April 17, 2014, 06:08:24 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 - facedodge

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Sigma 16-20 f/2 DG Art [CR1]
« on: December 19, 2013, 09:47:27 AM »
f/2 would be good for star photogs. You can get some bokeh out of an UWA. This is 14mm at 2.8

According to the poorly translated website,

1 previous models that have been updated firmware Ver.2.0 or more comparison is "EOS M".

I think that that means the comparison is to the newer firmware update. Good news.

Lenses / Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« on: November 22, 2013, 12:42:36 PM »
May we never speak of Ken Rockwell at Canon Rumors again.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 Distagon
« on: November 14, 2013, 01:53:59 PM »

Here is a comparison to the Rokinon/Samyang.

The Zeiss is a tad sharper at 2.8, but they are equal by f/4. Though this could be due to TDP having a bad copy.

The Zeiss also has a bit less distortion, but it's also 7% less wide so it's not apple to apples.

I definitely don't see $2,600 worth of improvement. 

Canon General / Re: Official: Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS
« on: October 14, 2013, 02:25:16 PM »
how do these charts compare to canon charts?



However, comparing MTF charts from one manufacturer to another is largely meaningless due to differences in the way they measure it.

Canon MTF source: http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/professional/lenses/ef_lenses/ef_24_105mm_f_4l_is_usm#Overview


I looked up how Sigma does their MTFs. Both lines are wide open. Red is 10, Green is 30.

So, ignore Canon's blue lines. Focus on the black only, as Canon's blue line is at F/8. Canon
s black thick compares to Sigma's Red and Canon's thin black compares to Sigma's green.

Looks like they have similar contrast, but Sigma is a bit sharper in the center at both ends. Sigma also has better bokeh.

Looking at this page, http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a_24_105_4/, the sigma has better barrel distortion and less vignetting.

Lenses / Re: The EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Has Arrived!
« on: May 31, 2013, 10:56:50 AM »
Less iPhone 5 photos of the lens and more photos from the lens! What a tease.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 DG OS HSM Now in Stock
« on: May 30, 2013, 04:47:10 PM »
The original listed for $4000 originally, and is now selling for $2,700. Give it a few months.

Do we know if the HDMI out recording will result in sharper images after grading?

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Introducing the MōVI Stabilizer
« on: April 05, 2013, 11:33:05 AM »
I see the BIF guy, running along the edge of the forest chasing birds!  haha!

Yes...except BIF guy's wife would be the one running with the gimbal, while BIF-guy manipulates the joystick from a lawn-chair.

 ;D ;D ;D ;D

Canon General / Re: Announcements Coming Tonight
« on: March 20, 2013, 04:35:17 PM »
What is the EOS SL1? Is this the EOS-b (mini Rebel) you reported earlier?

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T5i Leaks
« on: March 19, 2013, 04:21:03 PM »
A new kit lens to sell with the camera kit doesn't equal a new camera; it's a modified camera kit. There has to be something different for Canon to justify the T5i branding.

Personally, I think for the target audience, the T4i is probably more than enough camera. Maybe Canon should have just skipped a cycle and offered the camera at a discount to keep it competitive.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 100D Detailed Specs Appear
« on: March 18, 2013, 08:17:15 AM »
There are a lot of rumored names for the new small EOS bodys.

A guy from Canon told me today, that the name "EOS B" is possible.

It sound realistic to me, because the small EOS bodys are a new product line. But we will see at the 22th.

But I want a camera between the 5D Mark III and 1D X, a new EF 80-400 IS L, a 12-24 2.8 L oder a 16-35 2.8 III, a 7D Mark II with CF card slot to replace the TC´s, a better build EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS and a lot more. And the EF 17-40 L from 2003 needs a replacement too.

What do you do that you need 3 wide angle zooms with mostly overlapping focal lengths?

Lenses / Re: TS-E 45mm & TS-E 90mm Finally Getting Replaced? [CR1]
« on: March 15, 2013, 03:09:04 PM »
Might finally sell my 4x5 if the 45mm is great.

Speed not a concern... strangest thing to ask for on such a lens. I would live with f8! After all these are used for deep focus photography and on tripods or in studio. T/S is about increasing depth of field.

Tilt is about changing the focal plane. Sometimes this is used to increase the depth of field on the subject. Sometimes it's not.... and that's only half the function of the lens. Shift doesn't increase your dof.

Lenses / Re: TS-E 45mm & TS-E 90mm Finally Getting Replaced? [CR1]
« on: March 15, 2013, 01:31:27 PM »
Why not make the 45mm ts-e faster? If you can make a 90mm ts-e f/2.8 you can make a 45mm ts-e f/2 or 1.8

Lenses / Re: TS-E 45mm & TS-E 90mm Finally Getting Replaced? [CR1]
« on: March 15, 2013, 09:24:32 AM »
I really like the perspective of a normal lens...

I believe that perspective is only affected by moving the camera, not by changing lenses.
"Many will say that focal length also determines the perspective of an image, but strictly speaking, perspective only changes with one's location relative to their subject."

"In other words, switching from a "normal" lens to one with a greater focal length at the same camera location will have no discernible effect on perspective."


Yes, but a lens that is roughly equivalent to the diagonal of the sensor will yield images that look normal because it's similar to the way we see the world with our own eyes. For full frame this is close to 50mm. The lens isn't wide angle or tele.... I used perspective instead of field of view because we tend to fill the frame with our subjects. On wide angle this means we get closer than normal and with tele's we get farther away than normal.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7