April 23, 2014, 06:37:17 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 ... 49
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Petition to Canon regarding the EOS 5D Mark III
« on: April 22, 2014, 11:35:27 PM »
I hope I can upgrade my own firmware soon enough to utilize the existing features of the 5DIII!

2
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Focus indication with manual lenses
« on: April 22, 2014, 06:40:57 PM »
Why does the camera need to know the aperture settings of the lens?

The aperture setting is irrelevant, but the max aperture of the lens must be communicated to the camera.

So it is an arbitrary requirement set into the camera, like a number it needs to plug in before testing for focusing, rather than information actually used for the AF confirmation process?
Here's why I ask- if you set the chip on a Samyang to f/2.8 and then manually select the aperture to f/4 [which in this case is the aperture at focusing and metering, unlike auto-aperture (for lack of a better word) lenses which stop down only to take the shot]- it will still work. Meaning the f-stop information is necessary for focus confirmation, but not actually used.

3
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens
« on: April 22, 2014, 04:55:54 PM »

sagittarriansrock said, "I did comment on that and hypothesized it is an incompatibility with Canon's algorithm- therefore not necessarily Sigma's fault, just the trade-off with third party lenses, as Mackguyver mentions."


Missed that--But why would you say it isn't Sigma's fault?  Who is making a lens first released in a CANON mount?  If they CAN'T get it right, why put it on the market and lose all the respect they've been earning with the newer products?

If it isn't Sigma's fault, then who is to blame?  Canon for being crafty?

It might be their fault. But not necessarily so. It might be an unavoidable issue with any and all third party fast lenses with AF. And how many of those do we have?
Tamron and Tokina don't make fast lenses. Zeiss and Samyang don't make AF lenses. And all of Sigma's earlier (Local Vision) lenses have had AF inconsistency issues.
So Sigma might have be at the receiving end of a raw deal. Let's see if  they can fix it via firmware. I am hopeful, but not confident.

4
Canon General / Re: $10,000
« on: April 22, 2014, 04:30:41 PM »
Also means I have $ 8K of equipment just for hobby. WTF!!!  :o

Ain't it scary when you realize exactly HOW MUCH you've spend on your hobby? :P

After I got my 600mm lens, I calculated all of mine. Without the lens it's over $10,000, and with the lens it's almost $23,000!  ??? Throw in the new astrophotography gear...

It's way too easy to spend ridiculous amounts of money on photography.  :o

Yours is justified by the time you spend on it, and the photos you have created.
I have less control over the quality of the end product, but at least I need to spend a lot more time shooting. Which means I need to manage my time better...  :-[

5
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens
« on: April 22, 2014, 04:27:18 PM »
All that said, I'm surprised nobody has been discussing how odd it seems that AI Servo was apparently ok, but One Shot on a tripod wasn't...Any conjecture?

I did comment on that and hypothesized it is an incompatibility with Canon's algorithm- therefore not necessarily Sigma's fault, just the trade-off with third party lenses, as Mackguyver mentions.

BTW, Mackguyver, I don't agree with your analogy. Zeiss is highly dependent on human factor (although the long throw is forgiving), while the Tesla is not (talking about acceleration, not going off the road). The Sigma AF is not controllable by the photographer, while the new driver can get better at shifting.
I have no experience with either the 50L or with a sweet dual-clutch (which isn't technically 'automatic' by the way). My car has one of the worst dual-clutch transmissions ever made in an otherwise excellent car (I suppose I should have compared that to the Sigma...).

6
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens
« on: April 22, 2014, 04:13:44 PM »
Is there a lens out there that never has occasional AF inconsistency?

Does a 40% miss rate really constitute occasional inconsistency?  I think not...

Compare this to Zeiss missing 100% of AF shots  ;)

This comparison is as pointless as comparing a Audi with (automatic) transmission problems to a stick-shift Ferrari.

I don't think Audi makes cars that 'occasionally' mis-shift, causing the car to lurch and hot coffee to spill all over the driver.  Just sayin'…   ;)

I had a hard time finding a car manufacturer that makes a faulty automatic transmission in an otherwise excellent car. I don't think there are any, actually.
Hence the hypothetical example.

Pancakeman, I am sure you won't find much difference in a regular city commute between a Ferrari and an Audi, and while the Sigma works 'fine' I think the Otus can boast a much better manual focusing mechanism (throw, smoothness, accuracy of distance scale, etc.).

7
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens
« on: April 22, 2014, 03:29:11 PM »
Is there a lens out there that never has occasional AF inconsistency?

Does a 40% miss rate really constitute occasional inconsistency?  I think not...

Compare this to Zeiss missing 100% of AF shots  ;)

This comparison is as pointless as comparing a Audi with (automatic) transmission problems to a stick-shift Ferrari.

8
Canon General / Re: $10,000
« on: April 22, 2014, 03:23:34 PM »
you slowly start buying gear and one day your gear is more expensive than your first car.

…and then one day, you buy a single lens that is more expsnsive than your first car.   ;)

I got a really, really good deal on my first car (a pre-owned Ford Escort), so I crossed that limit when I bought the 17-85mm  IS USM for $ 325 :D

To answer the OP:
5DIII- 2450 (actually paid)
24-70 II- 1550 (actually paid)
70-200 II- 1700 (actually paid)
35mm A- 700 (actually paid)
135mm L- 700 (refurb 20% disc)
17mm TS-E- 1600 (refurb 20% disc)
Gitzo 2541- 550 (actually paid)
Arca Swiss Z1- 300 (actually paid)
600EX-RT x 2- 700 (refurb 20% disc)

Overshoots by $ 250, but whatever.

This was a really good exercise, because I own most of these except the 17mm TS-E and the extra 600mm, which means I did use my money wisely so far. Lots of buying and selling on the way, and lots of lucky deals. But I am at a happy place :)

Also means I have $ 8K of equipment just for hobby. WTF!!!  :o








9
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens
« on: April 22, 2014, 02:55:14 PM »
"Interesting is that, according to the owner's manual, "You can [snip] adjust the amount of focus ring rotation to operate Full-time MF function." via the dock.".
I'm not sure I understand well this sentence (english is not my native language). Does this means that it would be possible to have, for instance, a 270° focus throw instead of 90° in manual focus? Help would be appreciated, thanks!  :)

Ok, I think I get it now.
Here's what it says in the manual: "It is possible to adjust the timing to operate Full-time MF function." And it provides the following image.
I think it means you can change the amount by which the focusing ring has to be turned to trigger the MF override. So, let's say your fingers accidentally touch the focusing ring, that will not change the focus.

10
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens
« on: April 22, 2014, 02:45:17 PM »
The full text of the review indicates a 40% AF miss rate in formal testing, and includes statements like, "...the longer I focus tested this lens, the less sure I was about its focus accuracy," and, "Sometimes, most images are properly focused and when my shots counted, this lens delivered. But sometimes, more images are out of focus than I am comfortable with."  To me, that does not equate to, "...occasional AF inconsistency."  Which of those statements made it into the concluding paragraph of the review, which is the part most likely to be picked up and quoted, as it was in this post by CRguy?

+1.
The observations in the body of the review seem to have been toned down a lot in the summary.
AF inconsistency is a biggie. I will hope that it is correctable via firmware.

By the way, one advantage of reviewing pre-production or early production samples is that Sigma gets the opportunity to fix things before shipping out mass orders to the customers. Probably the only advantage IMO.

Let's hope for the best and keep fingers crossed.

11
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: April 21, 2014, 06:13:38 PM »
I've been shooting with my Otus lens that I received just after they were released. I use the lens on my 1D-X.

Looking forward to seeing your photos. Photos beat technical discussions any day.


12
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: April 21, 2014, 02:04:50 AM »
I am very impressed of what has been written. I personally believe it must be outside of the lens, but in this company I am a total illiterate. I have therefore sent off an email to Zeiss, with the link to this thread attached, to see how they reply. I´ll post their reply when I get it.

I welcome the return to images, but that must mean that more people than me must start posting. I am sure there are many readers of this thread who have the Otus.

Every morning, when I woke up in my cabin this Easter, a new icicle had formed from the gutter. At noon, when the temperature increased, it melted. Next morning, new icicle.

5DIII, 1/8000s, f2.2, ISO100

Which melts sooner, the ice or the bokeh?
Nice!

13
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: April 21, 2014, 02:02:09 AM »
Sorry, I'll shut up now. Bring on the beautiful photos!

Good idea. He is just trying to bait you.

Damn you! There goes my Easter entertainment.

LOL :P
Happy Easter!

14
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: April 21, 2014, 01:15:12 AM »
Sorry, I'll shut up now. Bring on the beautiful photos!

Good idea. He is just trying to bait you.

15
Photography Technique / Re: Am I the only one this has happened to?
« on: April 20, 2014, 08:42:49 PM »
Whenever I take pictures where there might be kids in the vicinity, I talk to the parents/adults to make it clear that I am not taking pictures of the kids, and if they are cool with me taking pictures in the area. Either they have been okay with it, or said okay and asked their kids to move over (happened once- but the parent might have misunderstood thinking her kids were ruining the shot, LOL).
I don't care if the parent is crazy or not, I wouldn't try and piss them off.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 49