September 16, 2014, 07:26:11 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 - mrsfotografie

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 93
226
I was reluctant to shell out $80 for a 50mm f1.8...seems like such a long time ago when I ruined most of my Disney vacation photos... ahhh, sweet nostalgia. 

Stop you - hell go full speed ahead.  They are great lenses.
Nice one and I think if you shoot with Canon long enough, the great white fever eventually gets you :)

I have three small whites, does that count too? ;)

Mini whites.  Not quite the great one, but still white fever
I was trying to think of a witty reply...but I had white fever for the 70-200 in my early days - back when I would say to myself, "How could I ever spend over $500 on a lens?" Then I made the fooli$$$h decision to shoot wildlife :o

Yeah I remember when I thought 150 Euro's for a Sigma 70-300 was way too expensive. Mind you, the EOS 50e + Canon EF 28-80 mm f/3.5-5.6 IV USM I was using at the time was given to me out of old company equipment at the end of my internship. That's what got me into the EOS system by the way.

227
Canon General / Re: What's Would You Keep? [The anti-G.A.S. thread]
« on: July 11, 2014, 03:19:18 PM »
As you say, old MF lenses provide a cheap, engaging adventure, often with superb results too.

I like the way you put it, and it's so true. I picked up a Sigma FDn 70-210mm 3.5-4.5 APO the other day that gives stunning results on my NEX, both with a Metabones Speed Booster and without. It's strange to say, and unexpected for a Sigma, but optically that lens is in 'L' territory. Maybe that's why it (deservedly) carries a red stripe.

228
Stop you - hell go full speed ahead.  They are great lenses.
Nice one and I think if you shoot with Canon long enough, the great white fever eventually gets you :)

I have three small whites, does that count too? ;)

Mini whites.  Not quite the great one, but still white fever
I was trying to think of a witty reply...but I had white fever for the 70-200 in my early days - back when I would say to myself, "How could I ever spend over $500 on a lens?" Then I made the fooli$$$h decision to shoot wildlife :o

Actually I consider the 70-200 f/4's the 'mini' whites.

229
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: A Summary of Sigma Lens Rumors
« on: July 11, 2014, 01:34:25 PM »
Well, I didn't find any decent samples from Ʃ20mm f/1.8 when I was looking for something really wide and the reviews weren't very promising either. So I just skipped it and grabbed a Samyang 14/2.8UMC. However, I was considering the 12-24mm DG HSM zoom too, but Sigma's QC was awful back then. Crazy copy variation lottery wasn't very tempting, rather scary. Maybe Art version of 12-24mm is more realistic and reasonable expectation. The new(ish) Sigma 8-16mm DC HSM is very good.
And yeah, that macro feature is a very nice and unique selling point. I hope Sigma will include it in their next 24mm.

That feature alone make the 20mm Sigma a lens worth having IMHO. I consider it one of my specialty/fun lenses that may not win any technical awards but it sure is a great creative tool if used wisely.

I've attached two samples shot with this lens that show its capabilities.  Both shot with a 5D MkII.

Nice shots. But when I look closely I see f/8, the uniqueness is lost :) and the 20mm doesn't have that feature, or does it? I think it is 1:4+ at MFD, similar to many other wide angle lenses like 17-40L.

The MFD is shorter; 0.2m.

Attached: f/2.5, f/1.8. Hand held.

It is a lens I use rarely, so it's fine by my standards.

230
Canon General / Re: What's Would You Keep? [The anti-G.A.S. thread]
« on: July 11, 2014, 12:04:04 PM »
Damn this thread has gotten me to think about the 300 f/2.8 L IS II again  >:(
Want to go halfsies?

No-- full swing  8)  ??? ::)  :-[

erhhh  :-[

231
Lenses / Re: UPDATE: Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 (1st gen., metal mount)
« on: July 11, 2014, 12:00:36 PM »
I sold this lens within a few days of advertising it on CL. The guy who bought it was more than happy to pay my full asking price of $180. We both went away happy with that deal.

Whoa this lens is a great investment, nevertheless I'm hanging on to mine  ;D ;D ;D

232
Canon General / Re: Seeing Rebels....
« on: July 11, 2014, 11:57:05 AM »
Am I the only one who doesn't care what mode random people use?

No you are not the only one.  I try to spend the majority of my time not worrying about what other people do. 

Besides, for a tourist picture, there is nothing wrong with setting the camera on Automatic.  Nothing.

To the vast majority of the people who own DSLRs, it is a tool to take a picture.  Nothing more or less.  Besides the automatic setting on modern DSLRs does a pretty good job.

Really?
About proper shutter speed? About DOF? about focus on the subject that you intended to focus?

Yup, Really.   ;D  Automatic handles all that stuff pretty well these days. 

If some one just wants a snapshot of something on vacation, automatic is most likely all they will need. 

Now if they want to take a more technical or artistic picture, then of course, automatic is limiting.  But how many tourists care about that?  Percentage wise, I think we can round that to the nearest zero.   ;D

In my opinion, what tourists care about is being able to take the picture quickly, easily, and reliabily so they can get on with what they were doing -- enjoying being there.  ;D

That's the difference between a tourist and a photographer.  A tourist enjoys being there, a photographer is too worried about the picture to enjoy being there.  LoL  :P :P

But seriously, it is all about what the shooter is looking for in their picture.  Not every picture needs to be artistic.  Some may just want a snapshot to share.

Tourists are on holiday, not a photography shoot. Let them enjoy their holidays and their snapshots. Life is complicated enough as it is.

I find it quite challenging to combine photography with my holidays; it's a bit of a trade-off so when I'm not quite satisfied with the results, I remind myself I had a great holiday :)

233
Regardless of weight, I use my 1Ds Mk3 plus 70-200 2.8 ll more often than any other lens. Having owned and tested a multitude of 70-200 variations and not finding any to be nearly as sharp as my primes, my Mk2 now out-resolves all my other lenses in this range.

This lens is also the reason why I have no primes in those focal lengths, save the 100L macro.

234
Canon General / Re: What's Would You Keep? [The anti-G.A.S. thread]
« on: July 11, 2014, 11:50:16 AM »
Damn this thread has gotten me to think about the 300 f/2.8 L IS II again  >:(

235
Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm Art 1.4 Focusing problems
« on: July 11, 2014, 11:48:48 AM »
A short update:

I got my 50A back from the shop, and lo and behold, the inconsistency was gone. Sigma representative said they adjusted the lens to a standard body, and then returned it. Now the lens was back focusing either when approached from INF or MFD, which is OK from my books as I've tools to correct that. So Sigma dock it is, and 20 mins of adjustments later, I was ready for real life testing.

In the 300 photos I took last evening, I didn't see focus errors, and got a very good keeper ratio. The lens is now working, and actually seems to be sharp enough that I actually need to decrease camera sharpening preset for JPEGs.

EDIT: I'll have to say that this lens rocks! The background blur stopped down is a definite improvement over Canon's 50/1.4!

Yep, it's great idea of Sigma's...make an expensive device to get customers to do their work for them.
You pay Sigma to spend you time correcting their sloppy manufacturing errors. Maybe Ford should make cars which only drive properly after you buy their laptop software to interface with it....

Actually I know of some people who fiddle with their car's engine management using... a laptop.

236
I have the 2.8 II, love it, but for travel I take the 70-300L.

+1

The 70-300L delivers staggeringly good image quality, I had to buy and use one to believe it ;)

Also, it collapses to a significantly shorter length than the 70-200 f/4 and will fit upright in most camera bags.

237
I like 2.8 ii. It works well with 1.4x iii tc. With br strap, the weight should not be a problem.

I regularly use it with a 1.4x II and the performance with that TC also remains excellent. I see no reason to invest in the Mk III.

The 2.8 IS is quite a heavy monster, but it's a magical monster. Worth it!!!

238
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: A Summary of Sigma Lens Rumors
« on: July 11, 2014, 01:58:11 AM »
Well, I didn't find any decent samples from Ʃ20mm f/1.8 when I was looking for something really wide and the reviews weren't very promising either. So I just skipped it and grabbed a Samyang 14/2.8UMC. However, I was considering the 12-24mm DG HSM zoom too, but Sigma's QC was awful back then. Crazy copy variation lottery wasn't very tempting, rather scary. Maybe Art version of 12-24mm is more realistic and reasonable expectation. The new(ish) Sigma 8-16mm DC HSM is very good.
And yeah, that macro feature is a very nice and unique selling point. I hope Sigma will include it in their next 24mm.


That feature alone make the 20mm Sigma a lens worth having IMHO. I consider it one of my specialty/fun lenses that may not win any technical awards but it sure is a great creative tool if used wisely.

I've attached two samples shot with this lens that show its capabilities.  Both shot with a 5D MkII.

239
You know you want one - just do it!
The only question is which one. To me there are only two choices, either the 800mm or 600mm, I suppose you could include the 500mm for mobility.
Many people go on about lenses being too long - this is the opposite of my experience, in fact on only 2 occasions has my 800mm proved too long normally it's too short!

I most definitely would go for the 300 f/2.8 IS II because it's not too heavy of a monster and you have the option of extending its range using tele converters. Such a lens would have to get a lot of use from me, and I usually don't have a need for 400mm plus.

240
Canon General / Re: What's Would You Keep? [The anti-G.A.S. thread]
« on: July 11, 2014, 01:39:44 AM »
If I really HAD to get rid of almost everything then I would keep my 1DX and 800 F5.6 L, if I was allowed I would also keep my 24-105 (which I use occasionally) - the 1DX is virtually glued to the 800!

Dam...bird shooter  ;D

That's great, when you're so specialized, you can concentrate all your money there making that big white a lot more affordable than if you want to maintain a whole range of other lenses.

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 93