July 23, 2014, 02:33:53 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 - extremeinstability

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
16
Lenses / 24-70 II Corners
« on: December 12, 2013, 12:34:43 PM »
I'm just wondering if this should be expected for corners at 50mm and 70mm at F4 with this lens full frame. 

http://www.extremeinstability.com/2470-50-f4.jpg
http://www.extremeinstability.com/2470-70-f4.jpg

Nice and crisp in the middle but goes pretty damn crappy up and away much while not at the 24mm end.  Never used a good standard zoom on full frame till now.  I'm probably expecting too much from a zoom on full frame.  Or this is a bad copy, which sounds there have been plenty of.   Really don't know.

Thanks

17
Cute.  Black Friday and Cyber Monday are such great deals now lol.  What is this called?  "Oh crap we didn't go low enough Wednesday."  Sigh.  Didn't they give people the price cut on like lightroom or something when it came out much cheaper right after something?  Wonder how many e-mails they are receiving now. 

18
Lenses / Re: Make it stop! (Photo pun not intended)
« on: November 30, 2013, 10:53:07 PM »
After seeing the 300 I don't feel so bad about my GAS(24-70L II ordered today).

19
Canon General / Re: So what have we bought this Black... Er, Weekend?
« on: November 30, 2013, 09:48:43 PM »
Going to have to pull the trigger on the 24-70L II at BH for that deal.  Must first get some idea if I can get $1k for my Zeiss 21 and $300 for a Sigma 50 to help pay for it.

You can absolutely get $1k for your Zeiss 21, I was thrilled to pay $1400 for a used one, that was by far the cheapest I'd seen it used. Granted that could just be because they haven't been around that long, but seriously don't sell it for $1k, waaayyy too cheap.

Yeah I did the same thing.  Got it last year from lensrentals for $1400 and haven't used it much.  It was even a crazy res one.  Probably the only lens I've seen them state "obscenely high resolution" and list it at 24/24 lines per/mm.  Crazy some of the same lens will say 20/20, a lot actually.  With quite a few at 22/22.

I'm just bad with selling lenses.  I just want to move them so sell them too cheap.  Though I haven't quite talked myself into going to $1000 yet.  But did just order that 24-70 and sold the Sigma 50.  I'd probably be content getting $1000.  Lens rentals has one for $1300 right now or did.  Should probably just try that out. 

20
Canon General / Re: So what have we bought this Black... Er, Weekend?
« on: November 30, 2013, 04:11:29 PM »
Going to have to pull the trigger on the 24-70L II at BH for that deal.  Must first get some idea if I can get $1k for my Zeiss 21 and $300 for a Sigma 50 to help pay for it. 

21
Lenses / Re: Lens dilemma for night sky
« on: November 20, 2013, 02:15:59 PM »
This isn't done yet, but I recently rented the Canon 14, 24, 16-35 and 17-40 along with my Samyang 14 and 24 and Zeiss 21 to test exactly this stuff.  http://www.extremeinstability.com/lenses.html  Guessing you can get the idea from that right now.  The Samyang 14 and 24 can both be used wide open on stars no problem.  Canon's are a joke on stars.  And otherwise still aren't worth the money.  Unless one doesn't care for corners I guess.

extremeinstability, when I said Lenstip was about the only place I had seen coma tests, your site was the other site, but I didn't have your URL.  Thanks for posting and keep up the great tests!


Yeah lens tip was the only place I've seen it too.  I never paid much attention to it till I bought a Canon 24L II and tried to shoot the night sky with it.  Heck didn't even know about it till then.  Using that I was like, holy crap what the hell, the outer third at least of the sky is ruined lol.  Then found lens tip and well swapped that Canon for the Zeiss 21.  Eventually wound up with the Samyang 14 and 24s which are quite scary good.  I now need to get the 24 centered if that is the issue because its good side is just straight up ridiculous at F1.4 even.  And the bad side is still as good as the Canon 24L II wide open lol.  It just matters where the focus is set at infinity. I need to get it back out at night and make sure I set it so it is splitting the difference.  Then compare to the Canon again.  But it has to be better.  It's worlds better with coma. 

22
Lenses / Re: Lens dilemma for night sky
« on: November 20, 2013, 02:10:26 PM »
I will be adding full size image examples for download once I get that far.  But at least on the 16-35 and 17-40 these two should give one an idea.  Only 6 seconds long so no moving stars like the edges look. 

http://www.extremeinstability.com/lenstestimages/blurring-canon1635.jpg
http://www.extremeinstability.com/lenstestimages/blurring-canon1740.jpg


That should give a person a general idea of the sharpness fall off on either of those lenses wide open at the wide ends.  17-40 seems it holds onto sharpness further out then falls the hell off hard.  Sure one is F4 and the other F2.8.  But clearly it pays to go prime when it comes to corners and stay away from Canon when it comes to coma. 

23
Lenses / Re: Lens dilemma for night sky
« on: November 20, 2013, 01:43:04 PM »
This isn't done yet, but I recently rented the Canon 14, 24, 16-35 and 17-40 along with my Samyang 14 and 24 and Zeiss 21 to test exactly this stuff.  http://www.extremeinstability.com/lenses.html  Guessing you can get the idea from that right now.  The Samyang 14 and 24 can both be used wide open on stars no problem.  Canon's are a joke on stars.  And otherwise still aren't worth the money.  Unless one doesn't care for corners I guess. 

24


-25F with rebels a couple times.  You know it is brutal out when ice water is steaming like mad.   -10F for hours doing star trails with rebels and 5D II.  Only problem that happens is the LCD slowing down. 

25
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Safe to clean the sensor?
« on: November 15, 2013, 08:53:09 PM »
Never had an issue doing the wet cleaning myself.  Usually the blower gets things but sometimes there are a couple that are stuck.  I'll then try a dry swab which usually works.  If not couple drops on the swab and there it goes.  Hardest part is just not streaking at all.  I use the same swab many times without issue too.  Think a sensor has to be pretty damn dirty  to dirty up a swab too much to use it again. 

All you can really do is muck up the clear cover if you somehow manage to do it badly(which is tough).  Then send it in and get fixed in that rare event.  Makes more sense than dumping $50 to a camera store each time.  If that was even an option and you didn't need it cleaned right then. 

26
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 Distagon
« on: November 14, 2013, 09:51:10 PM »
I just rented the Canon 14L II, Canon 24L II, Canon 16-35L II, Canon 17-40L for a day and sent them back yesterday.  I wanted to test them against my Samyang 14 and 24 (and Zeiss 21 for that matter)to be sure what I'd gathered already from images I've got from renting the Canon 14L II and Canon 24L II before I had either of these.  All I could do was compare different scenes.  Now I have them all compared same time/scene at a lot of things.  It's pretty interesting but I have a ton of work ahead to get it all online.  And I haven't even had a chance to look at much yet.  Samyangs of course smoke Canon in coma.  They also smoke them in CA.  The Samyang 14 really hands the Canon 14L II its ass in resolution.  Except in center I guess they are similar.  I've had two of those now from lens rentals which tests them before they send them out.  It's really clear what the results are now.  I haven't looked enough yet but I was getting the impression the Samyang 24 was going to actually best the Canon too.  Of course the primes make the 16-35 and 17-40 both look like S___ in the corners.  Anyway figured I'd comment given the 14 Samyang comments.  The vast majority of folks that get that lens seem to say the same thing, sharp sharp sharp.  Even after one corrects the horrid ocean waves distortion.   

27
Reviews / Re: Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 Wide Angle Review
« on: November 04, 2013, 09:05:21 PM »
I have a few things on this page like vignetting and corner sharpness and a coma and corner sharpness comparison to the 14L II.  I need to rent the 14L II again so I have them at the same time and do some proper comparisons.  http://www.extremeinstability.com/lens14mm.html

28
Lenses / Re: I'm done - I have all the lenses I need
« on: November 03, 2013, 11:02:27 PM »
I'm finally about there after bouncing back and forth from crop to full frame, over not being able to get good enough glass for the full frame. 

For the 6D I now have

Samyang 14 which is really silly good...sharper and less coma than Canon 14
Zeiss 21 which is hard to beat.
Samyang 24 F1.4 just for fast fast wide night and not coma'ing out the ass like Canon 24.

(so glad for Samyang, jeez)

Sigma 50 F1.4 which well is sharper than Canon wide open but eh Canon quickly flies past it even by F2.8.
Canon 100-400L has always been good enough to me.

I really only now desire the 135L and must get it.

29
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon 135 L for $989 + $100 rebate, good deal?
« on: October 27, 2013, 04:30:13 PM »
That is my next lens.  It's a rare fast canon that doesn't coma out the ass with points of lights on full frame.  Thinking it could be quite useful on Comet ISON later this year if the comet is worth a darn.  http://www.lenstip.com/320.7-Lens_review-Canon_EF_135_mm_f_2L_USM_Coma__astigmatism_and_bokeh.html

I'm pondering selling my 100-400 just to have that one.  Go for it.

30
Video & Movie / Storm Time-lapse 6D
« on: October 05, 2013, 11:49:26 PM »
Around 1200 1 second shutters behind the tornadic storms in northwest Iowa last night....  https://vimeo.com/76230613

Canon 6D Sigma 50 F1.4 at F2, 1 second, 200 ISO. 

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