April 17, 2014, 10:40:32 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 - Random Orbits

Pages: 1 ... 48 49 [50] 51 52 ... 76
Lenses / Re: 35mm f1.4 -vs- 50mm 1.2
« on: November 02, 2012, 03:48:17 PM »
Again, i know most everything about these lenses, except i have no first hand knowledge, and many of you do. Barring it all doesn't fall apart at smaller apertures(and i know it doesn't), i'm really only interested in stuff wide open to f2.8 or so. if i could get away with narrower i'd just use a zoom. how about if i ask this, is the IQ at f2 and below on both lenses crap, decent, good, or great? and that's without cutting any slack. i know f1.2 at 50mm and f1.4 at 35mm is tough, but i don't care. thanks

For portraits, they both work fine wide open.  Keep the subject toward the center, because the corners will be softer with significant vignetting, but that is the nature of the beast.  With AF, nothing really beats Canon's 35L and 50L wide open. 

Lenses / Re: 35mm f1.4 -vs- 50mm 1.2
« on: November 02, 2012, 06:08:35 AM »
Well, to me, this is a focal length issue.  I do think at f/1.2 the 50L is sharper than the 35 at f/1.4.
Are you sure? Reviews say it's:
- 1190 lines vs. 1437 at corners (50L vs. 35L)
- 2473 lines vs. 3245 in the center (50L vs. 35L)

P.S. This data is taken from photozone.de.

+1.  35L is sharper than 50L in my experience as well.

Lenses / Re: Choosing a kit thinking long term
« on: November 02, 2012, 06:02:59 AM »
You should consider replacing the 60D with a body that has AFMA before investing much in high speed glass.  It makes a big difference.  It makes a difference with f/2.8 lenses but the difference is much more signficant at f/1.4 or f/1.2.

I like the 35L as a low light option.  135L is too long on a a crop body esp. indoors, but you can confirm that once you have a chance to play with the 70-200.

Lenses / Re: AI Focus tracking issue, or user error?
« on: October 26, 2012, 11:37:05 PM »
So it's the body and not the lens? I was hoping your response would justify getting a 135mm f/2 for basketball season. :-)

Sorry to disappoint.  :P  My 5DII in AI Servo had trouble keeping up with my 3-4 year old daughter running towards me, let alone a football player.  My 7D could do it, even with a lens as slow-focusing as the 85L II.

+1.  Turn on the assist focal points, but I don't really see much of an improvement with them activated.  Use the longest focal length you can -- distance is your friend.  Take bursts.  If the subject is close and moving toward the camera, expect to throw most of the shots away.

Lenses / Re: 50 mm Can't make up my mind!
« on: October 25, 2012, 10:17:29 PM »
Based on resolution tests the Canon 50 1.4 and Sigma 50 1.4 are both similar in the center but the Canon is much sharper in the corners.

They must have had a bad copy. All other reviews report the Sigma being much sharper wide open, as it was designed to be.

Hmm... don't know about that.  LensRentals also noted that the Sigma had softer edges/corners.


Lenses / Re: Travel lens\es on crop body
« on: October 25, 2012, 06:53:08 PM »
For crop I prefer the 17-55 2.8 over the 24-105, but since you already have the latter maybe just rent a 10-22 for the trip and stick a 50 1.8 or 1.4 in the bag for those night shots.

+1.  You don't need to bring all the lenses everywhere you go.  If you're going out for the day, a 10-22 and 24-105 combo would work well.  Just use a fast prime (30, 35 or 50mm) when you head out at night.

Lenses / Re: looking for equivalent to efs 17-55 f/2.8 in EF line
« on: October 23, 2012, 11:22:19 PM »
why not the 24-70 2.8?
i can see the f2.8 from apc-h sensor is roughly equivalent to f4 in dof view. but.. why not 24-70 2.8?

No IS. 

Lenses / Re: Need comparisons between Canon 135L vs 100L
« on: October 23, 2012, 01:12:45 PM »
The 70-200L f/2.8 II, 135L and 100L are all great lenses, and you really can't go wrong with any of them.  How you intend to use them and your budget will determine which one would work best for you.

If you shoot sports, the 70-200L f/2.8 II is king.  It performs well and the zoom range helps when the subjects are moving around.  That it holds its own against other lenses in the same focal length range is a testament to well the 70-200L II performs.

If you focus on portraits, then the 135L is a good choice.  If you want something longer, then you can consider the 70-200L f/4s or a 70-300L, which are less expensive, smaller and lighter.  The extra stop over the 70-200L II is welcome in really dim settings (i.e. auditoriums), but you lose the versatility of a zoom.

If you have either 70-200L II or the 135L, there really isn't a need to get a 100L macro.  You can then opt for the non-L version.  You don't need to shoot 1:1 to make macros useful.  Take a look at the max magnification specs of your current lenses.  A lot of them will be in the 0.1 to 0.3 range.  If you want to get a tighter shot, then you can either crop or use a macro.

Lenses / Re: A very dumb view
« on: October 22, 2012, 04:32:06 PM »
My  FILTER saved my lens from a nasty knock, so yeah USE THEM and the HOOD its its not too much bulk (say 70-200 hood and below)

+1.  Although wide angle lens hoods are almost pointless for protection.

How many people use hoods indoors?

Lenses / Re: 28mm 1.8 or 40mm 2.8 on 60D?
« on: October 22, 2012, 09:40:25 AM »
I suggest bringing your camera body and buying the lens in person while trying the lens at the store.  The 60D doesn't have AFMA, which is a must for lenses with max apertures greater than f/2.8.  Try it at the store and find one that matches your 60D well -- true for either 28 f/1.8 and 30 f/1.4.

If you think you're going to stay with a crop body for a while, the 30 f/1.4 might make more sense (again, assuming you can try a few out a the store) because the 2/3 of a stop can come in handy at times.

Lenses / Re: 28mm 1.8 or 40mm 2.8 on 60D?
« on: October 22, 2012, 07:18:36 AM »
How many total lenses are you intending to bring?  If you already have the 24-105, are you saying that it is too slow for use indoors because it would not make sense to get another lens covered by the focal length otherwise.

If you're going someplace crowded, a wider focal length would be more useful.  I used a 10-22 when going sightseeing, and it works well.

If you're looking for another lens for use indoors, then a 28 f/1.8 would make sense.  However, the DOF at f/1.8 would be thin and would more useful for single person portraits.  If you are intending on shooting groups inside, it would make more sense to use your 24-105 and a flash.

Lenses / Re: Help me decide; keep my 35L or get a 50L?
« on: October 20, 2012, 07:16:04 AM »
Depends on which focal length you prefer, although I suspect that you'd prefer a longer FL for portraits.  See if you can borrow your friend's 50L and see which FL works better for you.  The 50L is more difficult to master than the 35L.

Lenses / Re: Help me spend a one-time windfall!
« on: October 19, 2012, 08:01:24 PM »
Because you state that you're primarily interested in landscape/outdoor/architecture, I'd suggest staying with the 5D II for now and getting another lens or two.  The 5D III has a high ISO and AF advantages over the 5D II, which you would not take advantage of with your interests.

You're comfortable using a tripod, so the TS-E 24 II is a great choice.  If you're ok with a heavier lens, the 70-200L II is a great choice.

TS-E 17 or 24 (depending on your preferred focal length)
24-70 f/2.8 II
70-200 f/2.8 IS II
1.4x III
2x III
100L or maybe a fast prime (35 or 50mm).

If you opt for the TS-E 17, then you can sell your 17-40L.  The 70-200L II works well with extenders and can get you to 400mm with pretty good IQ.  If you're happy with the 100mm macro, keep it.  The 180L gives you longer working distance, but it's larger and heavier.

Lenses / Re: Should I sell my 70-200L vii for the 85mm 1.2?
« on: October 19, 2012, 02:52:57 PM »
Rent/borrow the 85L II and see if it will satisfy your needs before making that decision.  An unused lens has no value to you, but you might as well figure out which FL would suit you best before plunking down all that cash.

Lenses / Re: Can a refurbished lens be backordered?
« on: October 16, 2012, 05:15:35 PM »
Thanks for the quick reply. Last night a lot of refurbished lenses came back in stock, the 70-300L amongst them. Why should that one show up by mistake (happened twice already)? Isn't it a lot more likely that someone else just pulled the trigger and that is why it is out of stock again? This lense seems to be selling very well...

The 100-300mmL doews not sell quickly, even at 20% off, it did not sell out for 5 days.  When they add new stock, its not just one or two.

Sometimes I wonder if it's the small size of the 70-300L's market or that it is a fairly new addition to the refurb site.  If it is a lower volume lens, then the refurbished pool would be smaller (in contrast to all the 70-200s).

Pages: 1 ... 48 49 [50] 51 52 ... 76