March 06, 2015, 01:32:40 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 - extremeinstability

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
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.

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.

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.

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

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....

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

Lenses / Re: Best setup for falling stars
« on: August 11, 2013, 11:12:46 AM »
I'd consider sticking a fast 50mm on a full frame and going with that.  That is what I got last year with a Sigma 50 on a 5D II.  20 seconds 1600 ISO apparently on this one then stacked the frames.   

Too bad coma so bad on that lens and well all the fast canons.  This year going to try the Samyang 24 F1.4 on the 6D.  Just because it at least doesn't coma.  14 too wide  unless something crazy happens.  If I had a 50mm that didn't coma I'd probably chose that as the go to lens for this.  35mm probably best on full frame for it.  Hard to say but fast lens helps a lot. 

Everyone that goes out to do that should at least have a cable release they can lock in and let the camera go in consecutive shooting mode. 

Technical Support / Re: Help needes: EOS 7D - noisy pictures
« on: July 03, 2013, 11:42:34 PM »
Looks normal to me.  Flat gray loves to show all the noise from that sensor.  Even 100 ISO can look like that on flat gray, especially at all underexposed.  Been actually going over files getting them ready for stock last couple days and cleaning noise.  It's been a big fat reminder how I never want to go back to crop sensors...because most of what I shoot is full of the same sorta large areas of flatness..that are dying to show off noise.  Got to the point I cringed going out to shoot any foggy scenes. 

Least the full frame options at the moment are more kind for that type of stuff but still can sometimes show some at low isos.  Blue sky is another one but nothing like flat gray.   

Thanks.  Yeah just doing it over and over is what seems to do the trick on everything like that.  Couple times I found a screw driver in the trunk and put that in my pocket lol.  Like least I have a screw driver now.  Bear mace I'd just end up shooting into the wind and getting myself with.  Wonder how hard of a time rattle snakes have biting through tennis shoes.  Probably the one thing I don't give enough respect to when out there.  I'll worry about the random camper or night hiker showing up that wants to steal camera gear lol. 

Thanks.  It was the 14L II. 

I did make it back this year and posted on here, the 6D with Samyang 24 or 14 are much better for this.  Well least the lenses are much better for that use than the Canon's.  6D is also simply a beast with the utlra high ISOs at night.

I use autofocus likely less than 1% of the time I use the camera, so can't say much about that.  What I do use a lot and have used a lot is live view 10x manual focusing.  I want tack sharp and well the eyes ain't going to cut it.  It can be such a tiny ass move on some of these lenses where it is soft or sharp.  I swap out lenses back and forth frequently and it's often night stuff too.  The way they decided to run the live view zoom in, as well as picture review zoom in, has driven me completely nuts being so used to how it really always has been on others.  Live view zoom in you push the live view then hit the magnify button twice, no more plus minus buttons upper right back.  And then on stills to zoom into those after the fact, hit play then magnify button but now you must spin the wheel to zoom in.  Pretty tough to get used to with them being different methods from each other and both different than how it has been.  Will eventually get used to it but so far I waste a lot of time with it. 

It being an utter high ISO beast besting the 5D III makes it worth the hassle to get used to though. 

Lenses / Re: Best lens for capturing the Milky Way?
« on: May 13, 2013, 11:46:01 PM »

Awesome!  Thanks for the links!

I've noticed your images look SIGNIFICANTLY less noisy than mine (taken on a 5D Mk III), what kind of noise-reduction are you using, if any?  A lot of your ISO 20k images look better than my 6400 images! (such as this one:  Are you just using LR's chroma noise reduction?

Great website, love the analysis, super-helpful!

Thanks.  If you look at the second page linked on there those full size examples have zero noise reduction done other than color.  I tried to do some on the smaller sized versions but pretty much it wasn't helping any of them and making them look worse, so most of those don't even have any sized down.  But the full sized crops on the second page were left alone to show the noise/lack of noise.  Pretty amazing sensor up in those extreme ranges.  But a lot of it can just be the scene.  Like if you have any haze or fog it will obviously show noise a lot quicker.  THis was very clear and so also there are a lot more stars too and that added detail tends to hide noise/make it appear better. 

In your opinion, may I acheive a good result with canon 7D too at high iso? better to shoot in RAW I think...

Might get something worthwhile at F1.4 yeah.  Not sure what ISO I'd expect to get away with.  3200 maybe.

I can't go wider than 15 f/3.5 in this moment.... (budget problems!)
Any advices?

All you can do is try and see what happens. Can always shoot moonlit scenes or star trails instead easily enough with slower glass and lower ISOs. 

Lenses / Re: Best lens for capturing the Milky Way?
« on: May 10, 2013, 11:28:31 PM »

I’ve rented the Zeiss 15 and 21’s but I never had good skies while I was renting them so I couldn’t test them.  Anyone test these bad boys out yet?  Curious if the coma is well-controlled or not.

I own the 21 and have at least one example on this page I posted the other day here.  Second page has full sized crops of several lenses.

Extreme corner crop here at full size 20,000 ISO on 6D.  Some coma on just the brightest stars.

Oh and nice shots OP, if only there had been a new moon huh?  And yes the 24L II does have a coma issue even though it's a great lens overall, might have to grab a Samyang.  I haven't experienced coma issues with the 14LII, but I have heard that the Samyang is about just as good (better if you consider the price).  Nice shots/comparison

Yeah I need to get out for the no morning moon/higher Milky Way op.  Kinda wanted the moon for part of it for that op too anyway but for sure now want a no moon op.  May give it a whirl next couple nights but sadly looking at Omaha about 50 miles south.  Getting a completely clear night this year is not an easy task. 

In your opinion, may I acheive a good result with canon 7D too at high iso? better to shoot in RAW I think...

Might get something worthwhile at F1.4 yeah.  Not sure what ISO I'd expect to get away with.  3200 maybe. 

I am thinking about the Samyang 14 too. Is this the VDSLR or just the normal one?

Looks great.

It's this one right here currently on sale till 20th. 

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10