July 23, 2014, 06:38:40 AM

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 - ecka

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 38
46
Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: May 04, 2014, 01:26:10 AM »
Lovely thread :). Thank you all for sharing.


IMG_4358 by ecka84, on Flickr

47
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM "Pancake"
« on: May 03, 2014, 01:00:26 PM »
6D + EF 40mm f/2.8 STM + 13mm Extension Tube


IMG_4265 by ecka84, on Flickr

48
Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: May 01, 2014, 08:43:38 AM »

IMG_3573 by ecka84, on Flickr

49
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: April 23, 2014, 04:45:14 PM »
6D + Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX APO DG HSM Macro

IMG_2752 by ecka84, on Flickr

50
Canon General / Re: $10,000
« on: April 22, 2014, 11:38:39 AM »
Sony a7R
Canon TS-E 17/4L
Voigtlander Ultron 21/1.8
Voigtlander Nokton 35/1.2'II
Leica Summicron-C 40/2
Canon FD 85/1.2L
Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 2/135 or 2/100 Makro
:)

51
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: April 21, 2014, 10:29:25 AM »

IMG_2792 by ecka84, on Flickr

Looks beautiful....what part of the world is that?

Lithuania :)

52
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: April 21, 2014, 05:37:36 AM »

IMG_2792 by ecka84, on Flickr

53
Lenses / Re: Canon IS Primes for landscapes?
« on: April 19, 2014, 10:36:13 AM »
There is no Sigma 24mm f/1.4 ART yet (thus an unfair comparison), but the Canon 24mm f/2.8 IS seems to be dropping the ball a bit:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=788&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=829&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=5
The Sigma 24mm f/1.4 ART is rumored to be heavier and more expensive as the 35mm Art.

Although the mentioned Canon IS Prime lenses are not as good wide open, they have some clear advantages:
  • They are much smaller and lighter (the combined weight of the 24mm and 35mm Canons is actually less than a single Sigma 35mm ART, a big bonus when hiking);
  • They are (much) cheaper (the possible savings could bring a 5DmkIII in reach, but likely be spend on more glass);
  • They offer IS (which I don’t care about, but could be good for filming).

Am I missing something, or is this actually a viable option? Any good experiences using these Canon lenses for landscapes?


There is an older Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 which is near as good optically as the new stabilized version, only cheaper and smaller.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=788&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=246&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

54
Lenses / Re: Canon 50L - Love or Hate?
« on: April 17, 2014, 06:46:40 AM »
I don't love it
I don't hate it
I don't own it and I don't plan to
I like primes. IMHO, 50L is meant to be used at f/1.2 and it has its look and specific bokeh, which isn't that good at longer focus distances. Personally, I prefer Sigmalux bokeh :). The problem is that modern L zooms do better at f/2.8+ than this prime and that makes it a specialized lens (meaning, if I need more dof, I'd rather use the pancake).
I just think that price is too high for its flaws. In other words, it's not perfect just because it has a red ring. The old Sigma 50/1.4 and the 50L both have very similar AF problems, but people rant a lot more about the Sigma, despite that it is just as good or even better optically (less CA or glowing edges), maybe because there are more Sigma owners than 50L (which costs almost 3 times more). Cheaper products tend to sell better, that's a fact. People are expecting "more" or special or perfect when they pay extra for it, but the 50L is not "more" or special, it's "different". Now the 50Art looks very attractive and it may become THE fast 50 to get, if Canon won't wake up from his "let's go video" dreaming marathon. New sharp EF 50mm f/1.4 STM with 9 rounded blades bokeh cream factory for less than $600 could do the trick, leaving 50/1.4 a consumer grade lens, because $950 Sigmalux-Art is expensive.

55
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro
« on: April 16, 2014, 01:50:32 PM »
I'm using the older non-OS version and it is my favorite lens. The new one seems to be even better, so I highly recommend it. However, it is a bit larger and 250g heavier than the old one. Otherwise it's almost perfect - sharp, low aberrations, beautiful bokeh, 20cm MWD at 1:1 magnification, popular 72mm filter thread, "free" accessories (hood, collar, case).

56
EOS-M / Re: Canon EOS M3 in Q3 of 2014?
« on: April 14, 2014, 02:23:37 PM »
Oh, please. Fuji's new (X-T1) horrible non-bayer detail-smearing-sensor (even in RAW) is the least impressive cake of all.

To take a lead from neuroanatomist (i.e. argumentum ad populum): The way the X-T1 is selling not many people would agree with you, thus your opinion is negligible.  ;)

Sure it is :). However, the image is what matters the most for enthusiasts, who are in the minority of the whole digital photography business, so the most important opinions from those who care are negligible. The average consumer doesn't participate (or rarely does) in forum discussions like this one. We only know that most EVIL users prefer cheaper toys (like EOS M). Many X-T1 owners would agree that there is a big problem (weird patterns appearing on distant trees or hair, overall image softness). X-T1 with 56/1.2 would cost you more than 6D with 85/1.8, which (in my negligible opinion :)) ) is a much better tool.

57
EOS-M / Re: Canon EOS M3 in Q3 of 2014?
« on: April 14, 2014, 10:25:51 AM »
Actually, I was cheering about every new camera from Olympus and FUJIFILM that sold like hotcakes covered with chocolate syrup ... 'cause those successes led to these respective companies finally making a camera (and companion lenses) as I want it. On the flipside, every successful "Rebel" made kept Canon in the past and it finally lost them (Canon) at least one big-mouthed, opinionated user/customer who no longer recommends their products to others.  :D

Oh, please. Fuji's new (X-T1) horrible non-bayer detail-smearing-sensor (even in RAW) is the least impressive cake of all.

58
EOS-M / Re: Canon EOS M3 in Q3 of 2014?
« on: April 14, 2014, 09:08:17 AM »
I hope that one of them will be FF with dual pixel AF :).

59
Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: April 13, 2014, 12:13:26 PM »

Old Friend by ecka84, on Flickr

60
Lenses / Re: New 50mm Sigma ? There are other options !
« on: April 13, 2014, 12:39:11 AM »
Perhaps my biggest reservation about the 35IS relates to the 40mm pancake.  Comparing them:
...
- my think the 35IS has slightly nicer bokeh, but there's not a whole lot in it
...

I would argue with that. If we compare bokeh quality (not quantity), then the 40 is producing smoother and nicer bokeh. I really think that 35IS is much worse there.

Quote
- has 67 filter thread, which means you may already have filters you can use on it (unlikely with the pancake)

- the 40 has 52mm thread, which means you can adapt any larger filter. I'm using 52mm-to-58mm adapter, which acts like a lens hood as well :). (Hint: ES-52)

Quote
If you have enough light though, the 35IS's IQ advantage doesn't seem to be that great really, so if you're using it in well lit conditions, it's less clear to me whether that advantage is worth the extra cost/weight/size.

Having IS for videos is worth a lot and that's what this lens is mostly good for (in my opinion), but handholdability of the f/2+IS with not-so-good bokeh (which is pretty bad at longer distances) is a no-go for me. I'd choose a lesser evil for stills - 35/1.4 or the pancake.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 38