April 17, 2014, 05:56:27 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 - ahsanford

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 35
2
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art
« on: April 16, 2014, 02:06:12 PM »

Continuing the > discussion, just speculating now, where will the long-rumored new Canon non-L 50mm F/nooneknows IS USM lens fall in that comparison?

For sharpness, I'd say:
Canon 50 f1.8 < Canon 50L < Canon f1.4 and Sigma f1.4 < New Canon 50 < Sigma 50 art < otus. 
(I put that old Sigma and Canon 1.4 in the same sharpness bucket as many reports conflict on that.)

For the overall likelihood I'll use it, the 'math' changes for me:
Otus < Canon 50 f1.8 < Canon 50L < Canon f1.4 and Sigma f1.4 < Sigma 50 art < New Canon 50

I say that because...

(a) I'm an AF user at that length 100% of the time (sorry, Otus)
(b) IS and much lower weight/size are big upsides for the new Canon
(c) Given the nice (but not best in class) sharpness improvements seen in the 24/28/35 non-L IS refreshes, I'm fairly certain the Canon 50 IS will bridge some of the gap between the Canon 1.4 and the Sigma Art.
(d) As stated before, I rarely shoot wider than F/2

Curious to see everyone's thoughts on where their money is going between the new 50 Art and Canon's long-rumored non-L IS refresh.

- A


3
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art
« on: April 16, 2014, 01:39:01 PM »

Simple... most people would agree if cost isn't considered... And I think for me I want to see

Canon 50 f1.8 < Canon f1.4 < Sigma f1.4 < Canon 50L < Sigma 50 art < otus. 

But I understand it isn't that simple...

For me, and what I shoot (i.e rarely wider than F/2), your relationship chart is just about right.

Others who live in those crazy wide apertures will clearly debate where the L goes in that list.

- A

4
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art
« on: April 15, 2014, 04:49:19 PM »

I know some of TDP's data has been discussed, but just today Bryan Carnathan put up some convenient head to heads in the 50mm range:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=9491

Compares the 50 Art against a host of 50-55mm alternatives.

- A

5
Bryan Carnathan's most excellent TDP website has posted a very nice head to head of IQ of the Sigma 50 Art against 7 similar focal length primes, including the Canon L, Canon 50 1.4 and the Zeiss Otus:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=9491

His IQ comparisons are fun if you haven't used them before.  You mouseover the sample shot and the arrow indicator flips to show what image is being shown.  You can change the aperture and see what changes, and he'll eventually even run the same test on crop body (note: he only has FF data on the new Sigma 50 right now). 

By my eyes on these sample shots, the new Sigma Art thoroughly trounces the Canon 50L (as expected) and the Canon 50 F/1.4 (though it's pretty similar after F/4 or so).  The Zeiss, to me, looks sharper wide open, esp. in the corners.  Maybe that's what +$3k buys for you.  :P

Of course, this is not the end-all be-all for a lens review.  I'm sure Bryan will write quite an opus on this one in the next week or two.

But it's looking good.  Have at it and see for yourself!

- A





6
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Coming Shortly
« on: April 11, 2014, 01:49:24 AM »

They formally updated the weight on the web page, btw.  It's been AWOL since it was listed the very first announcement day and then it was unceremoniously yanked.

But it's official:  815 g / 28.7 oz 

- A

7
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Gets Reviewed
« on: April 05, 2014, 04:11:53 PM »

One more thing learned -- weighs 28 oz /  1.75 lb / 0.8 kg.

- A

8
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma Announces Acquisition of Samyang
« on: April 01, 2014, 01:27:25 PM »
April fool?


Probably, I cannot find that news on Sigma's website.


Not probably.  Definitely.  It came from TDP.  They are just having a laugh.

Did you see their other April Fool's joke?
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=9393

- A

9
Let the record show that the brilliant OP (two thumbs aimed at *this* guy) that came up with a topic that led to 7 pages of discussion that didn't....

...have someone be a d-bag to someone else.
...devolve into a physics rant, applications of charts and graphs, etc.
...have the dynamic range people hijack the thread.
...have people whine about the pace of Canon's development pipeline.

In short, I got 7 pages of honest opinion and debate that was insightful, on-topic and respectful.  I am so proud of this forum.  Nice work.

Verdict:  After careful consideration, I think I still want this lens (in a G.A.S. way), but even at that great price, my money would better be served elsewhere. 

  • I need a best in class autofocusing 50mm for all-purpose use (read: I will use it somewhere other than wide open, so the 50L is out.  :P)  I've been waiting for either the Sigma 50 F/1.4 Art or Canon's hammerlock future offering of the "50 that does everything 8-9 out of 10 well" a.k.a. 50mm non-L F/wehavenoclue IS USM, so the money might go there instead.
  • Throughout this thread, people continued to rave about the 85L.  I feel it's a specialist portraiture tool given it's focus speed (and I like all my lenses to serve multiple purposes given the range of things I shoot), but I should keep it in mind in the future.
  • I should not covet magical lenses in similar focal lengths to other magical lenses I own.  I need to use my wonderful 70-200 more often.

You folks rock.  Truly, thank you.

- A

10
The 135L has so many other great uses other than indoor sports. Except for Macro and Supertele I have and can use it in almost any situation with the proper sneaker zooming. I put this lens in the same category as the 85 1.2. It has a unique look and color unlike any other Canon lens.If you can get it , get it, especially if it's through the Refurb program at 696.

So did they end up sending you the refurb'd 135mm after all?

Still listed as out of stock at this time.  I expect it will get restocked, but possibly not during this (20% off) sale window.

- A

11
I have both.  I primarily use the 135 for indoor sports such as basketball and volleyball.  That extra stop of light helps out a bunch when you need a fast shutter speed, especially for volleyball in a not so well lit gymnasium.

I don't have the 70-200 II (yet, maybe some day) but I have the 135L and the 200L, both of which get used for indoor sports (mostly roller hockey).  For me the extra stop is huge.  I've played with the 70-200 II and it is a nice lens if you have that extra stop of light.

There are lots of reasons to like the 135 but I think the one reason to _need_ it is low light action stuff.  Personally, mine doesn't get used since I got the 200 and full frame (5DIII).  But if the 7DII is as good a
sensor as the 5DIII then I'd have that w/ the 135 on it as a much lighter and discreet setup.

There are two current 200L primes, lest we forget.  I'm guessing that you are referring to the F/2L IS?

- A

12

Great discussion, all.  I really appreciate all of your perspectives.

- A

13
I am (somewhat surprisingly) not hearing "The 135L truly is magic" over the 100L and 70-200 F/2.8L. 

We all have our pet peeves, one of mine is the "unique look" from the 135 meme, there have been a few threads here where people have very aggressively stated that look as fact and I have rebuffed that by posting images from both that nobody has reliably, consistently or correctly guess which lens was used, even the most committed die hard got one right out of 8, call me crazy but it takes hard work to get less the 50% correct.

I am not saying there is no difference, or that one doesn't have features over the other, or indeed that owning both is pointless, but from an image point of view it has been fairly well put to rest that there is not a "unique look". After that it does come down to specs.
I'm surprised, too, and would have been one of those people before I used the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II.  It really is that good and the 135 only has some subtle differences in IQ.

Agreed -- I love my 70-200 F/2.8L IS II.  But with its size and weight, it often stays at home unless I know I'll need it.  If there's a likelihood of sports / outdoor kids / wildlife, it comes along.  If I'm just bringing my camera in case I see something I want to shoot, I stick with either the 24-70 or a combo of two of the 28, 50 and 100 primes.  (Again:  Enthusiast.  I'm sure pros have different thought processes for gear selection.)

That 70-200 is so good, one wonders if a future Mk III might focus on non-traditional improvement areas.  They might go after a dramatic weight reduction like with the superteles instead of pursuing major optical changes.

- A

14

Do you need the extra stop of light @ 135mm?  The lighter, black lens that doesn't draw as much attention?  My son plays indoor basketball and F/2.8 just wasn't cutting it for my shutter speed; the 135L did the trick.

I am (somewhat surprisingly) not hearing "The 135L truly is magic" over the 100L and 70-200 F/2.8L.  In that case, this becomes strictly a spec discussion, i.e. just a matter of size/weight/speed/DOF needs.

Then it boils down to:

  • One extra stop of speed for indoor sports, concerts, etc.
  • One stop smaller DOF / better bokeh for portraiture
  • Faster AF than the 100L
  • Smaller/lighter than the 70-200, a much easier '2nd lens in my bag' to lug around
  • Less conspicuous than the 70-200

...for the cost of $696 (when stocked) + the cost of 72mm filters (which I do not already own).

That same money could go a chunk of the way towards an ultrawide zoom, a fast wide prime, the Sigma 50 1.4 Art, etc.

[Scratches head over this fun tradeoff...]  ::)

- A

15
According to the Canon sales rep I spoke with, and her supervisor, and the rep who emailed me, they don't sell that lens refurbished any more. The page you are accessing is a cached page. So there is no question of it being in stock, it is simply not for sale. Quite disappointing.
However, you may want to confirm this for yourself. Good luck!

Yep.  I can't confirm it's gone from refurb forever, but it's not on the main refurb lens page as of the beginning of the sale.  That cached page that CPW points to still exists but now formally says out of stock. 

It's a little surprising, b/c many are in the wild and it sells out instantly when offered.  This isn't a $10k supertele that they get one of per year that can sit for some time without getting sold.

But I think it will be back.  The 24 1.4L, 35 1.4L and others drop off the refurb site completely (i.e. not listed as out of stock -- the item just drops from the store) as they restock.

- A




Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 35