August 29, 2014, 12:07:26 PM

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 - RLPhoto

Pages: 1 ... 119 120 [121] 122 123 ... 225
1801
Lenses / Re: 135 mm IS anywhere?
« on: December 24, 2012, 12:56:47 PM »
I seriously want a 135 f/1.8L IS.

1802
70-200 first but if you like primes, you could squeeze a 135L and a sigma 35mm for the same $$$. After all, the 100-400 is doing most tele work right?

1803
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Please explain expanded ISO
« on: December 24, 2012, 08:58:26 AM »
Horrible 1 and Horrible 2 are indeed, pretty horrible. :|

1804
Lenses / Re: New lenses for 46mp camera?
« on: December 24, 2012, 08:54:02 AM »
I see no reason for L grade lenses like the 24-70II and the 70-200II to out resolve 46mp. Even most primes could do Even better.

1805
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5d2 officially discontinued.
« on: December 23, 2012, 09:12:06 PM »
Never wanted, nor owned a 5D2. Still, many did enjoy their 5D2's.

1806
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions
« on: December 21, 2012, 02:27:26 PM »
I really can't understand the nitpicking with the bokeh... I haven't met any photog who would choose bokeh over sharpness. Well, I guess if you've paid $1000+ for a 35L then the sigma has to be THAT bad...

Not me. I'm sold - I'm getting the sigma.

what about the 50L?

1807
Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS Exists as a Working Prototype [CR2]
« on: December 21, 2012, 02:25:55 PM »
Tamrons are junk. They're good starter lenses but that's about it.

Have you looked at the new Tamron 24-70? From the limited time I rented it and the images I'm seeing, it's quite good. Also from the reviews I've read, it's very good. IQ, not quite up to the 24-70 v2, sure, but still around as good or a bit more than the 24-70 v1. Build quality seems quite good, although again, not quite up to L standards. But it's $1300, not $2100-2300 or whatever the 24-70 v2 is going for right now.

Now, most of the rest of the Tamron glass, far as I know you're mostly correct, but if their 24-70 is the new direction they are going it, they're likely to become a serious off-brand competitor for people who can't quite afford L and don't want to pay the vastly more expensive new non-L primes with IS.

+1 The Tamron 24-70 VC and 70-200 VC are a huge shift in IQ and quality from them. Add the Sigma 35mm 1.4 and you've got a superb third party kit.

1808
Canon General / Re: DxOMark vs. Reality
« on: December 21, 2012, 11:41:43 AM »
How come the 5D2 IQ was impeccable before the D800? I find it still impeccable today. :|

1809
Lenses / Re: Lens choice advice please??
« on: December 21, 2012, 11:39:43 AM »
Get a cheapo tripod and stop down your kit lens for landscapes and still get that 50mm 1.8.

1810
Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS Exists as a Working Prototype [CR2]
« on: December 21, 2012, 11:35:56 AM »
Too little, too late. Even if this were released tomarrow, I'd still buy the tamron 24-70 over the canon. The canon would be stupendously expensive and the tamrons IQ is already excellent. Why buy the canon? Oh yeah, that pretty red ring. ::)

1811
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Cannot Keep Screwing It's Customers Over
« on: December 21, 2012, 11:23:59 AM »
Meh, This seems to only be an issue for early adopters. I got both my Mk3s for under 3000$ and one for 2499$. I couldn't feel better about being patient.   8)

Just don't be an early adopter unless absolutely necessary.

1812
It comes to personal choice but wow lots of people on this forum use filters as protection.

Lets put this into perspective.

For the ones that have it permanently on do you guys buy the paint protection for your brand new car as well?
How about eye protection when you go out of your house. After all your eyes are more important than any L lens.

This reminds me of some old timers that would bubble wrap their TV remote control so it wouldn't get damaged.
The most infuriating thing for me is filters on the 18-55mm efs kit lens. Who here would seriously recommend for someone to use a filter on this lens?

Some other interesting reads.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/canondslr/discuss/72157630037025174/
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/06/good-times-with-bad-filters

If the protection provided has the same level of protection as the filters I use, I wouldn't mind a clear, in discernible force field around my car.  ;D

1813
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: UPGRADING 7D to FF Please help!!!
« on: December 20, 2012, 09:56:56 AM »
If you love the 7D, you'll hate the 5D2 or the 6D. Save the cash and get the mk3. It won't limit you later on.

1814
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Hand on SONY RX 1.............AMAZING
« on: December 20, 2012, 09:52:14 AM »
First gen product. Avoid.

1815
Lenses / Re: "Big White" lens choice
« on: December 20, 2012, 09:10:55 AM »
400 f2.8

Pages: 1 ... 119 120 [121] 122 123 ... 225