December 18, 2014, 05:49:27 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 - meli

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 12
76
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35 f/2 IS Resolution Test
« on: December 15, 2012, 04:15:17 AM »
Why does it make no sense to compare resolution numbers of 35mm and 50mm lenses?  I'm just saying it's not a "mediocre" lens if it produces resolution better than some highly regarded 50's, even better than the Leica 50 Summicron.  Infared mentioned that he had a "great experience" with his Sigma 50/1.4, but described this new Canon 35 as "mediocre" — and yet the new Canon offers better resolution than his Sigma 50/1.4, ... so why not compare the numbers?
Well, pas mal Infared didnt mention his 150-500 cause then you could draw some rather interesting comparisons;
how does it make sense comparing 35mm and 50mm res in the context of choosing a 35mm? And if it does, then how about comparing 35mm and 85mm or 35 and 24mm? What about 200mm, shall we compare them also?
If someone is on the market for a 35mm he will be interested on 35mm lenses only, not how they fare with some other random category.
Plus, Infared mentioned his sigma 50/1.4 to make a point about his experience with sigma's bokeh rendering unrelatedly to his opinion on 35/2IS

Your point is very valid.  It should be noted the new lens destroys the 35L in every category when the 35L is wide open; it is only stopped down that it surpasses the new 35 f/2 IS in the corners.  In fact, if it weren't for the Sigma's numbers, we would probably think this new lens was pretty great.  But the Sigma is turning in some fantastic numbers...and that makes it hard to deny.
The new one seems to have better corners & Ca but center res & distorion on par with the old one, I would deem that okayish not "pretty great" specially considering the old one is 22years old and 1/3 in price, IS notwithstanding.

77
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35 f/2 IS Resolution Test
« on: December 14, 2012, 01:04:54 PM »
The numbers don't show a very mediocre lens.  To put things in perspective, look back at LensRentals' "The Great 50mm Shootout" —
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01/the-great-50mm-shootout
and it appears that the new Canon 35mm f/2 IS offers better resolution (center & average) wide open at f/2 than ANY of the 50mm lenses at f/2, with the exception of the legendary $4,000 Leica Summilux.  And keep in mind that most of those 50mm lenses are stopped down at f/2, whereas this new 35mm is wide open. 

It can't be too mediocre if it offers better resolution at f/2 than any of these lenses do at f/2:

Zlatko you make no sense, what does 50mm has to do with 35?
Plus, about build quality, i ve only seen the sigma from up close but the build quality is insane for the price.

78
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35 f/2 IS Resolution Test
« on: December 14, 2012, 07:54:55 AM »
Interesting report - Seems that the Sigma resolves better, but possibly with a harsher bokeh. I wonder how the lenses perform in other areas - flare, CA, etc.

He does mention a couple apart from resolution:
Quote
Our new toys let us do some other measurements as well.
Chromatic aberration is low for the Sigma and the new IS f/2 lens at 0.7% and 0.9% respectively at the lateral edges. The Canon 35mm L is higher at 1.3% and the original 35mm f/2 far worse at almost 2%.
The Sigma also had the lowest distortion at 1% barrel, with the 35L higher at 1.3%, and both the new and old 35mm f/2 versions at 1.4%.

All in all -apart from the addition of IS- a rather dull update of an almost 25yo lens

79
Lenses / Re: Anything Like a Sigma 120-300 2.8 on the Horizon?
« on: December 11, 2012, 09:51:43 AM »
TexPhoto you're referring to the old version of 120-300

80
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD Hands-On
« on: December 06, 2012, 03:00:07 PM »
I'm loving these third party lenses.

On my wish list:
Sigma 35 1.4
Tamron 70-200 2.8
Also need a 17 - 55 (approx) but the Canon f2.8 one is too expensive. Anyone know if the Sigma 17-50 2.8 is good?

I've tested one in a friend's camera albeit in a nikon mount.
Drawbacks: no manual override,
But, that thing is sharp as hell, actually i lost a bet cause this thing's centerframe is sharper than nikon's 24-70 or 50 prime  :o
(not gonna comment on AF, it was fast & spot on but then again i didnt have experience with that camera's AF(d7000) or the native 17-55)
Wish i had a nikon2canon mount to compare it with some of my glass.
Perhaps it was a really good sample, but still...

No manual override?  That conclusion differs from all the reports we have had so far.  Lenses equipped with Tamron's USD motor all have full time manual override. 

I'm more concerned about the early reports that the lens is significantly shorter than other 70-200mm zooms.  I find that a big deal!

a misunderstanding, i was talking about the sigma 17-50!

81
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD Hands-On
« on: December 05, 2012, 10:54:49 PM »
I'm loving these third party lenses.

On my wish list:
Sigma 35 1.4
Tamron 70-200 2.8
Also need a 17 - 55 (approx) but the Canon f2.8 one is too expensive. Anyone know if the Sigma 17-50 2.8 is good?

I've tested one in a friend's camera albeit in a nikon mount.
Drawbacks: no manual override,
But, that thing is sharp as hell, actually i lost a bet cause this thing's centerframe is sharper than nikon's 24-70 or 50 prime  :o
(not gonna comment on AF, it was fast & spot on but then again i didnt have experience with that camera's AF(d7000) or the native 17-55)
Wish i had a nikon2canon mount to compare it with some of my glass.
Perhaps it was a really good sample, but still...

82
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 6D pricing... so much difference worldwide
« on: December 03, 2012, 08:39:28 AM »
Why is there so much difference on the pricing of the Canon 6D? Some countries really get a raw deal.

In Germany it's €1998 on Amazon which is pretty reliable at matching the lowest non-shady online price. That's certainly not great, but not bad enough to wait a year for it to drop significantly - in absolute €€€ terms the devaluation cannot be as large as fast as with the 5d3.

We have (amazon.de) 6D @ 2K, D800 @ 2.3K and D600 @ 1.7K! i doubt 6d can hold its price for even 2weeks

83
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D Likely Price Trend
« on: December 03, 2012, 08:24:53 AM »
I would strongly suggest against buying it now. The 6d has alot of fat to burn as 5d3 had upon launch.
5D3 lost almost 30% in a year and i expect 6d to dive 20% by summer, enough so you could spare for a new flash and/or a lens ;)

84
EOS Bodies / Re: More 6D sample images - with RAW files.
« on: December 03, 2012, 08:12:23 AM »
Depends i suppose, definitely not "crop 800 = FF 6400" though..,
Comparing with the undying current 18mp crop i would say the difference is between 1 & 3/2 stops, comparing with something like Pentax's K5(which has the best implementation of Sony's 16mp) I would say the difference is around 1/2stop.

85
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark III Body $2499
« on: November 23, 2012, 08:51:45 AM »
Some of us here were talking upon launching that the price will roll-off 500-700$ before the end of the year but seeing ~30% off in less than a year, wow

86
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 5D3 vs. BMC
« on: November 21, 2012, 01:56:41 PM »
There is alot of talk about canon falling behind in sensor tech and (in combination with high pricing & competition) losing market but i think this is where Canon shot themselves in the foot and lost a huge market.

They basically failed to capitalize on the revolution 5d2 brought on the market and instead of pursuing that market they took a conservative and wrong based approach. The 5d2 boom on the video market wasnt about having a dslr form factor with okay IQ and definitely not for 10k+. It was about great IQ - interchangeable lens system on a 2k-4k price range.

87
Lenses / Re: Canon Announces New Lens Caps!
« on: November 06, 2012, 06:57:03 AM »
I wish the pinch was horizontal and not vertical with the lettering.  [ducking]

design dictated i guess, you would end up with a small logo or off centered

88
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 650D Results on DxOMark
« on: October 08, 2012, 08:07:00 PM »
Yes because DXO is the problem, not that Canon is processor-wise stagnant for more than half a decade.

I mean DXO is for the clueless, no matter that their aps-c sensors are bottom leaders and actually getting outclassed by 4/3 cams, they're still better than any cameraphone out there.

89
EOS Bodies / Re: Who said Canon sensors suck?!?
« on: September 26, 2012, 07:15:02 AM »
@jrista im afraid your post is choke full of wild assumptions and misinformation. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.
Rent a D800 and test it. Rent a D600 and test it. Recovery is better in both sides of the spectrum.

As for the thread's title, my opinion is yes, Canon sucks. A lot.
I'm not saying this in relation to what other brands put in the market. I'm saying this based on the potential of Canon as the top tier manufacturer of dslrs.
After 4 years what we see is basically a resolved AF. Thats great, but given the resources of Canon for R&D, it's just laughable how they advanced sensor-wise. Basically they didnt.
I'm sorry but the difference with previous generation is just a measly update. As for the whole video-oriented designed sensor that also was a joke, what other can it be when that thing is capable of delivering something like 600lines in 1080p? Or was it the slight better behaviour in moire?(not even going to refer to DR etc)

90
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Announces the Canon EOS 6D DSLR
« on: September 20, 2012, 11:46:07 AM »
Well, two years later we're gonna have 6Dm2 with multi-cross focus points.

Yes but with the same sensor, cause Canon heard the people and the people only wanted a new AF  ;D

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 12