January 25, 2015, 01:27:48 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 - Phenix205

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
Lenses / Re: Selling my two Zeiss lenses. Your advice?
« on: July 27, 2014, 09:59:20 AM »
I'd sell the 35 and 135 and keep the 15. For wide angle landscape, I don't see the need of AF. Plus it is wider than the 16-35 IS.

I don't see much use of 35 1.4 under manual focus mode unless you are using it for astrophotography. If you use 135 mostly for tripod portraits, AF may not matter but I don't see how practical it is while hand holding shooting people who may move (such as kids).

Video is totally different story. I'd keep them all for video.

Third Party Manufacturers / Sigma 50 1.4 Art NOT bokehlicious?
« on: July 26, 2014, 08:16:57 AM »
Kai at digitalrev published his hands-on review video. Lack of beautiful bokeh at 1.4 seems to be a weak point of this lens, based on Kai. I was wondering what other users think of it.

I have been having good experience selling on CL. As long as your asking price is reasonable (I typically ask for 85%-90% of the new item price depending on how long I have had the item for), it is usually sold within a week to fellow enthusiasts or professional photographers. I also often lower the price by another 10-20 bucks when the buyer is serious. To me, selling it quickly and starting enjoying the new lens is more fun than posting the item around. Good luck.

Lenses / Re: Flex Lens Shade
« on: July 15, 2014, 09:19:06 PM »
Looks flimsy to me.  I have some rogue flash benders for my flashes (similar idea) and they are a pain to use. Why you would want this functionality in a hood is beyond me

It does look flimsy. Never meant to be a protective tool of course. I do see the value of cutting off the flare.

Lenses / Flex Lens Shade
« on: July 15, 2014, 06:16:38 PM »
I upgraded my polarizer and ND filters to 82mm when I purchased the 24-70 II two years ago, expecting to use them on a 24 TS-E or Zeiss 21. Now that I have the fantastic 16-35 4L IS for landscape, I'm not sure if I will ever buy either of the two lenses. 82mm filters on the 16-35 IS are great because I can stack them without having any vignetting issue even at 16mm, but I can't use the lens hood any more.

I searched on line and found this: http://www.flexlensshade.com/. I was wondering if any one has used this and what your experience is. Any other suggestions are very welcome too.

Software & Accessories / Re: Rain protection for 5D3 and lens
« on: July 14, 2014, 09:24:13 PM »
I bought this rubber mask for some degree of protection but mainly  to avoid scratching. It seals some of the buttons so I assume that it will help to keep some moisture/water out.
Looks nice. I guess one just needs to make sure to drain the water in case it gets in. Trapped water may do more damage.

Lenses / Re: UV filter on the new 16-35 f/4?
« on: July 13, 2014, 11:11:25 AM »
This is entertaining. It all started with a student who genuinely was seeking advice. Then there were clowns, professors, associate professors, fake professors, kids who hate professors. We all know in the end the true knowledge prevails.

Software & Accessories / Re: Sub $1000 27" monitor for photo editing
« on: July 13, 2014, 08:58:19 AM »
Thank you all. It appears that NEC, Eizo, and Dell are the top brands for this price range. The pricing for Eizo CX271 is not yet available. Will wait a little and see.

Lenses / Re: UV filter on the new 16-35 f/4?
« on: July 12, 2014, 07:54:23 AM »
I found that I've had a polarizer on this lens 90% of the time for landscaping since I got it three weeks ago. So I essentially am using the polarizer as the protective filter and only use a UV filter during low light shooting.

Software & Accessories / Sub $1000 27" monitor for photo editing
« on: July 11, 2014, 09:24:13 PM »
Any recommendations? I just bought a Spyder4Pro calibration kit. I used to use a Sony XBR6 52" TV for some casual shot editing, but wanted to do more serious editing for landscape. Thanks!

Photography Technique / Re: 85 vs 135 for portraits
« on: July 09, 2014, 06:26:29 AM »
I checked the focal lengths I shot at the most using 70-200 and found that I had either shot near the long end or below 90 and that 's when I decided to get an 85. I like to be closer to my Subject.

Photography Technique / Re: 85 vs 135 for portraits
« on: July 09, 2014, 12:33:00 AM »
The upcoming Sigma 85 1.4 A could become a serious contender to Canon's king of portrait.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 F/4L IS -- Reviews are trickling in...
« on: July 06, 2014, 10:06:38 PM »
Can we just call it a really good lens? Good enough to take amazing photos. And you can get bad shots too if you take a bad photo.
I have compared it to my 24-70 II, 24L, TS-E 17, and TS-E 24 II and it's every bit as sharp as those lenses, with the exception of the TS-E 24 and the 24-70II @ 35mm.  At f/11 they are all pretty close, though I'd give the 16-35 f/4 IS & 24-70II the edge in color and contrast.  Really.  The corners are MUCH sharper than the 16-35 f/2.8 II that I sold in part because CA is almost non-existent.  Distortion isn't great at 16mm, but I'm sure DxO & Adobe will take care of that soon.  The IS is very odd because you can't see the effect like you do with an unwieldy telephoto, but I think it will be a great travel/walkaround lens.

I'll put together the photos in the coming days (both brick wall & real-world shots) for everyone to take a look at.

Really looking forward to your photos. I'm particularly interested in your comparison between the 16-35 4L and the 24 TS-E as I was seriously considering the latter before the former was announced. Thanks.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS Sample Images
« on: July 02, 2014, 11:02:07 AM »
Some quick casual shots for testing while taking the kids for a walk yesterday evening. All handheld. I am very happy with the corner and edge sharpness this lens produces. IS worked very nicely for the last shot (1/8 sec).

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS Sample Images
« on: July 01, 2014, 07:42:21 AM »

Another issue with an image stabiliser is that it takes a few seconds to settle. If you just point and snap, there a possibility that the gyros and elements haven't settled and you get soft images.

If you had tried the IS on this lens and 70-200 II, you probably would not have made this statement. The IS is almost instantaneous on the 16-35 4L.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10