October 22, 2014, 12:12:25 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 - mrsfotografie

Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 95
571
The only time I had the pleasure of having humming birds in the viewfinder was when I was in Costa Rica. Would you believe I was stupid enough to take only a mediocre Canon EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM as my tele-lens (on a full-frame camera, too). While I should have brought the Sigma 150-500 that I owned at the time...
 
Most of these were shot in jpg, because I underestimated the amount of pictures I would take on this fabulous trip and had to save on memory space.

After that I invested in a 100-400, more memory cards, and more time to prepare for my holiday trips ;)

572
Reviews / Re: Review: Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro VC USD
« on: January 24, 2014, 05:08:15 PM »
Personal lens status update: Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro sold, Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM bought! I'm expecting it in the mail tomorrow :)

Congrats!


And to think is was all because of your great review of the excellent new Tamron  :o  ;)

You sold your Tamron because Justin wrote an excellent review of it, and bought the Canon?  Makes no sense...

I've considered buying this new Tamron lens, it looks like a terrific value relative to the Canon.  It might even be as sharp or sharper than the Canon...probably determined mostly by sample variation.  Probably not a lot of difference either way, but mainly I would prefer 90mm to 100mm focal length...besides the lower price.

My main photographic work does not encompass much macro, so that is the main reason I've decided against buying a macro lens.

Well, all things considering, and Dustin's recommendations aside from price I'd say the Canon is the better lens, and promises to retain its value better in the long run :) Besides that I'd like that little extra focal length, I think it will serve me well despite the small difference.

Ah, you mean Justin has found a Tamron lens he doesn't like?  Perhaps I should read over the review!

Errrhh no... the review triggered me to review the way I look at Macro lenses, and the outcome turned out to be slightly unexpected. Consider it a journey, not everything in life is straight forward ;)

573
Reviews / Re: Review: Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro VC USD
« on: January 24, 2014, 03:09:22 PM »
Personal lens status update: Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro sold, Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM bought! I'm expecting it in the mail tomorrow :)

Congrats!


And to think is was all because of your great review of the excellent new Tamron  :o  ;)

You sold your Tamron because Justin wrote an excellent review of it, and bought the Canon?  Makes no sense...

I've considered buying this new Tamron lens, it looks like a terrific value relative to the Canon.  It might even be as sharp or sharper than the Canon...probably determined mostly by sample variation.  Probably not a lot of difference either way, but mainly I would prefer 90mm to 100mm focal length...besides the lower price.

My main photographic work does not encompass much macro, so that is the main reason I've decided against buying a macro lens.

Well, all things considering, and Dustin's recommendations aside from price I'd say the Canon is the better lens, and promises to retain its value better in the long run :) Besides that I'd like that little extra focal length, I think it will serve me well despite the small difference.

574
Reviews / Re: Review: Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro VC USD
« on: January 24, 2014, 01:53:32 PM »
Personal lens status update: Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro sold, Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM bought! I'm expecting it in the mail tomorrow :)

Congrats!

And to think is was all because of your great review of the excellent new Tamron  :o  ;)

575
Canon General / Re: Review: Canon EOS 17-40 f/4L by DxO Mark
« on: January 24, 2014, 01:52:02 PM »
I've read that it is better to get good glass on a cheaper camera than the cheap glass on an expensive camera.  So now the person who takes that advice is being made fun of?

Both should be bought to *match* each other - the consideration to make is that there are basically two sensor types (ff & crop), but a nearly linear choice of lens quality. The ef type is not always "better" than ef-s and vice versa, and in the tele range it's ef anyway no matter the sensor type. Consider this classic:

Pro DSLR + Cheapo Lens vs "Cheapo" DSLR + Pro Lens

I enjoyed that!  ;)

576
Reviews / Re: Review: Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro VC USD
« on: January 24, 2014, 11:33:53 AM »
Personal lens status update: Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro sold, Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM bought! I'm expecting it in the mail tomorrow :)

577
Lenses / Re: Why no 400mm f/4L IS exists?
« on: January 24, 2014, 11:21:09 AM »
I found a little used Nikon 200-400mm f/4 VR on my local craigslist.  A local doctor had bought it and used it twice.  I even bought a used D300s to use playing with it, and a gimbal head, and was still below $3300.  Considering how over priced Nikon lenses usually are, I'll have no problem selling for a lot more if I ever do it.

That is the only Nikon lens I wish Canon had in its line-up (next to /other than the 200-400 1.4x). A former colleague of mine has it and it is absofabolutelyfantastic :)

578
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: January 24, 2014, 10:03:58 AM »
From Banff National Park, Alberta, Canada

More from Banff



Nicely done dpc. I especially like the second and the last one.

+1, a trip to the Canadian Rockies is on my list of places to visit, the last time I was there was 1986 when I was ten, and not yet into photography :P

579
Canon General / Re: Review: Canon EOS 17-40 f/4L by DxO Mark
« on: January 23, 2014, 02:39:43 PM »
... their lens comparison tool is an excellent resource

...if you only shoot in lighting equivalent to a dimly lit warehouse.   ::)

Their Measurements are useful, their Scores and the rankings which are based on them are generally meaningless (except in warehouses ;) ).

I should qualify that be saying their Measurements can be useful, when they're correct.  They weren't for the 70-200 II, but they defended them until they silently updated them.  Their measurements of the 17-40L are also suspect, as they apparently show it's as sharp in the corners as the center wide open, and sharper at f/4 than the 16-35/2.8L II stopped down to f/8 - I don't buy either of those.

Well, they did figure out that it's a great travel lens (at least they got that right), something that is also clearly stated on the Canon Europe website (and I agree!!) Doh!:

http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Zoom/index.aspx

580
Reviews / Re: Review: Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro VC USD
« on: January 23, 2014, 08:30:03 AM »
There's a good chance I'll go for the 'L', also because it may be a bit better investment. So far the bids for my Tamron are a little disappointing because the new version is pushing down the resale value of the old model. As for the Sigma, the way they're updating their lenses I expect a 150mm 'A' shortly. The Sigma is also rather massive, not sure I'd like that.

Thanks for sharing re. gloves to wear. I was in there for about 2 hrs almost continuously holding my camera. I tried to warm my hands in my pockets every once in awhile but as for comfort it was going downhill anyway...

581
Reviews / Re: Review: Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro VC USD
« on: January 22, 2014, 11:49:19 AM »
Here's another shot from this lens:


Frozen by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Fantastic! How do you manage at the low temperatures you experience? I went to an ice sculptures festival at -8C and had really painful fingers afterwards ( I was wearing black painters gloves that are sufficiently warm for most of my 0+ C outings).

Now that I'm digging into macro lenses, I find I'm torn between the new Tammy, the 100mm Canon 'L', and the 150 mm Sigma. They all seem to have some benefits to them. For the Tamron it's price and quality, the Canon has a slightly more pleasing bokeh (if I'm correct) and it would help me reduce my variety in filter sizes, the Sigma has the benefit of a longer working distance and it is a super-apochromatic lens but it has no weather sealing.

Knowing that you own the Canon, would you say it gives more pleasing images than the Tamron? I'm looking for the best and most useful macro here, please do not consider the cost of these lenses as I can afford to buy any one of them (but not all of them ;D ).

582
Salt lake Community College, Salt Lake City, circa 2013, Pinhole Camera made from Beats Earphone box.8 second exposure
This is lovely! Can you share the picture of the camera?
Thanks. That is neat!

My next pinhole will be made from a Canon 70-200 coffee mug!

That's funny. Given the length of the thing I suppose it will also have the effect of a long focal length.

583
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 90mm macro or Sigma 150 OS?
« on: January 21, 2014, 04:56:47 PM »
I'm reviving this topic because currently looking at upgrading my Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di MACRO (mostly because I want a non-extending lens with IS), but am stuck between the:

Tamron SP 90mm F/2.8 Di VC USD MACRO
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS USM Macro
Sigma AF 150mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro OS HSM.

The main issue here is working distance; how important is the focal length if the MFD's are all relatively similar?

So which macro lens should I choose for full frame, my interest is mostly larger subjects such as butterflies. I do like a little extra working distance, but that Sigma is a pretty big lens. Any thoughts?

Dear Friend mrsfotografie.
Ha, Ha, Ha, 1 best Macro lens that you forget to mention = Canon EF 180 mm. F 3.5L Macro USM , That fit to your need,  This Lens that can shoot far away from Butterfly or bees with out  chase them away. Yes I have 6-8 years already and Love this Big Babe too, Plus I still love my Canon EF 100 MM. F/ 2.8 L IS Macro too.
Nice to talk to you, Have a great Late afternoon on this Tuesday.
Surapon

Dear friend Surapon, you have an impressive and interesting flash setup. Very good to have a bracket on the camera, not the body. Thanks for the recommendation of the 180 mm, however I think 150 mm is long enough really AND the 180 has no IS which I really want because I like to do available light + hand-held macro photography as far as the light allows.

The wise decision here seems to me the Canon; it has IS, weather sealing (FWIW) and doubles as a portrait-macro, AND it has a 67mm filter size  which helps me reduce the number of filter sizes I have in my lens collection. Still, I have time to consider...

Edit: it looks like the Canon has is quite significant Longitudinal Chromatic Aberrations (LoCA) at f/2.8; the Sigma is much better in that sense. How is that from a real world perspective?


Dear Friend
"The wise decision here seems to me the Canon; it has IS, weather sealing (FWIW) and doubles as a portrait-macro, AND it has a 67mm filter size  which helps me reduce the number of filter sizes I have in my lens collection. Still, I have time to consider..." = The most smart Idea , + 100 for me too---Special Portrait Lens.

Sorry "  it looks like the Canon has is quite significant Longitudinal Chromatic Aberrations (LoCA) . How is that from a real world perspective?"---Sorry, My Old eyes can not see that LoCA. I just snap shots the subjects and I love that I get with minimum Post Processing.
Good day.
Surapon

Ha, ha looks like the Canon is in the lead ;) Thanks for your real world perspective.

584
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 90mm macro or Sigma 150 OS?
« on: January 21, 2014, 04:35:32 PM »
I'm reviving this topic because currently looking at upgrading my Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di MACRO (mostly because I want a non-extending lens with IS), but am stuck between the:

Tamron SP 90mm F/2.8 Di VC USD MACRO
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS USM Macro
Sigma AF 150mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro OS HSM.

The main issue here is working distance; how important is the focal length if the MFD's are all relatively similar?

So which macro lens should I choose for full frame, my interest is mostly larger subjects such as butterflies. I do like a little extra working distance, but that Sigma is a pretty big lens. Any thoughts?

Dear Friend mrsfotografie.
Ha, Ha, Ha, 1 best Macro lens that you forget to mention = Canon EF 180 mm. F 3.5L Macro USM , That fit to your need,  This Lens that can shoot far away from Butterfly or bees with out  chase them away. Yes I have 6-8 years already and Love this Big Babe too, Plus I still love my Canon EF 100 MM. F/ 2.8 L IS Macro too.
Nice to talk to you, Have a great Late afternoon on this Tuesday.
Surapon

Dear friend Surapon, you have an impressive and interesting flash setup. Very good to have a bracket on the camera, not the body. Thanks for the recommendation of the 180 mm, however I think 150 mm is long enough really AND the 180 has no IS which I really want because I like to do available light + hand-held macro photography as far as the light allows.

The wise decision here seems to me the Canon; it has IS, weather sealing (FWIW) and doubles as a portrait-macro, AND it has a 67mm filter size  which helps me reduce the number of filter sizes I have in my lens collection. Still, I have time to consider...

Edit: it looks like the Canon has is quite significant Longitudinal Chromatic Aberrations (LoCA) at f/2.8; the Sigma is much better in that sense. How is that from a real world perspective?

585
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 90mm macro or Sigma 150 OS?
« on: January 21, 2014, 02:53:28 PM »
I'm reviving this topic because currently looking at upgrading my Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di MACRO (mostly because I want a non-extending lens with IS), but am stuck between the:

Tamron SP 90mm F/2.8 Di VC USD MACRO
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS USM Macro
Sigma AF 150mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro OS HSM.

The main issue here is working distance; how important is the focal length if the MFD's are all relatively similar?

So which macro lens should I choose for full frame, my interest is mostly larger subjects such as butterflies. I do like a little extra working distance, but that Sigma is a pretty big lens. Any thoughts?


Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 95