April 20, 2014, 10:17:08 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 - dilbert

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 159
1
So it would seem that someone (Google!) has taken on the challenge of how do you make a camera phone with limited depth of field produce images that are like that with DSLRs:

http://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/tech-news-googles-new-camera-app-lets-you-add-lens-blur-your-pictures

3
Not to re-open a closed case, but here's another thought - what happens if you throw a polarizer on the lens?  In theory it should "straighten" the beams of light and eliminate the effects of diffraction, right?

Not necessarily.

If you want to understand light, take a course in physics. Freshman level maybe?

Or get a physics text book ... no, do a course - a good book should be a requirement for the course. Reading CR is not a substitute for doing a course on this if you really want to understand it.
He asked a simple question. If you can´t answer his question or add to it, stay off.

For you I can recommend a book on simple politeness. Freshman level might be to advanced thought ...

He did not ask for a rude reply from an incompetent jerk. Spread your garbage someplace else!

Or, alternatively, start posting images and show us that behind this rude alias, there is one who knows where the view finder on a camera is. I for one have not seen a single image for you, so I believe you haven´t shot a single decent image in your life. So until I see someone comment on your images, you will remain on my list of ignored posters.

So what would you have me do?

Give him a partial answer that is incomplete and doesn't transfer proper knowledge?

Redirect him to a web page that kind of tells him what to expect but doesn't convey full understanding?

Maybe quote one or two web pages and pretend to be an "expert" like others here?

Sometimes the best advice for someone is where to find information or how to obtain it because everything else will not come close. Maybe my recommendation is because I've studied physics and understand that doing a course in it will teach you more and give you a much better understanding of light than any amount of random posts here.

FWIW, I've posted images on this website. If you (or anyone else) really care(s) enough, you'll be able to find them.

4
Not to re-open a closed case, but here's another thought - what happens if you throw a polarizer on the lens?  In theory it should "straighten" the beams of light and eliminate the effects of diffraction, right?

Not necessarily.

If you want to understand light, take a course in physics. Freshman level maybe?

Or get a physics text book ... no, do a course - a good book should be a requirement for the course. Reading CR is not a substitute for doing a course on this if you really want to understand it.

5
I too was looking at buying a new DSLR but not now.  I just sold a 40D and T3i in anticipation of snagging a 6D or 5DMK III.

Have you looked into Canon USA's refurbed units with 1 year factory warranty and 20% off MAP?  6Ds are available last time I checked.

Call Canon and ask about they loyalty program.  You send in an old film canon camera that you bought off craigslist for $10 (or I'll sell you one for $10), and they give you 20% off the refurb price.  Not all bodies are available... but I think the mkiii and the 6d are now... but I havne't really checked in a while because I have my body and I hopefully won't be upgrading for many years now.

Loyalty discount is only 10% on the 6D and 5D3. I called a couple months back. They also charge sales tax in all but 4 states I believe.

So if you're in CA, it is refurb - 10% + 8.5% (varying), meaning a whole lot of pain to effectively get the advertised price without tax. Probably easier just to buy from some online ship in NY...

You misunderstood. The refurb price is 20% off of map. Then you get 10% off of the refurb price.

No, I didn't but you seemed to miss the point that once you take into account all of the local sales taxes, the 10% discount disappears pretty quickly to make it a questionable benefit. Do you also have to pay to ship the old camera back to Canon?

6
Canon General / Re: "MAP" pricing....How long will it last????
« on: April 19, 2014, 05:38:39 AM »
I too was looking at buying a new DSLR but not now.  I just sold a 40D and T3i in anticipation of snagging a 6D or 5DMK III.

Have you looked into Canon USA's refurbed units with 1 year factory warranty and 20% off MAP?  6Ds are available last time I checked.

Call Canon and ask about they loyalty program.  You send in an old film canon camera that you bought off craigslist for $10 (or I'll sell you one for $10), and they give you 20% off the refurb price.  Not all bodies are available... but I think the mkiii and the 6d are now... but I havne't really checked in a while because I have my body and I hopefully won't be upgrading for many years now.

Loyalty discount is only 10% on the 6D and 5D3. I called a couple months back. They also charge sales tax in all but 4 states I believe.

So if you're in CA, it is refurb - 10% + 8.5% (varying), meaning a whole lot of pain to effectively get the advertised price without tax. Probably easier just to buy from some online ship in NY...

7
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samyang Teases Some New Lenses
« on: April 18, 2014, 02:06:35 PM »
When is someone going to make a wide angle lens (16 - 35 or there abouts) for Canon EF mount that doesn't suck, doesn't cost the earth and has auto-focus?

Tokina makes a 16-28mm F2.8 quite interesting, which costs $629.


The Tokina 16-28/2.8 is an EF-S lens, not EF.


No it isn't. The 11-16/2.8 is EF-S (But mounts on full frame). The 16-28 f2.8 is full frame.


But that has the bulbous front element which means using it with filters is a PITA.

Plus photozone doesn't think much of its optics...

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/595-tokina162828eosff

8
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samyang Teases Some New Lenses
« on: April 18, 2014, 01:02:54 PM »
When is someone going to make a wide angle lens (16 - 35 or there abouts) for Canon EF mount that doesn't suck, doesn't cost the earth and has auto-focus?
Tokina makes a 16-28mm F2.8 quite interesting, which costs $629.

The Tokina 16-28/2.8 is an EF-S lens, not EF.

9
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samyang Teases Some New Lenses
« on: April 18, 2014, 09:53:17 AM »
When is someone going to make a wide angle lens (16 - 35 or there abouts) for Canon EF mount that doesn't suck, doesn't cost the earth and has auto-focus?

10
I'm more interested in a future Sigma 85mm Art 8)

+1

11
Wonder if this lens will be eligible for Sigma's "mount conversion" service?

I'm surprised that so far nobody has said DxO's results are meaningless because they don't represent bokeh in their tests results anywhere! But at least the first post on this thread doesn't disappoint with the expected putting down of DxO.

When DxO get a Nikon mount copy of this lens, I think we'll see a much better representation of its capabilities. In at least one score, the "megapixel" thing, the scores are obviously limited to what Canon cameras can provide.

Compared to the 50/1.2L

NameCanon 50/1.2LSigma 50/1.4A
Camera5D Mk III5D Mark III
Sharpness1821
Transmission1.4TStop1.7TStop
Distortion0.4%0.1%
Vignetting-2.4EV-1.5EV
Chr Aberration20µm6µm

Wow, that's about as cherry picked and biased a comparison as I've ever seen. Do you even try to be objective?

No honey, I don't. If I was objective then you'd have nothing to post about and then you'd get bored.

12
Lenses / Re: Sigma vs Zeiss vs Canon
« on: April 18, 2014, 01:18:02 AM »
@Dilbert: I refer you to Neuro's answers for all the spherical aberration stuff. Canon DOES purposely leave in spherical aberration by design, as it is a desirable effect in many circumstances.

As for your assuming, you assume that people are trying to justify what Canon does, when in actuality people are simply explaining what Canon does. You assume that people here "worship" Canon, when in fact some people are simply fans, others are simply customers and might otherwise not care about the brand. You assume a whole hell of a lot about people here man, and then you lash out at them with thinly veiled hostility and nasty words based on your INCORRECT assumptions.

All I'm saying is...might not want to assume, you would look like less of a donkey's rear end in the end.


Well I asked a collection of questions (to you) in this post:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20498.msg387881#msg387881
but you have not answered. Should I take from this that you do not wish to enlighten me with information and thus leave me in a place where I can only but make assumptions?

13

Not that it will help the 50L much, but you might want to report the data for the two lenses tested on the same camera, instead of different cameras.  Either drop the Sigma to 18 P-Mpix for the 1DsIII, or raise the 50L to 16 P-Mpix for the 5DIII.  Or just leave it alone if you'd prefer to artificially bias the data in favor of the point you're making.

Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Fixed

You'd think DxO could code the site so the same camera was selected by default.  But no...

Their website is a PITA to navigate and however they do their indexing is a mystery ...

... it may also mean that the majority of those that use the 50/1.2L for photography do so with a 1Ds Mk III.

14
Lenses / Re: Sigma vs Zeiss vs Canon
« on: April 18, 2014, 01:11:16 AM »
@Dilbert: I refer you to Neuro's answers for all the spherical aberration stuff. Canon DOES purposely leave in spherical aberration by design, as it is a desirable effect in many circumstances.

How many of Canon's lenses have spherical aberration specifically designed into them?

And perhaps a better question to ask, if Sigma (and Zeiss?) can design sharp lenses that produce pleasing bokeh without spherical aberration then why can't Canon?

Quote
As for your assuming, you assume that people are trying to justify what Canon does, when in actuality people are simply explaining what Canon does. You assume that people here "worship" Canon, when in fact some people are simply fans, others are simply customers and might otherwise not care about the brand. You assume a whole hell of a lot about people here man, and then you lash out at them with thinly veiled hostility and nasty words based on your INCORRECT assumptions.

What has this got to do with lenses???

Quote
All I'm saying is...might not want to assume, you would look like less of a donkey's rear end in the end.

What concern of yours what I do or do not look like? hmm?

15

Not that it will help the 50L much, but you might want to report the data for the two lenses tested on the same camera, instead of different cameras.  Either drop the Sigma to 18 P-Mpix for the 1DsIII, or raise the 50L to 16 P-Mpix for the 5DIII.  Or just leave it alone if you'd prefer to artificially bias the data in favor of the point you're making.

Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Fixed

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 159