Messages

271

Lenses / Re: EF tse-90 or tse-45, possible to upgrade as L, color Question?

« on: May 25, 2012, 06:57:50 PM »

Hi

I own tse 24 II and i love the color so much.

thanks

Me, too.  And I've also considered 45 and 90 T-SE, but they are much older lenses, so I'm hoping Canon revamps them some time this millenium.  If not, I'll probably pick up the 90, which is widely considered sharper than 45.

272

Lenses / Re: Recommend me a lens or 2 to rent

« on: May 25, 2012, 06:54:40 PM »

LOL, I find it amusing that you think I didn't read OP's post, yet clearly you did not read my own post.  Yes, I do know his already owns 135L, and your post and my post are recommending basically the same thing, e.g. try the 35L.   

273

Lenses / Re: No Optimal Option for 7D Standard Zoom

« on: May 25, 2012, 06:18:10 PM »

Well, if you are unwilling to spend $2300 for Canon 24-70 II, then I personally would look at the new Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC.

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/tamron-sp-24-70mm-f-2-8-vc-usd-lens-review-19056

274

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon are you listening...?? NIKON D600

« on: May 24, 2012, 05:47:37 PM »

In all honesty, since fewer people actual swap brands than imagined, the D600 (if true as spec'd) will eat mostly into other Nikon sales, especially D800 and D3X.  I know Nikon shooters who do not want 36 MP and are waiting for a lower MP full frame body. 

275

Lenses / Re: 50mm 1.2

« on: May 22, 2012, 06:30:06 PM »

You don't buy f1.2/1.4/2.0 lenses and stop them down.

Well, I hope stopping down 50L to f/1.8 is still in the spirit.  I just sold my 50 f/1.4 after getting 50L, and even before I got the 50L, I found myself using other lenses to "make do" like 35L.  There's something about 50 f/1.4 images that is a bit unrefined and bothers me.  I can say that 50L at f/1.8 is even sharper than 50 f/1.4 at f/1.8, in addition to the refinement in rendering.


DZ3C2797 by drjlo1, on Flickr

276

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: RAW vs JPEG debate in the light of 5DIII improvements

« on: May 22, 2012, 06:15:09 PM »

Nope, Digital Lens Optimizer (DLO) is not available in camera. The different lens (assuming more than one lens) profiles are several 100MB's to download, available only through Canon's DPP. It works ONLY for RAW. In camera is only the "old" vignetting (also distortion?? nope...) correction thing.

And even DLO could be in-camera, it would completely slow down the camera, as even with DPP in computer, DLO takes a while to process. 

Below is Chromatic Aberration correction in DPP turned up to max (200), and I still prefer the DLO results by far.  CA correction *IS* available in-camera, and there's no reason not to turn it on if you shoot jpegs.


C2.8.200S0 by drjlo1, on Flickr

277

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake Coming [CR3]

« on: May 21, 2012, 09:42:50 PM »

Does this mean that the 35mm f/2 is destined for the 'Discontinued List', as it is at an almost identical price point and is so close in focal length, plus considered very soft (easier to make f2.8 a lot sharper)?

Who says 35 f/2 is "very soft"?  My copy certainly isn't, and it, along with 50 f/1.8, is what saves the masses from also-ran zoom lenses with entry-level dslr bodies.

278

Lenses / Re: 50mm 1.2

« on: May 21, 2012, 08:18:07 PM »

I don't use LR, so can't say.  I use DPP for RAW, then transfer to photoshop if I need to use further processes. DLO makes much more difference in overall detail and clarity, more in compared to the Chromatic Aberration correction tool in DPP.  In fact, when DLO is used, CA correction tool is greyed out in DPP. 

"New in DPP v3.11 is Digital Lens Optimizer – a revolutionary new tool designed to drastically improve image resolution. Digital Lens Optimizer (DLO) precisely imitates lens performance, with a series of complex mathematical functions replicating each stage of the journey of light through the optical path. Using this information DLO can correct a range of typical optical aberrations and loss of resolution caused by a camera’s low pass filter, by applying an inverse function to each shot to take the image nearer to how the scene appears to the naked eye."

279

Lenses / Re: 50mm 1.2

« on: May 21, 2012, 04:22:48 PM »

One reason to stick with Canon EF fast primes is Canon's Digital Lens Optimizer (DLO), which was rolled out without much hoopla with DPP but carries a wallop!

For example, the venerable 85L II has tons of color fringing at f/1.2, and even stopped down to f/2.8 there is substantial amount. Similar observations occur with 50L.  First photo is 85L f/2.8 shot with sharpening set to 0 in DPP, no DLO applied.  These are ~400% crops.


C2.8S0 by drjlo1, on Flickr

Second shot is same settings, sharpness 0, with DLO applied at 60 (out of 100).


C2.8DLO60S0 by drjlo1, on Flickr

280

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: RAW vs JPEG debate in the light of 5DIII improvements

« on: May 21, 2012, 04:15:40 PM »

One fantastic feature Canon rolled out with DPP without much hoopla is the Digital Lens Optimizer (DLO), which IMO is one of the biggest reasons to shoot RAW, as it does not work for JPEG. 

The venerable 85L II has tons of color fringing at f/1.2, and even stopped down to f/2.8 there is substantial amount. First photo is f/2.8 shot with sharpening set to 0 in DPP, no DLO applied.  These are ~400% crops.

I have tested similar results with 50L as well, which argues for sticking with Canon branded fast lenses since DLO only works for Canon lenses. 


C2.8S0 by drjlo1, on Flickr

Second shot is same settings, sharpness 0, with DLO applied at 60 (out of 100).


C2.8DLO60S0 by drjlo1, on Flickr

281

Lighting / Re: Alien Bee lights - AB800 vs the AB1600?

« on: May 21, 2012, 03:11:13 AM »

Unless you have no limit budget, I would get more number of 800.  I have 2 but wish had 2 more, although you can use speedlights for hair, rim, etc.

282

Lighting / Re: 5D3 + 430EX II/580EX II

« on: May 21, 2012, 03:04:53 AM »

580exII works perfectly great with 5D iii.  I jusf don't see any limitation at all.

283

Lenses / Re: 85 L vs 135 L

« on: May 21, 2012, 12:29:29 AM »

As much as I love my 85L II for portraits, its AF is *just* slow enough to end up in missed shots with active children not to mention moving bees. 

135L is not called the "magic prime" for no reason, and its price is certainly THE bargain in the L lens lineup. 
Below is 135L shot wide open at f/2.0, and below that is 100% crop (!).  I really don't think even 85L has melting cheese like these.


World Melting by drjlo1, on Flickr


100% Crop! by drjlo1, on Flickr

284

Lenses / Re: Recommend me a lens or 2 to rent

« on: May 21, 2012, 12:24:16 AM »

Of all the lenses you mention, the only ones I love are 135L and 35L, which is perfect FOV, great "normal" on crop and awesome non-distorted wide angle on FF.  I had the 16-35 II, and while it's good, 35L is quite a bit better, so I've learned to just move my feet with it.  Let's hope Canon's answer to 14-24mm is good. 

285

Lenses / Re: Your dream 50mm f/14

« on: May 20, 2012, 11:34:35 PM »

Unfortunately, Canon decided to make 5D III focus screen "not replaceable," so I'll have to see how that pans out with third party screens and Canon warranty, etc.
I do love manual focusing with TS-E 24mm II, which is just so much easier with massive and smooth focus ring and great DOF at 24mm.