October 21, 2014, 11:52:03 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 - eml58

Pages: 1 ... 39 40 [41] 42 43 ... 101
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
« on: November 20, 2013, 05:01:07 AM »

Wow! Whether above or below water, your photos are always amazing. 8)

Thanks Serendipidy, appreciated.

Black & White / Re: Black & White
« on: November 19, 2013, 11:29:29 PM »
We'll be together even when the sun sets...

Very nice, Petronas Towers in the background, well done.

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
« on: November 19, 2013, 11:28:02 PM »
As always, great image Edward!

Thanks Eldar, it's always a difficult decision for me, Safari ?? or Dive Trip ??

Still, not a bad quandary to have.

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
« on: November 19, 2013, 11:03:43 PM »
Komodo National Park, Near Rinja Indonesia

5DMK II 100f/2.8L IS f/22

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
« on: November 19, 2013, 10:56:12 PM »
Raja Ampat Papua Indonesia 2011

5DMK II 100f/2.8 L IS, f/22

Black & White / Re: Black & White
« on: November 19, 2013, 09:35:21 PM »
Mombo Main Camp, Botswana Okavango Delta 2012

1D MKIV & 400f/2.8 L II, Shot @ f/2.8 & 1/640th ISO200

Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!
« on: November 19, 2013, 08:59:47 PM »
Botswana Okavango Delta 2012

5DMK III & 300f/2.8 L II, Shot @ f/2.8 & 1/500th ISO125

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: November 19, 2013, 07:22:21 PM »
Honest question.  I don't get why a well made lens with half dozen machine ground lenses of a particular shape and in one configuration can cost 10-20x what another well made lens with a half dozen machine ground lenses of a similar shape and configuration?  How can the shape of a lens element or the coating cost so much more to produce?  What is special about this lens that Canon, Nikon or Sigma could not reverse engineer (i.e. lens shape) and produce for $400?

Because they all respectively currently have 50mm lenses that already cost a lot more than $400 that don't really compete with the Otus.

Agree, I have & use the Canon 50 f/1.2 L, very good Lens, My copy though I've settled on after 3 attempts. I like very much the way this lens renders the background, I very seldom use it on auto focus as I'm mostly using it at f/1.2 or f/2, focussing is critical at this shallow depth of field. I expect the Otus 55 to be quite a bit better in any and all areas, except auto focus, and in a couple of weeks I'll know.

I'm somewhat surprised at those that criticise the Otus 55/f1.4 based on price alone, I don't really see the sense in it, either you appreciate there is a difference and want the Zeiss Lens for the little extra IQ it will deliver, and are prepared to pay the 2x price over the Canon 50f/1.2L, or your not, to criticise Zeiss for producing an amazing lens because it's "too expensive" is a little like criticising a Petrus Pomerol 1986 over any 2 litre cask wine, you need to first be able to appreciate that there is a difference, if you can't, your going to head for the cask wine, so just enjoy it.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: November 18, 2013, 10:20:06 PM »
Honest question.  I don't get why a well made lens with half dozen machine ground lenses of a particular shape and in one configuration can cost 10-20x what another well made lens with a half dozen machine ground lenses of a similar shape and configuration?  How can the shape of a lens element or the coating cost so much more to produce?  What is special about this lens that Canon, Nikon or Sigma could not reverse engineer (i.e. lens shape) and produce for $400?

You perhaps need to compare Apples with Apples, sort of.

Canon/Nikon/Sony Lenses are comparable, some within the group are slightly better than others, all made for the mass market, with a few exceptions, Large Whites (and Nikons similar range), 50f/1.2 etc.

Zeiss lenses you might need to compare with Leica, not made for the mass market more for the Pro/serious amateur that will appreciate that 10% extra all round, IQ etc etc, and the engineered for a life time Lens.

In the Otus 55f/1.4 Category you should be perhaps trying to compare it to the Leica Summilux 50f/1.4, both are manual focus, both are engineered to last 50 years, both are USD$4K Lenses.

A couple years back I tried the Leica M9 system, the Summilux 50f/1.4 Aspherical I waited a little over a year on back order to finally get a copy, Leica sell, mostly on Back Order, every Lens they make, Zeiss have a similar problem (joking), Canon/Nikon/Sony would just love top have the same issue.

I feel this is one area where you do probably get what you pay for, I hope so, I have the Otus 55f/1.4 on order.

Lenses / Re: Photos from 200-400. Also any comments...
« on: November 18, 2013, 07:24:03 PM »
Has anyone used this lens in lower lighting conditions? There's a few shots in this thread that look like they were taken around dusk and turned out pretty well, but I'm curious about a bit more input.  I'm looking into getting my first "big white" and am mostly interested in this lens vs the 400 2.8.

I have had both Lenses on Safari, used both in low light/Dusk/Dawn shooting, the question is a good one and it's probably the biggest decision maker between these two lenses other than Sharpness. I've sold my 400f/2.8 L II since buying the 200-400f/4 but only after doing two Safari Trips with both Lenses to compare, and bringing along my 300f/2.8 L II as well.

I sold the 400f/2.8 II as I feel the versatility of the 200-400f/4 works for me in my own style of imaging to the point where the 400 was no longer necessary, but, this decision becomes easier when you have the 300f/2.8 II sitting waiting for those extreme low light situations.

The 400f/2.8 II is always going to be the better low light Lens, caveat here being what your shooting the lens on, I use the 1Dx and I find the combo unbeatable, the 5DMK III I also shoot with and it is not as good as the 1Dx in low light. The 400f/2.8 obviously has a full stop more light to play with over the 200-400f/4.

The 200-400f/4 though is no slouch in the low light department, what I have found is I simply operate the 200-400f/4 at 1600 or 2500 ISO where I would have operated the 400f/2.8 II at say 800 or 1250 ISO, any graining I take care of in Post. This is where the lighting conditions require higher ISO, otherwise during normal light conditions I would operate either lens at a Base 400, rarely do I shoot lower than ISO400.

Image quality comparisons I've found they two Lenses, same Length, same ISO same f/stop, are pretty evenly matched, again, I feel the Primes will always out the Zooms, but the 200-400f/4 compared to the 200f/2 (@f4) the 300f/2.8 II (@f4) the 400f/2.8 II (@f/4) the 600 f/4 (@f/5.6) and the 200-400 f/4 @ f/4 200/300/400 & 600 similar set up, you are going to find you need to go to zoom in quite a bit to begin to see the benefits IQ wise of the Primes over the Zoom, the 200-400f/4 is the best I have seen when comparing zoom to prime.

My feel is if you concentrate your imaging on low light you may want to go for the Primes, if your low light is say 10% of your Imaging, as is my own case, the Zooms versatility and first class IQ makes the 200-400 a better all round tool.

But that is an opinion knowing that I always have the 300f/2.8 II sitting ready for those low light extremes.

The attached were both shot @ ISO2500.

The Bush Baby with the 400f/2.8 II @ f/2.8

The Female Lion wight he 200-400f/4 @ f/5.6 560mm.

Not a true test of apples with apples, but both Lenses, on the 1Dx, work well in low light.

Both Images were shot with the 600EX-RT for fill flash.

Both Images shot well after sun down full dark, Both Images were shot with Spot light to gain focus, without the spot light neither shot could be achieved as no light/no focus.

This is one area where the f/2.8 will always out the f/4, a point where it's just too dark for the f/4 to achieve focus and the f/2.8 possibly still can.

Lenses / Re: Handheld vs. tripod with the Great Whites
« on: November 16, 2013, 08:33:49 PM »
I wonder how much extra freedom the bandolier gives compared to a monopod.
The bandoleer does not work without a monopod. And its not meant to be used with a 300mm. Have you seen the picture at the beginning of the thread?

I do a reasonable amount of shooting from a Helicopter, doors off, when I'm on Safari, especially in the Okavango Delta area, the Bandolier is almost the perfect solution, alternative is simply hand holding, the Helicopter harness keeps you attached to the chopper when your standing out on the skid, but this makes it impossible to use the Monopod attached, I've tried a harness from the top door edge but it's restrictive even using a line that has a tension brake included (similar system to car seat belts) the Bandolier is an almost perfect solution in this situation, and light weight easy to pack.

Thanks Eldar.

Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 16, 2013, 02:09:44 AM »
For those who expect a new 200 f2 ii, what new features do you think will be implemented in it?

The new 'white' paint color.  ;)

I'm afraid I tend to agree, here, New White Paint same as the Series II Lenses, 20% less weight ?? (Not sure how much, but some weight saving).

I say "afraid" to agree only because I would love to see the 200f/2 get the series II Lens treatment, but it's my view that the current 200f/2 is so good I just don't see why Canon would do anything to it.

Plus the new Lens should it get the series II treatment, will get the Series II price increase, I had the 300f/2.8 series I and the 400 series I before upgrading both Lenses (have sold the 400 since though), in general the price increase for the series II over the series I has been in the order +/- 30% increase, that would likely see a series II 200f/2 move to above 8K, not sure that would be a smart move for Canon.

Why mess with perfection ??

Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!
« on: November 15, 2013, 09:07:07 PM »

It's been a while since I've seen a Peed off Blue Tongue, grew up in the Northern wheat belt area of West Aussie, these guys provided a reasonable amount of distraction as a Kid.

Thanks for Posting.

Lenses / Re: Things to get when you purchase a 600mm?
« on: November 15, 2013, 08:33:24 PM »

Is it worth it?

No doubt in my mind, I'll not go into the equipment list, Neuro and others have covered it to perfection.

I used Gitzo some years back, good gear mostly, but about 3 years ago I switched totally to RRS for Tripod, monopod, safari clamps, replacement foot on all my whites, Gimble head, Ball head, etc etc.

I live in Singapore so I order the gear direct with RRS & ship Fed Ex cheapest Air to Singapore.

Costs for shipping have been between USD$60 to USD$100 per order, the most expensive shipping was when I ordered the 34L tripod & pano head plus bits, that was USD$109 shipping US to Singapore on an order that totalled $1,800.

Singapore also has GST add on, they may or may not be more reasonable than Sweden, cost is generally 7% of Order cost excluding Shipping & Insurance costs. But in Singapore if your Non Citizen (I'm a Resident), you can claim the GST back less Fee when you next leave Singapore, that may not be an option in Sweden.

RRS will either handle payment with a Telegraphic Transfer (they charge a Fee for this but waive the Fee for orders over $1,000 so bite the bullet and get as much gear as you can in the one order, I think the Fee is $35, or waived if more than 1K). I do my order payment now via PayPal to RRS, save Transfer fees and hassle, but of course PayPal have built in Fees as well.

I have had absolutely first class service from RRS, I deal direct with the owners wife with all my orders, so you get spot on service, in this day and age that's simply worth money to me. I could get Gitzo/Arca/Wimberley etc (and still have some of this gear laying about) here in Singapore, but I'm Happy to pay the premium to get the RRS equipment, it is engineered to perfection and being an Engineer I appreciate it when i can see gear made this way.

If you would like the contact details of the lady I deal with at RRS please message me direct & I'll pass the contact details onto you.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 Distagon
« on: November 15, 2013, 02:41:12 AM »
LOL!!! (Once again....What kind of hood do you have on that $3000 lens?). Funny post!

The attached is the "Dumb assed end"

I must admit I didn't research enough before I purchased, the Images from this Lens are 2nd to none among my ultra WA lenses, of which I own several, Canon 14f/2.8L II, Canon 8-15f/4, canon 17TSE, 14-24f/2.8 Nikon, Canon 15f/2.8.

With the exception of the 17TSE, all my WA lenses are purchased first for Underwater WA, secondary function, Landscape, but I sort of suck at Landscape.

I just couldn't imagine anyone handicapping a Lens by having a fixed Lens Hood like the Zeiss 15, in my view, "Dumb Assed".

And, after trying several Circular Polariser Filters it wasn't until I found the Heliopan Slim that I found a Polariser that didn't cause Vignetting, but that Heliopan cost $500 bucks.

So, amazingly sharp, beautiful contrast, smoothest Manual Focussing system I've experienced, but a dumb assed Lens Hood system.

Yes, as has been shown by others you can remove it, but after laying out 3k for a Lens anyone that brings a spanner or a screwdriver within 3 metres of this Lens while on my Camera, is a dead man, or women.

Pages: 1 ... 39 40 [41] 42 43 ... 101