April 17, 2014, 11:38:27 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 - brad-man

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 40
Why does everyone seem to think they're going to make a 135mm f/1.8?  And why does everyone think it's going to be a f/1.8 instead of f2?

Just cause there have been rumors about one in the past. Plus, with the fact that Sigma is the only company with a f/1.8  zoom in the market it would seem appropriate. But f/1.8 or f/2, I doesn't really matter that much to me; marginal difference to the final photo. I think a f2 OS is more likely all things considered. And $950 would be perfect for the sub-$1k theme Sigma might be starting.

Works for me. As much as I'd love a fantastic 24, I would use an 85 and probably even a 135 more often. Os would definitely be more desired than the difference between 1.8 and 2.0. I am more than satisfied with my Tamron SP24-70, but of coarse if Siggy really wants to give me GAS, they seem to have the wherewithal to do so.

At the risk of being flamed, I feel that the many photographers around here that proclaim IS to be of no use on lenses wider than 85mm are being snobs. It's as if they are saying, "My technique is such that I would derive no benefit from it and if you feel the need for it, well you just suck."  OK, that's a bit of an exaggeration, but you get my point.

I used to think the same way as you- the pros who suggest IS isn't important at wider FLs are snobs.
But let's dig deeper- there is SOME truth to it, as I have realized with time. Not all true, mind, because I still think IS is important.
However, I think IS gives a false sense of confidence to inexperienced photographers. They feel they can shoot a photo at 1/17 just because they are shooting with a 35mm lens with IS. But they don't understand the limitation of shutter speed vs subject movement.
Pros point at the fact that you realistically cannot shoot lower than 1/n (put your favorite number here) unless you want motion blur or you are shooting still life.
Now, for longer focal lengths, n is a larger number:
Consequently 1/n is higher, and 1/n divided by factor of image stabilization still remains high. So motion blur is avoided.

Now, less knowledgeable people have taken this maxim, misunderstood it, and propagated it at face value- that IS is unimportant. I think it is just a misrepresentation and generalization of otherwise sound logic.
or to summarize... "I have IS turned on, so why are the wings of the hummingbird blurred?"

To me, IS is a tool. Sometimes it is needed, sometimes it is not. The trick is knowing where and when.

I agree to the extent that IS is frequently not needed at these FLs, and that it certainly is not a cure-all for poor technique. However, I have made quite a few shots where IS has undoubtedly helped, and have never had a shot ruined by it. I leave it on always, needed or not.

At the risk of being flamed, I feel that the many photographers around here that proclaim IS to be of no use on lenses wider than 85mm are being snobs. It's as if they are saying, "My technique is such that I would derive no benefit from it and if you feel the need for it, well you just suck."  OK, that's a bit of an exaggeration, but you get my point.

Well, there's around a 13 month separation between the game-changing release of the 35A and the equally game-changing release of the 50A (relevancy?). So which lens is slated for next year? I'm hoping for the 85, though I suspect it will be a 24. 135 f/2 anyone?

Who would have thought just a few short years ago, that Sigma would become the preeminent AF lens manufacturer? Certainly not me...

Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art
« on: April 14, 2014, 11:29:27 PM »
Here's what I've been waiting for - a 50L to 50A comparison from SLR Lounge

I think it's enough to convince me to cancel my pre-order.  The Sigma is sharper, but not shockingly so, and the Canon's bokeh is slightly better (IMHO).  The Canon also appears to have ever-so-slightly better contrast, while the Sigma has better CA control, but again, only by a hair.

The other thing I've learned is that you'll have buy the USB dock to enable full time manual focus (which I guess isn't standard for Sigmas).  That's crappy. 

The 50L has killer build quality and USM in a much smaller package and I don't think the Sigma is worth 950 of my dollars for such subtle differences at f/1.4 in what for me, is a portrait lens. 

I guess I can't cancel it till the 24th, so I'll keep my mind open until then, but I think I'm going to cancel and resume the 50L II vigil ;)

Here's a more scientific comparison of sharpness. Seems the Sigma vs Canon L decision is really sharpness vs. bokeh, respectfully. If I had a 50L I probably wouldn't sell, but since I don't, I'm still super excited about my preorder :)


Wow. Just wow. What a lens. I can't imagine that anyone other than brand loyalists will opt for the 50L after seeing this comparison. I have and love the 35A, and while I do want to upgrade my 50/1.4, I think I'll wait and see what Canon's new IS version is like. I'd like to have some primes that are more travel-friendly and inconspicuous. Although when Sigma releases the 85A, all bets are off...

Software & Accessories / Re: Convertible tripod/monopod options
« on: April 11, 2014, 06:31:29 PM »
@expat, I'd love to know which model you got. 

Sorry, am travelling at the moment.

I have the Sirui N-2004. Never had a problem with the monopod in heavy rain (sat out using it all day), humidity etc. many times and never once hinted there may be an issue. It can carry a lot and even more than I described above.

Go to a store and check one out you will be amazed at the monopod part especially, but also just how small the lot compacts into.

I am not the biggest fan of the tripod part, works great and I use it all the time but am about to buy something different, but when I use tripod I mainly am doing video which is why I have the head mentioned earlier.


+1 on the Sirui. I have the Sirui M3204x. It is the roughly equivalent carbon fiber version of the N-2004. It is very well made and very reasonably priced considering the specs. It goes to 58" without raising the center column so there's no bending over, weighs less than 4 pounds and collapses to 21".


Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Gets Reviewed
« on: April 05, 2014, 05:07:36 PM »
A salesman at Henry's in Toronto said that the Sigma rep who was there a few days earlier said it would be around/less than 790.

Stop saying that. You're giving me GAS.

must wait for the 85. must wait for the 85. must wait for the 85...

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: April 02, 2014, 10:51:34 PM »
Too many great shots here. Time to lower the standards...

PowerShot / Re: Canon EOS Smart 1 Phone - April Fools Joke? :)
« on: March 31, 2014, 08:05:00 PM »
Speaking of April Fools, I don't think this is a joke:


I saw this on TV yesterday. I mean, seriously? People buy these things?

Care to share with the rest of us what the joke is?  What is so hard to believe about Nikon selling polycarb and other materials for lenses for eye glasses?  Pentax also makes lens material for eyeglasses along with Ziess.

I agree.  Doesn't seem so odd.   And if Canon could put out some EOS glasses with interchangeable lenses, I'd consider buying them. 

The Nikons would have better DR :P

Animal Kingdom / Re: Mooses
« on: March 27, 2014, 06:26:47 PM »

It's moose mooose...

Great shots Pierre!

Contests / Re: Gura Gear Uinta Bag System Giveaway
« on: March 24, 2014, 06:13:34 PM »
Sure, I'll enter my name.  Photographers can never have too many camera bags!

...said the guy who's never seen my closet...

Great shots Phil. You're very fortunate to have access to such awesome models.The happiness is contagious. This is the only APS-C lens, other than my 15-85, that has ever tempted me.

I don't think that's as sad as the fact that lately the most anticipated lenses on a Canon rumor site aren't Canon lenses :P

Software & Accessories / Re: LP-E6 third party and Canon Chargers
« on: March 19, 2014, 08:46:57 PM »
Also a good reason to buy one of these generic AC/DC chargers for $11 that don't care who made the battery...


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 40