April 19, 2014, 03:55:04 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 - alexturton

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 12
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50 f/1.4 Art Lens Should be Amazing
« on: January 15, 2014, 04:01:39 PM »
I loved my 50mm f1.8 but I was ambivalent to the f1.4.  I wanted to love it.. but I just couldn't. 

If the sigma is amazing, I'm in.  35 is too wide for me and 85otoo long.  Goldie locks.... don't care... but I will wait a year or two for the  50 to come down in price the was the 35 has.  699 New... on sale... thank you very much.

+1 on your view of the 1.4.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50 f/1.4 Art Lens Should be Amazing
« on: January 15, 2014, 02:29:23 PM »
Sharpness has never really concerned me with a 50mm prime. I'm more interested in af speed and accuracy

Lenses / sigma 15-30
« on: January 15, 2014, 08:12:18 AM »
Has anyone tested this lens on full frame? (specifically 5d3)

I really want a super wide (something 16mm or wider) but I don't really want to spend to much as generally I only use superwide to exagerate perspective / fun creative shots rather than serious landscape or architecture.

I've seen a preowed copy of the 15-30 for £140 and wonder is it cheap because its rubbish?

Any opinions or sample shots would be really appreciated.

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D with 24-105 1:4 lens and 580EXII flash
« on: January 13, 2014, 07:43:04 AM »
what AF and exposure settings are you currently using that causes OOF images?

EOS Bodies / Re: More dead pixel problems for canon
« on: January 13, 2014, 07:41:36 AM »
if you shoot raw I'm fairly sure lightroom autmatically maps out hot pixels in long exposures. If the hot pixels were there in normal shots I'd be more concerned, but in long exposures (as mentioned above) its not uncommon.

I'd buy a safari trip to africa and take some pictures. :)

Canon General / Re: Renaming and storing photos
« on: January 08, 2014, 08:50:11 AM »
On importing I organise my in folders lightroom as follows:

Top level (e.g. "Working")
year (e.g. "2013")
Month (e.g.  "2013_09")
Day (e.g. "2013_09_15")

this way even if you view the folders outside of lightroom they are always in date order.

Then lightroom imports into each days folder. Within that folder I might sub sort into image type e.g. if I've been to the zoo I might separate out monkeys to birds.

Then once a batch of RAWS are editted I move the folder into a similar structure set of folders but under a "done" top level. On moving the folder I export all pictures to iPhoto as JPEGS. Periodically I move the "done" folder to a backup hard disk.

I give pictures names in iPhoto when I upload them to flickr, but I never rename the files because I can't see the point/merrit

Canon General / Re: Advice for future path please!
« on: January 08, 2014, 08:44:25 AM »
Unless you're planning on getting a FF body soon, I'd consider selling the 17-40L and the 28-135, and getting the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS.  It's a much better walkaround lens on APS-C than the 17-40 - you get an extra stop of light, IS, and it's sharper, too.


Staying with Crop......I would:

Sell  17-40mmF4 L, (I never liked this on crop. Its not weather resistant unless you add a filter. There is no IS. f4 is relatively slow. and 40mm f4 is not enough to give subject separate on crop)
sell 28-135mm IS - I personally don't like variable aperture zooms (although I do own 1  myself :S)
Buy 17-55 2.8 IS - great quality on crop. and all those dust sucking comments are rubbish as small amounts of dust do not affect IQ.
Buy sigma 30mm 1.4 (as this will be effectively a crop standard. I had this for a number of years on 7d & 60d and it was fantastic)

The above will help in lower light, landscapes (@17) and portraits (55 is ff equiv c88mm)

Keep the 100-400 for wildlife.
Keep the 50mm as 1.8 vs 1.4 is not a massive difference and you wont get much resale value for it anyway.

If you don't use the 100m f2. sell. I've never found 100mm on crop an attractive focal length (but thats personal preference).

Don't bother with the Canon M. Given its size its still not truly compact and cannot rival the speed (particularly AF speed), feautures or quality something like the sony rx100 can provide even though the RX100 has a smaller sensor. Plus a new camera won't make you a better photographer. It'll just be something else that delivers similar quality than your 7d in a slower albeit smaller form.

I cannot comment on the vintage lenses. If you use them keep them, otherwise sell the redundant gear.

Having said all that.................. If you have the appetite to go full frame. Do that. I switched from 7d to 5d3 a year ago and it has been wonderful. The narrower depth of yield at wider angles is unprecedented on crop. so many focal lengths suddenly make more sense, i.e. 24mm, 35mm, etc.. Admittedly 5d3 is a massive spend and might be out of scope here.

With a limited budget. Blank sheet of paper I would:

Sell all your bodies and compacts.

Buy a 6d (if you have 1 camera, that will be the one you take with you. Rather than having 1 main camera, 1 backup and 1 compact; which serve as distractions)

Keep the 50mm 1.8
Keep the 17-40 for landscapes.
Keep the 100m f2 for portraits
Keep 100-400 for wildlife
Keep your 580ex flashgun

Sell everything else that isn't needed.

My 2 cents is that an f2.4 1/3.2 inch sensor of the nexus 5 will give an effective depth of field of somewhere around f11+ (in full frame terms) so everything will always be in focus (because the sensor is so small). However you will still be benefitting from f2.4 in shutter speed terms (because f2.4 is f2.4 in terms of light transmision, assuming there is no light loss)

Whereas on your 60d to get f11 equivalent depth of field you'll need to be around F8 which will kill your shutter speeds.

I agree with the sentiment above that its easier to handhold a camera phone and seemingly take a better still.

But in IQ and NR terms, in anything less than perfect lighting conditions,. the DSLR should always be better

However...... +1 need samples to truly compare.

Lenses / Re: Quest for the perfect copy?
« on: December 26, 2013, 06:19:51 PM »
Reading the latest thread discussing the advantages of the 24-105mm versus those of the 24-70mm 2.8 II, I saw, as usual, a lot of talk about copy variation.

Couple months back while shopping for a 24-70mm and an 85mm 1.2 II, on the retail sites I also saw the usual talk about trying and trying to get a good copy.

It really makes me uneasy to know that so many lenses are getting shipped back and forth to the places I want to buy from.  Is it Canon I should be concerned about or are there a significant number of OCD types going nuts looking for perfect lenses?

In fact, I myself actually returned an ef 35mm 1.4 to a big retailer because the front element was full of finger prints.  Ironically, the one I got in its place was perfect at a distance but wretched up close and to about 7 feet at less than f/2.0--plus the purple fringing was way beyond what I expected.  I didn't really figure this out in the first 30 days, so I sent it to Canon CPS and was told all was in spec.  I sold it at a slight loss and bought a Sigma 35mm 1.4 instead--and from the same big retailer.  No problems with it whatsoever after an MF adjust of +3.

Back to the 24-70mm II and the 85mm 1.2 II--bought 'em and love 'em.  Neither needs any MF adjust.  These I bought at a different retailer, one that specializes in photography, because from my experience, this retailer takes a lot more care with padding items for shipping.

When I first started buying expensive gear, I also got nuts.  But experience and perspective have helped me realize that the pixel-peeping issues I was concerned about are not influencing the quality of my work.

In poker, there is an expression:  Don't play at stakes you can't comfortably afford because you will play badly.

I wonder if some of the apparently OCD behavior with questing for the perfect lens has to do with passionate photographers well out of their spending comfort zone.

Or are there really so many bad copies of great lenses?

For me it is making sure I get my monies worth. If I spend £1000 on a lens to replace a £100 kit lens, I want to make sure it is as perfect as possible to ensure my purchase was justified.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100 f/2.8L IS Macro autofocus?
« on: December 26, 2013, 06:17:39 PM »
I'm curious to know just how much Macro folks that are recommending using AF are doing? It's a sizable part of my portfolio and AF isn't ever part of the equation.


I'm a fan of the: set focus and rock back and forth technique.

Id go with the rx100. I use one as backup to my 5d3. For still landscapes sometimes I can barely tell the difference. Rx100 is the best compact I've ever used. Plus it's a "compact" ie you can still fit it in your pocket; unlike many compact system cameras.

Now the rx100 mk ii is out the mk i is going cheaper.

Canon General / Re: Gear storage solutions
« on: December 08, 2013, 12:05:23 PM »
I'm using a chest of drawers from ikea and ikea in-drawer separators. (I.e. The one for separating your pants etc..). Keeps each lens nicely separated Plus have separate space for wires, accessories etc...

Throw in a few silica gel bags for good measure.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to spend $3000 now or keep saving?
« on: December 05, 2013, 02:19:40 PM »
There are only 5 currently planned native lenses for the a7r with only 2 available now.

The native af speed is only on the native mount lenses. With an alpha mount adapter (to access sonys other lenses) the af is somewhat poorer.

With only 5 lens options I would not buy the a7r.

I would save further and buy a 5d3.

Software & Accessories / Re: Good idea to upgrade to LR5? Regrets?
« on: December 04, 2013, 08:30:32 AM »
both mavericks and LR5 (from LR4) were painless upgrades for me. LR5 seems snappier than LR4, but still not as snappy as LR3.

content aware spot treatment brush is now better. Plus the radial filters are quite nice.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 12