« on: September 23, 2014, 02:24:00 PM »
Where the heck are the 85 and 135 Art lenses?
...dang... Hurry up, Sigma!
...dang... Hurry up, Sigma!
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.
I'm a little late to the party here but let me address some of the points in a general sense without naming names.
- Laptops (Apple or PC) are always a compromise compared to a good desktop unit with a high end IPS display. And I agree with many who say gaming laptops are overkill. A gaming laptop is purposed for a completely different use dependent on 3D video performance. For photography, it's all about the display and CPU/RAM/SSD and protecting the data.
- Avoid TN Displays, get IPS. Most everyone agrees on that and the OP wants the BEST, not a compromise to save $$.
- Durability - Many have said they went out and looked at laptops to compare. Most laptops at retail stores are not built to the standards that business line laptops are. Lenovo Thinkpads vs Lenovo Ideapad. DELL Precision/Latitude vs Inspiron. HP ProBook/Elitebook vs Envy/Pavilion. The major name business lines are built like tanks for enterprise traveling workforces. The retail lines are built for individuals who don't know the difference and want shiny plastic.
- Display, CPU, RAM, SSD all matter, but not video. After that, it's just a difference in configuration.
- Macbooks aren't better, they are just different (and overpriced). They won't last longer. They have the exact same hardware inside built by the same manufacturers. If you like Mac, buy it. Heck, you can even install Windows on it if you want. But macs don't have much in the way of versatility. They are pretty limited for real world use with abbreviated ports, no docking or removable parts like batteries, optical drives, etc. And I HATE GLOSSY HIGH CONTRAST DISPLAYS. But to each their own.
- Workstation level business laptops are expensive but they offer multiple custom configurations like drives with RAID, mSATA and other options including replacing the optical drive with even more storage, etc. So you can create a custom drive setup that protects your images and even backs them up internally without the need for external drives hanging off, etc. This is one area where macs and other retail offerings are totally lost. You can also get custom docks that you can connect at your desk with everything including multiple displays.
- What would I buy? The Thinkpad W series from a W520 on up are excellent. DELL and HP also have great workstation level IPS offerings that are similar. These are serious workstation replacement products that are much more durable and powerful than retail products (and macs). You could get a refurbished unit for a lot less and still enjoy everything you need including good performance and IPS display.
I'm not familiar with the Acer unit that has been mentioned here heavily but someone is pretty impressed with it so it's probably worth a look. It's still a retail laptop however so I'm a little worried about the durability.
Finally, I saw a comment about why shouldn't all devices have the better IPS displays? Well, it's mostly about money and profit. IPS is more expensive and most devices are built for profit for a market that doesn't know the difference and doesn't care. Most of the market wants a cheaper device with specs they think matter, like hard drive capacity and fancy names on the audio chip. An iPad costs a TON of money and gives Apple something like a million percent profit margin to boot.
OP - Good luck finding what you want. Please stay in touch here and let us know what you decide. Again, my suggestion is to go with a Thinkpad W series or one of the DELL or HP business offerings.
I would not get a high end gaming laptop for photo editing, since a lot of your money will go towards a nice video card for gaming, which is not all that relevant for photo editing. My laptop has the Intel video card AND an Nvidia card, and even using Photoshop 6 with 36 GB RAW files, the graphic card doesn't even kick in (Nvidia Optimus function).
Optimus doesn't change/switch automatically between your onboard and nvidia gpu. You have to manually set an dedicated GPU for each application (e.g. Photoshop) in nvidia control panel.
Not all programs works flawless with the 'auto select' feature. So your quote above doesn't make any sense. Select manually your nvidia GPU and you will see that things do speed up.
Hi everyone, I've only recently begun shooting with this method, and I'm totally LOVING the results I'm getting!
I'm wondering, however: I shoot using my 135L on a 5DM3. Does anyone here use the 85mm? I've noticed that with the 135, I'm shooting probably more photos than I need to, but that's because I'm scared I'm going to miss an area (those of you who shoot these photos know what I'm referring to).
Should I get an 85L just for this type of shot? I actually don't have one, but I'd love to have one. Maybe this is the catalyst to push me into that camp.
I've also tried it with my 70-200mm 2.8L m2 at approximately 85mm, but I'm more nervous because of the zoom ring.
Thoughts? Also, if you have good Brenizer Method photos, please share!
One of the things Brenizer suggests is making sure you have the entire primary subject in one of the shots. This prevents any stitching issues within the main subject. It is very difficult to achieve that with the 135mm. So yes, I think an 85mm FL is necessary. You might be able to make do with a 50/1.2 or even better, the Sigma 85/1.4.
I am waiting for Canon to come up with the 85/1.4 USM (day-dreaming...)
To sum up, it seems like Sigma is much less reliable than canon here. 35L has been tested for more than 10 years and the only real problem is CA when wide open, though it's not often seen. The AF is more stable on canon's side.
Seems like I'd better remove CA when retouch a pic... yeah, 35L is my choice, for sure.
I've been wanting to upgrade my camera body for about two years now... I'm still shooting with my old-ass XTi (yeah, yeah, I know) but it's not been a huge deal since I don't try to make any money off my photography. It's just a hobby, although I do shoot events and stuff for my family and friends sometimes (for no charge, just for fun).
Anyway, so I was all set to buy the 70D but then I read the last few posts on this site about the 7D replacement coming soon and I'm wondering if I should wait and see what that will have. My budget is $1,200, and while I'd like to have a new camera for the summer I really don't *need* one until early fall when I'm taking a big trip.
I know nobody here is a soothsayer, but I am really wrestling with what to do. Do I go ahead and get the 70D? At $1,000 it's well within my budget. Or do I wait until August (if that's when they're expected to announce) and see what the 7D replacement will have?
My concern with waiting is that it will be more than what I want to spend, and unless it's just really super awesome and way better than the 70D I can't see myself going above my budget. So I will have spent three months without a 70D just to go ahead and get the 70D anyway. But I'm also concerned that if they announce in August, it might not come out until later in the fall—after the trip I am really wanting a new camera for.
My concern with buying a 70D now is that the 7D replacement will be announced and it might be within, or around, my budget, and I'll regret getting the 70D instead of waiting for a presumably better camera. Or do people have an idea of what the replacement would likely sell for?
I had a poor copy of the 35 Art, but I know now they are not all like that, and calibrated with the docking they are very good.
I bought the 50 Art and I had also dismissed Sigma, but the 50 Art is a staggering good lens, and is now my all time favorite lens. And I have owned 90% of the lenses Canon has ever made in EF mount.
Get the 35 Art with the docking, you'll be much happier with money left over for the 50 Art as well. The 35 L II will NOT be cheap.
And the quality at that 1.4 is amazing too.