April 16, 2014, 06:56:43 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 - sagittariansrock

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 44
Lenses / Re: Canon 50L - Love or Hate?
« on: Today at 06:45:46 PM »
I think the choices are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
I love the look of the 50L, but wouldn't spend that much on an FL I don't use so much.
For me, the nifty fifty is fine until a more general purpose 50mm comes out or 50A prices go down a bit.

Lenses / Re: Sigma vs Zeiss vs Canon
« on: Today at 06:23:24 PM »
However because of the extremes in construction and pricing between the 50L and the 50 f1.4, the former is often misinterpreted as the 'high - end option', and to correct this Canon should introduce a better constructed, higher end 50mm than the 50 f1.4 to fill the gap. ( 50/1.8 IS perhaps).

This makes sense, except Canon has really handicapped the 50 1.4 for some reason. The sharpness isn't great and nor is the bokeh (and I am not even talking of 50L levels here), and clearly no adjustment was done there intentionally. It doesn't even have a ring USM.
Indeed a allrounder standard lens has its place, and I am sure an updated 50mm 1.4 or a 50mm 1.8 IS is a matter of time (although I know I'd prefer a 1.4, the majority of people might not, and that is what matters).

Thanks for the explanation, jrista! It did seem to me the issue might be focus shift but then I felt Eldar has probably seen all the AFMA drift at f/1.4.

Software & Accessories / Re: The best tripod ...
« on: Today at 03:22:56 AM »
I'm thinking of buying me a tripod and a tripod head... when I started thinking about tripods and heads.

You have two super-telephotos and you are just thinking of tripods? Do you mostly use monopods, or are you really strong? I am frankly quite surprised.
In these forums, people start looking for tripods as soon as they order their first telephoto (I know I would).
I am sure you will choose nothing but the best considering the quality (and heft) of your gear.

Lenses / Re: Landscape lens for backpacking
« on: Today at 03:18:20 AM »
Please do think this out well and make your decision. The best landscape photos are make when the light is real low. In low light a FF camera is much better than a crop. Pick your camera for the toughest need, not for the bulk of the need.

This is great advice.

Lenses / Re: Sigma vs Zeiss vs Canon
« on: Today at 03:09:36 AM »
My 35 Art´s AF is drifting again (a third AFMA with Focal showed a further 4 step adjustment, on top of the 7 steps I got between the one I did when I got it and Christmas), so I must admit I am a bit skeptical to that part of sigma. But since so many are happy with it, I hope my AF problem is a one-off.

I have a technical query here:

As far as I understand, the purpose of AFMA is not to 'fix' defective lenses, but calibrate a specified lens to a given camera to account for manufacturing tolerances.
Once the AFMA is done, the camera knows how much to compensate for this lens, and everything is hunky-dory.

But in what condition can AFMA drift as is happening in Eldar's case? Is it because something is moving within the lens and a gap is getting bigger or a cog is becoming more loose?

I am particularly interested since I just acquired a 35A (so far it looks like it is focusing right on target as shown below- spot focused on "6" using a peripheral point and center point respectively), I haven't run it through FoCal yet.

Lenses / Re: Sigma vs Zeiss vs Canon
« on: Today at 02:11:49 AM »
I see the discontent on this forum about Canon not yet having a perfect fast 50mm, a tack-sharp UWA zoom, etc., and I learnt a few days ago that Nikon brought out their f/1.4 autofocus primes, 24mm and 35mm, only in 2010. That must have made for a lot of irritated professionals! 

Lenses / Re: Landscape lens for backpacking
« on: Today at 02:00:20 AM »
I am lucky to say that I have a permit to hike the John Muir Trail this August and cannot wait to bring my camera along with me. I currently have a 40D, 24-70 mk I, and 15 fisheye. I would like to get wider shots than the 24-70 on my crop, and am kind of forced to make a decision: get a FF body or a wider lens. I'm not 100% sold on any FF body as being the one for me (new or used), so I'm leaning towards new glass. Weight and price are not of concern to me as this is going to be one epic trip. The obvious choice seems to be the 16-35 for superior IQ over the 17-40, despite weight and cost. But are there primes I should consider as well? I certainly wouldn't hesitate considering one, especially if the IQ and weight are superior by comparison to the 16-35.


The 16-35 is definitely a better choice for at least two reasons:
1. Since you are backpacking and don't have a tripod, the lens with better sharpness (esp. at corners) at wider apertures will make a big difference.
2. More light will also make a difference due to the lack of light sensitivity inherent to a crop sensor.
I haven't felt there is a huge weight disadvantage over the 17-40, and I am not a particularly powerful person.
It is certainly a good investment IMO, and a very versatile lens both on APS-C and FF.

Sports / Re: Horses / Horseriding etc
« on: Today at 12:43:08 AM »
Houston rodeo 2014, cowboy mounted shooting.

Sports / Re: Horses / Horseriding etc
« on: Today at 12:42:12 AM »
Houston rodeo 2014, cowboy mounted shooting.

Lenses / Re: Filters Question
« on: April 15, 2014, 07:15:53 AM »
Hi all,

Just want an opinion:

My main lenses right now are all 77mm but I'm going to get an 24-70 f2.8L II in a few months...

Is it better to get a larger filter such as an 82mm over a 77mm and just use a step up filter when using it on smaller lenses?


I'd get both 77mm and 82mm filters (actually that's what I did).
It is a hassle to use C-Pols with step-up rings since you cannot use the hood.
If you don't use hoods, then yes, getting an 82mm future-proofs it.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: April 15, 2014, 06:13:58 AM »
The Art is on preorder. Could not resist ;)

Nice :)

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: April 15, 2014, 06:09:29 AM »
From the link Jrista posted it appears aspherical elements may also have caused the effect. The concentric rings are slightly asymmetrical and the Otus does have aspherical elements.
However, even if that is the case, this is very very minor side effect for some major correction of optical aberration. The Sigma seems to have them from the sample pictures, and I never seem to notice until specifically looking for it.
Anyway, now, looking forward to more gorgeous shots through the Otus, and hopefully a comparison with the Art- if you decide to buy it as well. :)

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark.II delayed again + 1Dx replacement mentioned.
« on: April 14, 2014, 08:55:54 PM »
News from Reikan Focal ?

You're kidding right? April Fools hasn't worn off yet?
You have a picture of what looks like a 5D and Product ID: 12345678 :D

look at yourself and draw your conclusions.
I am a user of focal and while reading the news the last version I saw this! weird? yes!

Firmware 2.1.1 on a new camera model?  Someone's having fun yanking chains...

Or forgot to switch off the time machine...
On the other hand, the 24-70 II still seems to be in use at this time in future, so no hope of 24-70 IS for a while I guess :P

Macro / Re: The same flower.
« on: April 14, 2014, 08:48:51 PM »
Disregarding the background, the second one feels three-dimensional with a clear sense of depth.
The first one looks flat (as in two-dimensional).

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 44