there's a better value alternative but I would deem it a necessary item if using this lens with a lightweight body like the consumer-oriented D5100 or similar.  It's just too much mass and length to hang off the end of a plastic body when using a tripod.  It might be OK when mounted on a more substantial body like the D800 or other semi-pro or pro chassis.

Since I rarely use my EF 70-200 f/2.8 L 2 wide open, this smaller, lighter, and possibly as-sharp option may supplant one more bit of my Canon kit.  The latest Canon classic fast zoom has been disappointing me with ugly bokeh too often anyway.  I didn't use the EF 70-200/4 IS so can't compare it.

So if any Nikon users are considering this lens... YES, it's certainly worth considering.

Lenses / Re: Is this the normal bokeh for an L series lens
« on: December 07, 2012, 08:50:26 PM »
..  My customers often seem to most like the photos that I like the least! :o

I wish I knew why that was in my experience too.
Would be a lot cheaper for me if I didn't buy gear to make images that satisfied ME. :)

Lenses / Re: Canon 70-200 F/2.8 IS II vs. Tamron 70-200 F/2.8 VC
« on: December 07, 2012, 08:40:50 PM »
Roger says it's really only 175mm though:

That's very interesting.  Canon is better than Tamron @ 70mm, but Tamron is bettran Canon @ 200mm.  For 70-200mm lens, 200mm is more important.  That's really nice to see Tamron made another good lens.  However, it's three year late for me.  Since I have Canon 70-200mm already, I won't get this Tommy one.

just makes my decision for my next F-mount 70-200 harder... ???

Third Party Manufacturers / D5200 review
« on: December 07, 2012, 07:54:07 PM »
great if you can read the original Chinese?..

google translation is vaguely useful too.
Looks like an interesting camera, class-leading features?..  Some perhaps.
Looking forward to tests from sources I rely on.

meanwhile, here's the link posted by NR:

Lenses / Re: Is this the normal bokeh for an L series lens
« on: November 30, 2012, 11:58:25 PM »
seems like aspherical correction elements, wide apertures and certain focal distances can make the onion highlites show up.  Many lenses will do this, tho not always at all settings.


Lenses / Re: Canon 70-200 F/2.8 IS II vs. Tamron 70-200 F/2.8 VC
« on: November 30, 2012, 03:36:10 PM »
I'm looking fwd to trying Tam's new 70-200/2.8 VC
I use the older non-VC on my D800e and it's VERY sharp and optically well-behaved, sharp enough to show fine moire problems on fine repetitive textures at times so that's a match to the hi-rez camera.  AF is not quite as fast or precise as ultrasonic motored units but perfectly adequate for non-fast-action.  Build Q is not up to Canon's L either but it's enough for my use.

I use Canon's EF 70-200/2.8 L ISv2 on 5D2 and it's amazingly sharp and handles well but it shows more CA than the old Tamron and also surprises me at times with horridly busy bokeh that I haven't yet suffered with the Tamron's shots.  See the lens gallery for a sample of the ugly side of the Canon glass.

Lenses / Re: Just pulled trigger on 70-200 2.8L IS II USM - NEW - $1625.99
« on: November 27, 2012, 08:10:31 PM »
Great buy on an INCREDIBLE lens!!!  Every time I use mine I cannot BELIEVE its a zoom.  You will freak at the sharpness.

You might also freak at the bad bokeh in some situations.
Just be aware it's not all razor blades and cream.

see a sample I posted near the bottom of the page in the lens gallery here

It's got a number of focal lengths, subject distances and aperture settings where bokeh is less than pleasant.

Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« on: November 27, 2012, 03:27:11 AM »
Here's where NOT to use this lens.

This is the most hideous bokeh it's produced for me yet. The outlining almost looks like multiple exposures.

Avoid wide apertures with contrasty stuff in the transition zones, especially at or near min focus distance.
I've encountered plenty of other horrid bokeh scenarios with it too, usually at wider apertures it seems, but not at all focal lengths or distances.
Exhaustive testing won't be performed, just cursing when I see the results back on the computer.

Good thing this lens has plenty of redeeming qualities like incredible sharpness, speed and a great IS.

Here's a non-cropped shot from my 5D2

1/160s, f/4, 200mm, a few inches beyond min focus distance.


My Rebels already sit in a drawer while I take my D5100s all over the place.

are you a collector of entry level cameras?

Inadvertently, yes. :)

They do an excellent job for low ISO IQ in decent light, nearly as well as their pro-level contemporaries.
They cost a pittance second-hand and are easily resold with minimal, if any, loss of value if you don't keep them too long.
Entry level DSLRs are great cost/performance value, especially used ones!  I used plenty of them from Canon's Rebel line; the 350D, 400D, ending with the 450D.  Newer models had too much Canon characteristic red banding noise then the prices started going up too fast so switched to the Nikon D5100.  D5100 lacks a few minor features even older Rebel series had but the IQ/cost is terrific.  Worth it to me to keep some of both lines in inventory when I need a small light body to travel with and I know the work will be within their limitations.

I have good glass for both mounts, gives me plenty of options, depending on what I'm shooting.
I keep a few 450Ds and D5100s around, generally mounted to lenses I don't often use.
I reserve my big guns for more critical work, where their higher-end features are needed or warranted and their better raw files support more intensive PP work.

Lenses / Re: Bokeh Quality from Different Fullframes vs APS-C´s DLSRs?
« on: November 08, 2012, 01:21:49 AM »
Not really.  The supertele lenses are really optimized for sharpness.  Lens design is all about tradeoffs.  One lens known for particularly good bokeh (often described as 'creamy') is the 50mm f/1.2L.  That lens is optimized for bokeh, and the way that's done is to undercorrect for speherical aberration in the lens design.  When you do that, you get better bokeh, at the cost of a loss of some sharpness (and some focus shift, too).

without going into lens technicals I don't entirely understand I DO agree with this point.

I normally like very sharp lenses with very little CA.  That tends to require special types of elements and aspherical correction elements in the lens.  This often results in lenses with poorer bokeh, tho they may have really nice flat field performance, great sharpness and low CA.

I will often choose a lens that has no aspherical elements in it when I want one that will give me smoother, more pleasing looking bokeh for a shot.  For the most part, this works.  Old primes, if you can live with whatever their shortcomings may be, are sometimes good for this. These lenses will often have a lot of CA and coma though, which can either add or subtract from the overall image effect.

OTOH, there are many cheap modern consumer zooms and many perform better than some old primes and are far more plentiful and compatible with modern cameras.  I've got some used ones for as little as $100 that perform beautifully; acceptable sharpness of focussed subject and creamy smooth bokeh. (nikon 55-200mm VR comes to mind)  You can buy a lot of them to experiment with for the price of a used 50/1.2 L !

More complex modern zooms can be hit-and-miss.  Even within the same lens!
My 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II for example.  I haven't cataloged where it occurs but I know it does.  At certain focal lengths and apertures the bokeh on this lens is horrible!  But that only occurs in some situations over a very finite set of settings.  It actually provides reasonably decent bokeh most of the time.

And of course, the bigger the sensor, the more ability you have to generate out of focus areas and bokeh.

Tilt-shift lenses can be put to work too if you have the budget for them.

accordin' to:

the sensor in the 5200 is not the same as the one in the 3200
and here's the interesting part

"The D5200 uses a new 24.1-million effective pixel sensor that has not been seen elsewhere and according to Nikon we can expect the new device to have a more extensive dynamic range."

really?!?...   Su-wheet! :)
cuz the d5100 DR is pretty awesome at low ISO, the d3200's less than a stop behind it, despite the tiny pixels.
So if they've managed to bump the DR back up a little, comparable to at least the D5100 again on a per-pixel basis, that's gonna be a wicked little imaging tool!

My Rebels already sit in a drawer while I take my D5100s all over the place.

$1500 for the 70-200/2.8 VC Tamron is not bad...
cheaper than the new Nikon f/4 VR I have on order!  I might have to cancel that and wait for some test results on the 2 of them.

I have the older non-VC Tamron, IQ is excellent and worth every penny of the $700 I paid for it, even if MF is a little touchy.

I was pleasantly surprised to find my 7D with 100-400mm L, zoomed to 400m, was able to track birds in flight using center spot AF, servo mode, in very low light well after sunset where ISO 3200 wasn't adequate any more and 6400 wasn't what I wanted to use.
OTOH, I've had it fail in broad daylight.

Detailed set of pages describing the new cameras features and specs

This is gonna be a pretty impressive bit of kit and serious competition for the Rebel line.

Hopefully it won't have a tilted image relative to the viewfinder like many of the D5100s I tested!
Despite which I just got a 3rd d5100 cuz they're just so low cost right now.

this is not a rumor! :)

Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 61