April 20, 2014, 03:28:05 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 ... 99 100 [101] 102 103 ... 159
1501
Lenses / Re: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Available for Preorder
« on: April 06, 2012, 01:21:16 PM »
Anyway, the Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC looks to be a fantastic lens on paper, picking up where the Canon left off.

With the usual discounting for 3rd party lenses, I wonder if we'll see this go for under $1000 from retailers?

Lets hope it delivers!

1502
Lenses / Re: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Available for Preorder
« on: April 06, 2012, 11:30:30 AM »
I wonder if Tamron have a wide-angle lens for full frame up their sleeves somewhere?

Their 70-300 VC faces off quite favourably with Canon's 70-300 IS USM, the 24-70/2.8 VC holds its own against Canon's 24-70/2.8 MkI (very similar price point.) All that is missing is something to compete with the 16-35 or 17-40.

I had Tamron's 70-300 and it was indeed very sharp.  The issue I had was if I had 5-10 seconds to compose and focus on a still subject it did a great job almost every time.  If I had to turn 90 degrees and try to focus on something quickly (oh look your daughter is about to dump spaghetti on her head) the lens' focus motor would move quickly but there would be a 25-30% chance of the shot actually being in focus.  The canon 70-300L nails it every time (though 3-4X the price)

Personally, I'm happy that they traded off focus speed for better IQ in the 70-300 VC. But for similar reasons, I'm considering the 70-300L.

Quote
Tamron's 60mm macro is an epic fail for canon's 7D, they admitted the problem like a year ago and I have not heard since whether or not they fixed it.   For me it would have to have been almost as sharp as the mark II at $1300 for me to even bother taking a risk, I hate paying for return shipping on a crap 3rd party lens.

Well it would seem that the lesson here is to wait for decent reviews before buying. I know that I'm going to wait for it to be officially reviewed before deciding. That way I can make an informed purchasing decision.

1503
Lenses / Re: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Available for Preorder
« on: April 06, 2012, 11:13:00 AM »
On Adorama's website, it says that this lens comes with a 6 year warranty.

Is this a mistake?

Because Canon's warranty, for all EF lenses in the USA, is 1 year.

1504
Lenses / Re: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Available for Preorder
« on: April 06, 2012, 10:40:53 AM »
"Vibration Control." It's there variation on Canon's image stabilization.

"their".

1505
EOS Bodies / Re: Go small or go home (T4i)
« on: April 06, 2012, 10:39:44 AM »
So when I open this up with Photoshop, there are three points selected on the "T". Why would that be true?

Has the "4" been Photoshop'd in? If so, it is a very good Photoshop'ing of 4.

1506
Lenses / Re: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Available for Preorder
« on: April 06, 2012, 07:43:53 AM »
That's not a very encouraging MTF chart.

Especially compared to the II from Canon... Though some people have been clamouring for IS... Though not sure is IS is all that great if the image is soft to begin with.  I would prefer tack sharp with some misses than a peak of muddied across the board

Does the Canon 24-70 MkI result in images that are "muddied across the board"?

No. Everyone talks about how great it is, how sharp it is.

Both the new Tamron and Canon MkII are better than that.

1507
Lenses / Re: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Available for Preorder
« on: April 06, 2012, 07:42:05 AM »
I wonder if Tamron have a wide-angle lens for full frame up their sleeves somewhere?

Their 70-300 VC faces off quite favourably with Canon's 70-300 IS USM, the 24-70/2.8 VC holds its own against Canon's 24-70/2.8 MkI (very similar price point.) All that is missing is something to compete with the 16-35 or 17-40.

1508
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Announced
« on: April 06, 2012, 12:23:04 AM »
Readers of this thread should also read here:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5389.0

1509
Lenses / Re: 24 - 70mm f/2.8 L I or II
« on: April 06, 2012, 12:21:39 AM »
The thread on the Tamron 24-70 is worth reading. I've posted all three sets of MTF graphs in two posts:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5389.msg104013#msg104013
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5389.msg104014#msg104014

Note that to compare the Canon graphs with the Tamron lens, you need to look at only the black lines (f/2.8). All of the blue lines on the Canon graphs represent f/8.0. Tamron's graph has lines only for f/2.8.

1510
Lenses / Re: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Available for Preorder
« on: April 06, 2012, 12:15:20 AM »
For reference, the 24-70 MkII MTF charts:


So clearly the Canon MkII lens is better than both the Tamron and the MkI.

But for twice the price of the Tamron lens, do you get twice the performance with the MkII?

1511
Lenses / Re: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Available for Preorder
« on: April 06, 2012, 12:12:13 AM »
If you look at the Canon 24-70, MK-I charts:


For the Canon's charts, you have to use the black lines. The blue lines are all f/8.0.

So if you compare this to Tamron's:


Then it is clear that the Tamron has better sharpness at f/2.8.

The chart for Canon's lens is crazy. I've mentioned the Canon 24-70 MkI lens here because that is the one that is similar in price.

1512
EOS Bodies - For Stills / 5D3 vs D800: Video 1 of 3
« on: April 04, 2012, 07:55:14 PM »
Canon 5D MK III vs Nikon D800 with Nathan Elson Small | Large

1513
Animal Kingdom / Little Penguin.
« on: April 04, 2012, 12:44:43 PM »
1/30, f/1.8 ISO 3200, 5D2, straight out of Lightroom with only a white balance adjustment and cropped to fit.

1514
EOS Bodies / Re: Thoughts of Gizmodo today - pretty balanced
« on: April 03, 2012, 07:55:35 PM »
You're assuming he, personally is shooting 1000 a day... if he has 1-2 or more second/third shooters and assistants, which someone of his volume may be, it is very reasonable.  Also dont forget, most wedding photogs are so afraid of missing the moment, they overshoot... It's all about numbers and odds...  They shoot 1000-1200 shots for one wedding for instance, raw/jpeg whatever, they have more keepers on average to fill up a wedding album/sell to the client than one shooting 500-600 pictures...  A good chunk will be repetitive, a good chunk may be slightly off focus, may slightly be off topic, may be scrappers, but the more shot and by more photographers/assistants from different angles, the more chance he has to nail the shot that may be his "money" shot.  Plus everything that he keeps during his initial cut, generally is saved long term in case the client wants more.  Storage is cheap, yes, but it's still a factor to include...  I shoot professionally... all my keepers are saved either on a network of portable TB HD, but in the end I dont want to keep going out every few months to buy more HD's if I can help it...

Having watched a kid with a Canon DSLR take photographs of a wedding by the beach recently, I can say that there are more wedding photographers with cameras than know how to use them and in which case, having 100s or 1000s of pictures is not going to help.

A good photographer can recognise the moment/money shot and/or manufacture it.

1515
EOS Bodies / Re: Thoughts of Gizmodo today - pretty balanced
« on: April 03, 2012, 07:53:28 PM »
Actually, with the rotation of the earth, El Capitan is traveling somewhere between 820 to 850 mph. It's amazing how still it looks though.

Clearly a vast underestimate, as you've failed to include revolution about the sun, galactic rotation, and the expansion of the universe into account.

 :P

But relative to the person taking the photo?

Pages: 1 ... 99 100 [101] 102 103 ... 159