November 26, 2014, 07:54:05 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 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 97
91
Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: September 02, 2014, 12:47:52 PM »
I need 200-500 4.0-5.6 L I S  8)

As far as I remember, there is a pretty good 200-560 4.0-5.6 L IS...  ;)

If only every wish were answered that perfectly ;)

92
Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: September 02, 2014, 02:09:33 AM »
No 100-400 replacement! This is the first time in a long long time that the rumour has been no replacement. Four years of saying it will come and now "no it won't".

First 100-400 rumour that I believe and I will be the first to laugh if it is wrong again :)

I think everybody's got it wrong and it will be a 400-100L, and it will be reverse engineered from the original.

93
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: September 01, 2014, 03:32:39 PM »
I dunno wheather post my composition into City subsection or here... 'cause its the opposite of "nature":

Shinjuku Split by davidcl0nel, on Flickr

That's excellent, I like the day&night effect. Very artistic. Tokyo is also a cool city (I've been there myself!).

94
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samyang Teases New Lenses
« on: September 01, 2014, 01:00:44 PM »
Samy need AF or they will go only for video.

But that is not the case...we`ll see...

For work i prefer af 1.8 not 1.4 mf.....  on the field you need fast and accurate af and that why we pay all that money for complex af systems.

If not...deam i will stay with 5d original and 3-4 samy`s

The MkII also pairs very nicely with MF, or even AF primes, one reason it stays in my kit :)

95
A related question:  how many non-Nikon shooters go to Nikon forums to complain about Nikon?

From what I've seen, many of the most vocal complainers on CR don't use Canon gear.  Some of them used to shoot Canon.  So why are they here?

Have they 'found religion' and are here to 'convert' the great unwashed masses?

Do they have inner doubts about their choices, and coming here to complain about Canon helps them continue to justify their decisions?

Do they think they're being altruistic, devoting their time and energy to show us poor, deluded fools how bad we have it, and how good it could be if only we make the same choices they made?

Do they honestly want Canon to deliver products that would meet their own needs, however niche those needs are, and somehow believe that complaining here will help accomplish that?

Or...do they merely want to sow discord?

Frankly, the vast majority of CR forum members are here to request and provide information, share techniques and images, etc.  CR is a great community resource, and like nearly all successful Internet forums, it attracts a few incessant complainers.   Look on the bright side – they provide some entertainment on slow rumor days...

I've never figured this out.  It happens with almost any product.  I'll see an article about a new iphone and most of the posts are from people criticizing it.  If I see an article, post, forum, etc. related to a product I don't want, use, or have an interest in, I don't read it, let alone leave negative comments.  What's up with these people?

Some people just don't understand the gear they're using. Quite often gear is unjustly being criticized for what is essentially user error. For example - "my lens is soft at 300mm" well ok but then that's to expect with a shutterspeed of only 1/20s :p

96
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: September 01, 2014, 12:05:40 PM »
Prepare for the big waves...


That's a very interesting image. Well done.

97
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: September 01, 2014, 12:02:54 PM »
Another shot (5D MkIII + 17-40).


Sunset on the lake
by Giuseppe Cammino, on Flickr

On 500px --> http://500px.com/photo/81375833/sunset-on-the-lake-by-giuseppe-cammino?from=user_library

That's a great shot. The 17-40 will soon become an underrated lens  :-\

98
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samyang Teases New Lenses
« on: September 01, 2014, 12:01:21 PM »
http://vimeo.com/104693016

That's a nice teaser; aiming at the videographer obviously. I don't yet see a major advantage vs let's say the Sigma 1.4 EX.

99
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: September 01, 2014, 11:53:50 AM »
Just a flower...

Lovely

Interestig bokeh/background. Almost looks like a painted glass window.

100
EOS-M / Re: Finally a 50mm for EOS-M...
« on: September 01, 2014, 02:13:58 AM »
...from Samyang without autofocus.  :-\  Why hasn't anyone made this standby focal length yet??
Sigma offers some very good lenses for EOS-M at very affordable prices. Check them

Sorry, no. This has been dissussed before:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=12658.0

101
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: August 31, 2014, 03:04:23 PM »
Not sure this is a landscape, but it's a massive panorama anyway (this is downsized to 1080 pixels height). Enjoy :)

102
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: August 31, 2014, 05:15:18 AM »
with the 20 set f8 hard stop infinity and everything from 2m to infinity is in focus anyway its a wicked point and shoot when used like this.

I have a 12mm Samyang that I use on my Sony, and I've not quite figured out what is the 'ideal' setting for that lens. I use focus peaking but found that OOF areas with high contrast are still shown as being in focus. Wide angle MF can be really challenging, and I think I need more practice to build the necessary confidence.

103
Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: August 30, 2014, 02:38:16 PM »
Wow, good catch.
Upvote for you!
For folks who don't know, in Windows a right click on image, and "Search Google for this image" is about as easy as can be.


One question, when did I ever say the 400 DO wasn't sharp or took TC's well? Because it reads to me like he is calling people that say those things idiots, and his images prove they are.

Nope, you said "horrible bokeh".  There are several pictures in that post (and elsewhere on the internet) showing the bokeh of the lens.  It is not, in any way, "horrible".

What he doesn't show you is stuff like this that demonstrates what DO do to bokeh and how they handle specular highlights, you might have noticed not one of Mr Morris' images has any specular highlights, did you wonder why? No, of course you didn't, you are too obtuse to do that.

No, its probably because it isn't actually a problem in real world shooting situations and you are blowing it way out of proportion.  Bryan from The Digital Picture had this to say about it:

"The Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM Lens has been criticized for its poor specular highlight bokeh (OOF blur quality), but I have seldom encountered this problem. Specular highlights can have a target-appearance at worst - concentric circles instead of a smooth blur. I can't say I like the bokeh of this lens more than Canon's other 400mm Lenses, but the 400mm focal length combined with a relatively wide aperture can very nicely separate a subject from its background."

If you are happy to pay $6,500 for a lens that does that then I suspect you are the idiot, after buying them for that much many owners are happy to sell them for $3,500 to get rid of them, maybe they are the idiots.

One thing I will agree with you on is that I think the lens is too expensive and a new version isn't likely to be cheaper.  It would be stellar if it was priced at about 2/3 or 1/2 of the 300 f2.8 IS II.  One of the promises of DO technology is that it is easier to eliminate chromatic aberration (a huge problem with traditional optical designs lens manufacturers have struggled with for decades that, curiously, doesn't completely invalidate the entire technology...) so fluorite lens elements aren't needed for high end telephotos which should make them cheaper to manufacture but, well, Canon. *shrug*

One last thing - that photo you posted is pretty disingenuous.  Were you just not going to mention that it was taken with the very different 70-300 f4-5.6 DO?  Just going to allow that to be inferred by people who didn't bother to do a reverse GIS? The 70-300 DO exhibits far more problems than the 400 f4 DO and is reviewed a lot more harshly for a number of reasons related to its IQ.  If you've got a sample that demonstrates the absolutely horrendous disaster that is the 400 f4  DO, I'm all eyes, but make sure its the 400 f4 DO and not that other lens.

Thanks, for killing another internet lie.

And no thanks for making me want the 400 DO even more  >:(

 ;)

104
Lenses / Re: Your favorite older EF lens
« on: August 29, 2014, 01:42:41 PM »
50mm f/1.8 MkI. Hands down  8)

My old 24mm f/2.8 would be a very close second.  I would say I "mistakenly" sold it if you ask me today.  I should have kept it.  But I sold it when I had, variously, the 17-40 L, 24-105 L, and 24-70 L.  I wish I had it today as a small, lightweight complement to the 40mm pancake for my "running" kit that I carry while running and covering ultramarathons.  Sometimes I need something wider, and the 17-40 is just too much lens to carry when I'm running for hours around 50 or 100 mile running routes trying to get the shots.

I recently bought a 24mm f/2.8 with the original hood. It's a totally cool little wide angle. Makes you wonder why all these lenses are so large nowadays.

105
Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: August 29, 2014, 01:28:37 PM »
Wow! a new 400/4 with ISII and improved optics surely.

Light in weight so tough competition for the heavier 500/4 and the possibility of a good 560/5.6 - probably much better than the 300/2.8 with 2xTc.

Yes this would be totally cool!  8)

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 97