March 01, 2015, 08:04:01 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 - sdsr

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 53
1
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Canon EOS 5D Mark III Body $1999
« on: February 23, 2015, 10:10:28 PM »
I bought mine from them 18 months ago, when the price was rather more than this (recently sold it for more than this too).  It arrived the next day in a kit box minus the kit lens, which they presumably sold separately, and without a US warranty - which ended up being fine as it worked perfectly throughout the time I owned it.  No complaints here.

2
Lenses / Re: Which Lens to buy for Portraits
« on: February 20, 2015, 09:38:43 PM »
If you're only taking portraits in offices on APS-C and c. f8, and have a lens you really like using, I'm not sure what you're hoping to get from a new lens.  Autofocus?  Unless the offices in question are very large or you're doing tight headshots, I wouldn't consider any of the 70-200/300 zooms, especially not the very heavy 2.8II - you're paying a lot extra in money and weight for apertures you're not using (unless you would use the lens for other purposes) and if as I think you said you use a tripod you don't need the IS either.  Even 85mm primes could prove far too long on APS-C.  At the apertures you're considering just about any lens is more than sharp enough for portraits (or are your clients sharpness fanatics who will be presented with images so large that sharpness differences among lenses would be readily apparent?), so if you must buy a new lens that would work on your APS-C I would join those who recommend a fairly inexpensive zoom, such as the 24-105 or a 24-70 (needn't be the expensive Canon 2.8 II for your purposes, either).  But if you like your 50mm, why not wait until you buy a FF body before considering what next?  (I prefer the look of portraits taken with fast primes at wide apertures, generally in the 50-135mm range, but that's another matter....) 

3
Lenses / Re: My "Minimalist" Lens Arsenal on Crop?
« on: February 17, 2015, 08:55:45 PM »
 
       My camera is a 70D and will likely stick with crop.  With that, does this make sense?:
     - Canon 10-18
     - Canon 35 2.0 IS (had a 50mm Sigma Art, but there didn't seem to be a whole lot of difference)
     - Canon 85 1.8
     - Canon 100-400 II (not yet obtained and will possibly sell my 200 2.8 since it's not used a lot and I could use the 85 when really needing the low light performance and the zoom when needing the focal length - although it might be tough at times indoors)
 

The 10-18 is very good (though it's a shame the even better Rokinon 12mm f2 doesn't seem to be available in EF mount), as are the two primes you mention.  The Sigma 35mm Art has better coma control and can provide shallower focus than the 35mm IS, but I'm not sure it has any other advantages and the former may not matter on APS-C anyway.  The 100L suggestion made by others is a marvelous lens too, but if you're trying to be minimalist you may not want the 85 1.8 as well - there's not much difference in focal length between those two.  And since lens size seems to matter to you, are you sure you want the 100-400 rather than, say, the lighter and smaller 70-300L?

4
I've a lot of time for Thom Hogan's comments.

Sure, he knows and uses Nikon kit, but is happy to call out their deficiencies/benefits as well as any other camera maker.


Right - and its presumably because he's primarily a Nikon user that he devotes more space to complaining about Nikon than he does any other company.  (Cf lettherightlensin's post above.)

5
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L Already Shipping in Asia
« on: February 16, 2015, 10:41:15 PM »
Hi,
    Just wonder is the Sony A7 mount is strong enough to support the lens when the camera is mounted on tripod... hmm... Look like they might need to come out an adapter with a tripod collar so that can support this heavy lens on the smaller mirrorless camera.


The metabones EF-E adapters have tripod mounts, though I've no idea whether they're up to the task (I've never used it on mine with any lens).

6
Photography Technique / Re: What is your keeper rate?
« on: February 16, 2015, 02:29:11 PM »
Not sure, but over the past year or so I've largely switched to using old (usually) manual focus prime lenses, reserving AF for things I expect to move in some way that matters; and I'm pretty sure that as a result I delete fewer, in part because I take fewer in the first place and am more careful about composition etc. when I do - as advocates of the manual route keep pointing out, there's something about making the process harder that makes it also more thoughtful and discriminating and the results better.  Of course, some people need to such constraints (and for various types of photography it would merely be a nuisance). 

7
Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!
« on: February 13, 2015, 11:46:06 PM »
My live-in models.  (5DIII + 85mm 1.8 and 70-300L; two are OOC JPEG's whose RAW equivalents I've not yet gotten around to running through LR, though I'm not sure they need much tweaking.)  The uploaded photos here look unpleasantly oversaturated to me, but this will have to do, I suppose.




8
Some great shots.  I love shooting with vintage glass.  My most recent toy is a vintage Zeiss Planar T* 1.7/50mm.  Really quite a beautiful lens, and very sharp when you nail focus.

I share your enthusiasm, an enthusiasm I wouldn't have if mirrorless cameras hadn't made vintage lenses so easy to use; that's probably the chief appeal to me of the Sony a7 line - not the resolution, not the dynamic range, but the fact that they're so far the only FF mirrorless option.

I probably have too many c. 50mm lenses already, but you certainly make this one look appealing - then again, I suspect you could make any lens look good....  I love the colors (among other things) in this photo.

9
Lenses / Re: Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art announced..
« on: February 12, 2015, 12:10:36 AM »

As far as I'm concerned coma is the one area where it most obviously beats the Canon 35 IS (aside from max. aperture, of course). 
I start to wonder if I have a defect copy...


I don't think so - the sample you posted looks about right.  I didn't mean to suggest - nor did the lenstip review show - that it had no coma wide open; rather, in my experience it's better than the alternatives I've used/seen. If I remember right, it's completely gone by c. f2.5, while - say - the Canon 35mm IS starts out far worse and takes much more stopping down to remove.  If you poke around in the reviews at lenstip I don't think you'll find better fast 35mm coma performance on FF (the Canon 35L is terrible).  Maybe Leica can do better....  (I've not tested my Sony/Zeiss 35mm 2.8 for coma, but one might hope that a slower lens would have less of it....)

10
Lenses / Re: Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art announced..
« on: February 11, 2015, 02:01:17 PM »
The Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art has very little coma wide open.
Is your experience perhaps from using it on APS-C? From what I recall on FF, the coma was not subtle. I will search for samples or obtain new ones tonight, weather permitting.

My experience (FF only) matches lenstip's:

http://www.lenstip.com/359.7-Lens_review-Sigma_A_35_mm_f_1.4_DG_HSM_Coma__astigmatism_and_bokeh.html

As far as I'm concerned coma is the one area where it most obviously beats the Canon 35 IS (aside from max. aperture, of course). 

11
My cheapest old lens is a Vivitar 135mm 2.8, which came with its original leather case, all in excellent condition, for $30.  My most expensive is a Minolta 58mm 1.2, which cost rather more than that, but still much less than any current 1.2 lens.  Here are two via the former, one via the latter (an unintended grab of an unexpected sunset as I was leaving my apt. a couple of evenings ago).   I should probably not add any more non-Canon shots....

12
I guess we should try to stick with Canon equipment here, which limits me somewhat as my old cheap gear consists of lenses which I only use on non-Canon mirrorless bodies, and only one of those lenses is a Canon, an FD 55mm 1.2 which I seldom use because I haven't yet found an adapter I like using it with; and I won't claim that any of these are great, but here are five (I hope their self-explanatory labels will accompany them):


13
Lenses / Re: Advice on Canon PRIMES
« on: February 10, 2015, 03:56:53 PM »
Hi everyone - thanks for all your input.  I guess I'm venturing into primes wanting to not be lazy with my zooms, be more creative and after better IQ in lower light situations, shallower DOF etc.  I know I have some great lenses, but I can get some of these lenses at great prices very soon & didnt want to pass up the opporunity.

I guess I was referring more to bettering my street photography, candid people shots (more candid people shots than actual posed portraits), so possibly the 35mm and 85mm would be good options.

Ive heard that there can be issues hand holding the 135mm re sharpness, any truth to that ? Ive read that people go with the 100mm with IS instead, but is this lens primarily for macro (which I dont do a lot)

Also the 85mm 1.2 may not be worth the extra money due to bulk especially when the 1.8 performs nearly as well ?

If by "candid" you mean photographing people who aren't aware you're taking their photo (or who you hope won't notice), you may be better off with greater distance - 35mm would likely be too short; 85mm may be too; though this depends in part on what the environment is: how much available space there is, how crowded the scene is, etc.  Very fast, accurate AF helps in such situations too, which would likely rule out the 85L and, if you're likely to be changing the distance from your subject a great deal, maybe the 100L wouldn't be ideal either (wonderful though it is in every other way).  AF on the 85 1.8 and 135L is very fast and accurate (same for the 100 f2, apparently, though I've not used one); the 85 1.8 and 100 f2 have the additional advantages of being small, relatively inconspicuous, light and inexpensive.  The main flaw of the 85 1.8 is purple fringing, but the 85L is at least as bad (though it has a "look" the 85 1.8 can't quite match).  I probably use a fast 50mm more than any other prime, but I don't know what I would recommend there for use on Canon (the ones I use are all cheap old MF lenses that I use on Sony mirrorless bodies).

14
Lenses / Re: Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art announced..
« on: February 10, 2015, 03:14:53 PM »

Indeed, though the 50 and 35mm Art unfortunately have quite poor coma wide open. The press release gives some hope, but I will also wait for a reputable review. A low-coma 24/1.4 would be a dream. The Samyang 24/1.4 seems to be the best so far in that respect (though don't know about the crazy expensive Zeiss).


Which fast 35mm lenses have less coma than the Sigma Art?  I haven't tried all that many, but even though it wasn't perfect the copy I briefly owned was far better in terms of coma than, say, the Canon 35mm IS.

15
I'm just wondering if English Heritage would like some pictures of a pretty, scantily clad maiden suspended in ropes in front of one of their castles ? Hmmm, sounds quite kinky, I'm beginning to warm to the idea. Maybe I should try it at home first.........

Please do! Selfies of you scantily clad and suspended with ropes from your living room ceiling would certainly be more entertaining than this ad.  Probably more enlightening, too: all they tell us (they don't *show* us) is that ISO 1600 images, viewed on a small monitor, look "clean" - which would surely be true of images taken with just about any Canon camera made in the past five years or so....

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 53