September 17, 2014, 11:39:34 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 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 61
Lenses / Re: New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)
« on: July 29, 2014, 10:50:25 AM »
85 wont come until after Sigma's offering....

I expect the 35 II & the 50 II to wipe Sigmas eye on their comparable offerings. If it doesn't, will be very dissapointed.

It depends on what you want.  I'm not convinced Canon can just burp out a 35L II or new 50L that handily beats Sigma on the resolution side of things -- Sigma has been formidable on that front. 

But on draw, weather sealing, color, etc. Canon historically does well here.  We'll see.  Competition in the lens world is always a good thing.

- A

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO Sonnar T*
« on: July 29, 2014, 10:47:58 AM »
Great review, thanks for posting.

Unfortunately, I see this as a stellar lens I'll never use.  Large aperture glass simply has to have AF in my hands or the value of that huge opening is lost on anything I shoot that is moving (even slowly).  I'd end up stopping it down just to avoid missing with manual focusing. 

As such, I'd only opt for an MF lens if it were on a tripod for landscape work.  And as much as 135mm certainly has a place in landscape work, it's not a focal length I reach for enough to justify $2k out of pocket.

So I flag stellar lenses like these in the 'win the lottery / when-I-retire bucket': magical, but not a priority for what I shoot.  Keep in mind that I am an enthusiast who has only grown up on having AF on everything I've shot -- pros or folks with significant rangefinder / MF lens experience may be able to net a high percentage of keepers with it.

- A

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: July 29, 2014, 10:29:43 AM »


Lenses / Re: New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)
« on: July 28, 2014, 06:38:03 PM »
All I wish lenswise is that Canon would produce a 14-24mm (or better, a 12-24mm or, even better a 10-24mm) and announce if they will (or will not) produce a new 100-400mm.

I think that Canon´s new 50mm could be a behemoth 50mm f/1.4L just to compete with Zeiss or Sigma, but I would like to see a new 50mm f/1.2L or 50mm f/1.0L just for bragging rights.

I ran (what I thought to be) an interesting poll on the nature of the 14-24 interest in this forum.   I asked if people had a choice of the sharpness of Nikon's 14-24 or the focal length of Nikon's 14-24 -- and you could only have one -- what would you choose?;viewresults
(See the question for how I phrased it, the specifics do matter.)

75% of respondents said they just wanted a sharper ultrawide than their current 16-35/17-40 options.

25% stuck to their guns that they'd accept the current (lack of) sharpness from their 16-35 lenses applied to the wider 14mm FL.

Keep in mind this was run before the very nice 16-35 F/4L IS was released.  But I find it fascinating that (with this limited sample size), the majority of people clamoring for a 14-24 just want a sharper ultrawide.  But, based on your comments, I have to assume you'd want the focal length over the sharpness (if you had to choose).

- A

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: July 28, 2014, 06:29:06 PM »

Another APS-C vs. FF rant, this time by Zack Arias:

I'm not remotely foolish enough to stir a debate so much as pass on something that will give the pre-digital-era photographers a smile.

- A

Lenses / Re: New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)
« on: July 28, 2014, 05:09:23 PM »
Why not produce a 50L which is the 50 many photographers wanted as a robust, high quality L lens which is a razor sharp f1.4, and keep the current 50L as a specialist 'art' or portrait lens.

It's annoying that those of us who like the 'standard' 50/1.4 have to put up with such a flimsy, cheap plastic lens, with appalling manual focus, no full USM, WS etc.

Where would this leave the rumoured 50/2 or 50/1.8 IS ? Well maybe that lens is going to replace the current 50/1.8 as the cheapest prime that is very popular as a first lens to compliment the kit zoom.

The topic of whether the new non-L 50 IS will be the base-level or the mid-level has been heavily speculated already in these forums. 

Personally, I think it will be mid-grade and replace the 50 F/1.4 (old-)USM.  I just can't see the nifty fifty being retired -- it holds a unique price point and serves a common need as a photographer's first prime.

But there are those that would correctly argue that all of the non-L IS USM refreshes to date (24/28/35) have replaced the cheapest non-USM lenses so far.

Whatever line it replaces, that new lens will sell like hotcakes.  It will be sharper than the 50L (heck the 20 year old 50 F/1.4 is already sharper today at some apertures), lighter, have IS, have true internal focusing (without the front element sliding inside the housing), and have proper modern USM.  The only thing it won't have is weather-sealing and the widest possible aperture.  But even at F/2, I'm probably buying that lens.

- A   

Lenses / Re: New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)
« on: July 28, 2014, 04:46:27 PM »
Every time a CR1, CR2, etc. drops regarding new lenses, I want to make a rival to CR's webpage that is The Onion-flavored. 

Stories would include:

Canon, a business that profits from releasing new products, is reportedly working on more new products [CR1]

35L II is a certainty:  Canon uses the terms '35', 'L', and 'II' in the same interview [CR2]

Mysterious 14-24L informant turns out to be a sadistic Nikon employee with no credible Canon intel whatsoever [CR3]

Sigma writes a love letter to photographers, asking, 'When will you love us back to the point where we can overcharge you as much as Canon does?' [CR0]

B+W admits UV Filters were invented solely because that dipsh#& Klaus forgot to polarize a batch of CPLs in 1949 [CR1]

Citing years of neglect, EOS-M formally sues Canon for parental negligence:  "All we wanted were a few lenses, but they just gave us this s@#$ty EF adapter..." [CR2]

Exclusive Scoop:  5D Mark IV to cost more than 5D Mark III [CR9]

- A

This will happen more often, similar to the 5D2 at time of the 5D3 launch.  The 7D is going to be obsoleted, and we all know it, so it's just a question of how low everyone needs to go with all these specials before realities (like grips, batteries, etc.) are trumped by emotions ("but it was soooo cheap!").

Also:  EOS-M.  It's the same price-drops-and-drops-and-drops-until-you-bite scenario, albeit for very different reasons than the 7D and 5D2.  I've recently seen EOS-M kits with the EF-M 18-55 for something comical, like $249.  They are, in effect, giving those away.

- A

Lenses / Re: What do you do with lens cases?
« on: July 25, 2014, 06:10:14 PM »
Not to go OT too much, but I'm curious to hear the ratio of lenses to bags owned by this forum.  Photogs tend to be mighty picky about camera bags.

Not including the nice pouches/cases that come with L lenses, I have 7 camera bags and 7 lenses.  In fairness, only three of the bags are purpose-built for cameras and the others are generic-use satchels and bag that I have foamed-up with inserts.

- A

Lenses / Re: What do you do with lens cases?
« on: July 25, 2014, 06:04:39 PM »
You need to protect your gear. The lens bags that come with a lens protect from nothing more than scratches and maybe dust.

Sounds like you need something like a camera bag insert if you'll be taking 3 lenses and a body, unless you have a dedicated camera bag.
Agree. if you don't have a purpose-built bag with padding on all-sides of the lens*, it might be time to get one.  Lowepro, Tamrac, etc. are the staple brands but there are jillions of competitors.  You should have no trouble getting a bag that is right-sized for your needs.   Unless you are a veteran of buying bags and you know your payload well, I recommend you walk into your local electronics/camera store with your camera with you (make you can prove it's yours) and trial-fit your product in a variety of different bags to find the one that's best for you.

Alternatively, you could choose to put a camera insert into a bag you already own.  They come in a lot of shapes and sizes, but one like this...

...can slide into a satchel/shoulder bag and very simply protect a body and a few lenses provided they aren't too big.  Such shoulder bags go in the only place I will take them on a plane -- under the seat.  Under the seat is a fairly protected cubby that's all yours, and it has been my only choice for gear on a plane.  (I would never check camera gear without a super shock resistant Pelican-style case, but I don't own one.  And I avoid using the overhead compartment with camera gear because jokers cram things into those and I can't control the risk to the gear.)

- A

*There is a fair debate whether cameras truly need 6-sided padding.  In the insert I linked, the top of the insert is open to allow for easy access of your gear from inside your bag.  I love this feature and have inserts like this, but some folks insist upon a foam 'top' as well to avoid a bag getting stepped on or having weight put on it.  The right balance of ease-of-use vs. risk to gear is entirely up to you.

Lenses / Re: What do you do with lens cases?
« on: July 25, 2014, 05:33:29 PM »
Hi All,

Taking my camera on a plane for the first time and am wondering how much individual lens cases (sigma) or lens pouches (canon) actually do.

Reason is that in a pouch or case, more space is required. Are they more for long term storage? Do they add safety? Do you travel with them? I'm trying to bring just a messenger bag with 3 lenses but if you add individual cases or pouches, it gets a little too tight...

Thanks for your opinions in advance

I turn them into sock puppets. 

- A

FM charges you to join their selling community, right?

Yes.  $9 for the ability to post sales for 30 days.

- A

In the early 2000's I used to use Ebay...a lot.  I gave up on Ebay around 2007 as the fees for listing/selling were too high and shipping is a pain in the butt.  Since then I have used Craigslist exclusively.  I usually get what I want for my gear and have sold numerous cameras this way including: Leica M8, Canon 1DSII, 7D, G12, 20D and numerous lenses.  In addition to selling, I have bought countless gear on Craigslist too which is a nice way to meet other photographers, not to mention try the gear before you hand over your money.

The thing on Craigslist is to sort out the flakes from the people who are serious...also, for Craigslist to be viable you need to live in a populated area (Vancouver, BC is where I am).  No matter what, do not ship to anyone on deals only, in person, usually at a coffee shop.

Perhaps I had back luck on Craig's list but all I was scam offers - "I'll pay extra 50% to ship the lens to my cousin in ..."

No serious offers, so after 2 or 3 items I only list on ebay (10% fee plus 3% paypal fee hurts) or Fred Miranda.

Seems PayPal is the online tool of choice for cash changing hands.  Has anyone tried Google Wallet or PayPal's other competitors?

- A


That doesn't make sense. Do you not have an upload/sell account set up (subscription required).

Of course.  You can't post items for sale without one.  But even then, it did not let me PM with a 'you have less than 25 posts' error message. 

Non-issue in this instance, though.  Lens just sold for a good price and is on its way.  Thanks for everyone's advice!

- A

Hey gang,

I've already gotten two private message inquiries on my lens, but as I lack 25 posts at FM, I cannot respond to them privately!

Is there some way I can contact these folks directly, or must I reply to my own advert with a public answer to a private question?

- A

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 61