January 31, 2015, 09:41:02 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 - sagittariansrock

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 107
Lenses / Re: 24-70 f4 IS vs. 24-105 IS
« on: January 24, 2015, 03:41:08 PM »
IMO, the 24-70 is nothing special.
I had it for a while, and it's just ok. The macro is pretty unusable for the close subject distance you will have to use.
The wider end is probably a lot better than the 24-105, though.
However, in your case it doesn't seem like you have anything to lose by getting the 24-70, and actually a bit to gain. So why not try it out? If you don't like it then you can always sell it...

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Ice sculptures - any tips?
« on: January 24, 2015, 03:36:06 PM »
Very nice results candyman.

Wished I had more time in a less crowded environment.

Very nice shots (the light on the motorcyclist is superbly captured), but I will restate what I said in my (deleted) post. If you had a wider angle lens, you could get closer and not have to wait for people to move.
Also, the effect of getting up close can often be dramatic.
For stationary subjects, the 4-stop IS of the 16-35 is more relevant than that f/4.

Lenses / Re: Where are the new Canon 50mm and 85mm lenses?
« on: January 24, 2015, 03:03:01 PM »
The Canon 50mm primes are the most disappointing set of lenses in Canon's portfolio. I've owned and used professionally every one of them except the 50mm f1.0 L and all of them have been disappointing when compared to the results from other Canon prime lenses. The build of a 50mm f1.2 L is impressive and it's a great lens, but it's just not as sharp as it's price tag would indicate (even stopped down). Shortly after it was released it's new value plummeted and stayed quite low for a long time. Then one day Canon raised it's prices and bumped it's price point because it was erm...f1.2 and therefore worth more. The saddest thing is that it's really tricky lens to use and one which most people go for if they are dabbling with a pro prime lens itch. The 35L and 85IIL are far better performing lenses. 

I'm sure that Canon have a new set of 50's in development, but when is anyone's guess. 

As to 85mm lenses....Canon already have those covered and they are both awesome.

Interesting take.

I feel like the 50 1.4 has a MUCH better rendering profile than most other non L canon primes. The 85 especially suffers from fringing wide open, and has a veeeeery flat profile. Its a great lens and af is blazing, but i sold it because it was too long for crop and all that purple fringing drove me nuts.

A 50 1.4 with IS would simply kill. I think we would all buy one. But i would want it to keep the beautiful rendering of the current version, not so much the still good 35IS.

I am curious- would you mind expanding on that? I have tried to love the 50/1.4, but failed on three separate occasions. It just seemed to lack contrast and color and it wasn't very sharp below f/2.8 or so. Due to the lack of contrast and sharpness, the out of focus effect looked extremely bland.
It seems to me like a lens that might work with sufficient post-production, unlike the 35L or the 135L which just pop without much help from Lightroom.

Lenses / Re: Where are the new Canon 50mm and 85mm lenses?
« on: January 24, 2015, 02:59:24 PM »
As long as Canon keeps selling the 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8 like they have been, I think we'll be in for a long wait.  Those lens productions must be almost pure profit at this point and while they aren't the world's best lenses, they are good enough for a great many people.  The 24, 28, and 35 lenses were rather poor in comparison and not good sellers from what I understand, so the economics to replace them made sense.  Sigma certainly hears the voices of discontent, however...

This is pretty much what I think as well.  The 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 are great as they are so the improvement will be harder to sell at a higher price point.  Canon knows that the ROI for a prime lens factors heavily into pro shooters' decisions and many already own the existing 50 and 85.  Canon must find or somehow create a demand for the replacement versions and that was a lot easier with lackluster 24, 28 and 35 version 1 lenses.  And while they're at it, Canon doesn't want to create an EF lens that is so good that the L versions become less of an upgrade at their even higher price point!

I assume zooms probably sell much better at a higher price point so they get all the love first.

Incidentally, I don't agree that Canon doesn't foresee a market with newer versions of the non-L 50 and 85.
Regarding the 50, there is certainly a large number of videographers who will like a 50 IS, and if Canon can bring out even a 50/1.8 IS sharp wide open and prices it at $ 600/700 then they clearly leave room for the 50L (a full stop faster for the bokeh people and dedicated portrait users), while they still allow the cheaper 50/1.4 and much cheaper 50/1.8 to sell.
Regarding the 85, there is a large amount of people who can use a faster focusing medium telephoto, and will prefer better color and contrast that what the 85/1.8 provides. Now, an 85/1.4 priced at just about 1K will affect both 85/1.8 and 85/1.2L sales (although breaking up the segment might increase net sales as a lot of 85/1.8 users will upgrade to the 85/1.4 and at that point it becomes a numbers game). What I think more likely is Canon upgrading the 85 to a 85/1.8 II and pricing it at ~ $ 800. That will let them make more profit on the f/1.8 bracket and not affect the 85/1.2L too much.
We will see I suppose.

Lenses / Re: POLL: Which of these UWA options would you buy?
« on: January 24, 2015, 02:25:04 PM »
Just for fun,
ASSUMING the rumored 11-24mm f/4L arrives, performs well, has a bulbous element, and costs around $2499-$2999: which would option would you pick below if you could only have one since they would cost around the same?

OPTION 1: 16-35mm f/4L IS + 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye
PROs: Offers both rectilinear and fisheye UWA depending on focal length, 16-35mm accepts filters
CONs: No rectilinear option wider than 16mm

OPTION 2: 11-24mm f/4L
PRO: This one goes to 11. :)  Unusually wide for a FF rectilinear lens.
CONs: Expensive for a single lens, no filters, no fisheye option available, lacks 25-35mm coverage.

Just curious about what the opinions and use case scenarios for people would be  8)

Why not include the Tamron 15-30/f2.8 VC as an option?

Software & Accessories / Re: Camera Bag
« on: January 24, 2015, 02:21:58 PM »
I know it is hard to find a perfect bag.
But I really want to avoid having many different bags. I hate owning stuff that I rarely use.
The Loka could fit my needs. I would like to actually see one before buying it. I live in Europe, I can't see on their website where it is on sale.
Looking at the picture I can see that the Tammy fits in. Not sure if a 70-200 would fit on top of that.
Anyone has tried one of these?:


You should write to f stop gear and ask. They are extremely accommodating at customer support. I wanted to know if the Loka fits someone of my height and they sent me a photo of one of their employees (of my height) wearing it. Plus, they have a 30-day return policy I think. And yes, they ship to Europe AFAIK.
The problem is, you can always go bigger (for example, buy the Satori and the XL ICU) but that might exceed the size restrictions of some careers. It seems to me, that the 70-200 plus camera will take up the two upper left compartments, and the 24-105 and the flash can sit vertical next to each other in the bottom left one. The large ICU is deep enough for each camera to carry their grips.
The other question is, whether it is even portable with all this gear. But I am assuming you are strong enough to be up to that task :)

Software & Accessories / Re: Camera Bag
« on: January 24, 2015, 09:15:37 AM »
I check the Lowepro Tactic. I don't like the design. The Loka is very nice. Looks like a serious competitor!


I added the link to the picture showing how the Tammy fits within the large ICU. Missed it last time.

Software & Accessories / Re: Camera Bag
« on: January 24, 2015, 08:28:39 AM »
The f stop Loka with a large insert might work for you except I don't know if the Tammy will fit.
In any case you can check it out. If fulfills all the other requirements.

Edit: looks like the Tammy will fit in the large ICU (the bag in the picture is larger than the Loka, but what matters is the insert is the same one that I mentioned above).

thanks for the comparison alan, just the fact that there are comparisons being made says a lot for the tamron. something that cannot be overstated is the bargain price and how well it fits into a pack!


Lenses / Re: Used Gear stories....
« on: January 23, 2015, 09:46:00 PM »
I hope this doesn't bite me in the butt now that I have an 85/1.8 on the way, but I have purchased many, many lenses used through various outlets, and almost all my experiences have been good. The only two suboptimal experiences were through Canon refurb, but were completely remedied.
I purchased (this is for personal reminiscence only, lol) the 28-105, 28-135, 17-40, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, and the 70-200 II through Craigslist. Only the last one remains, and it was like new for $ 700 off the MSRP. Love that lens.
Purchased the 24 TS-E, 100/2.8 non-L, 5D classic, 5D Mark II, and currently the 85/1.8 through FredMiranda. All of them (dunno about the last one) were perfect.
Only my T3i was DoA and I tested it only after the 90-day warranty that Canon refurb had at the time was over. Nevertheless, the call center lady issued a return label and encouraged me to turn in it, and they replaced it with another one. Also, there were paint chips on my refurb 17 TS-E, but Canon service took it in (free shipping both ways, again) and fixed it like new.

Lenses / Re: new TS-e lenses ?
« on: January 23, 2015, 08:08:06 PM »
To Privatebydesign... I had not thought to use a 1.4 TCR on my 24TSe II, other than the resulting hit of Max aperature, any other "side effects" you'd report? Sounds like a great solution.
And with repose to to the thread, I would love to see a second gen' 45TSe with the same axial rotations as my 24.

None that I know of, though some people have said the 1.4TC MkIII (the one I use) is so close a fit that the rubber ring on the end actually brushes the rear lens element, but nobody has ever reported any damage that I have seen, and I have looked!

The IQ from the 24TS-E MkII and 1.4TC MkIII is much higher than both the 24TS-E MkI alone and the FD 35TS.

Hope this helps.

Is this true for both the 17 and 24mm TS-Es or just the 24mm one?

Better to go for a Phottix Aion or even better a Hahnel Giga T rather than overpriced Canon remotes.
These work as cable release or remotes with intervalometers. And are far cheaper than the TC-8093 (or something like that...)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Help with upgrade from T3i?
« on: January 23, 2015, 10:11:41 AM »
Thanks for all the help so far guys! How much better would you say the FF ISO performance is? 2 stops?

I only shoot RAW so its pretty noticeable at 3200 for me. Even whites seem to start getting this rainbow fringing going on.

I like that FF has better DOF aswell. I was leaning towards the 5D III with a 24-70 F4 IS L. Since I have the 70-200 already. Though I may just go with a fast 50mm prime. I always shot prime lenses with film and loved it.

All of the 24, 28, and 35mm IS lenses are faster and sharper than the 24-70, and you will be able to get at least a couple for the same price. Yes, the 50mm at f/2.8 is sharper as well (or get the Sigma with fingers and toes crossed).

EOS Bodies / Re: Buying second hand, avoid low shutter count.
« on: January 22, 2015, 08:42:19 PM »
Being a cheapskate I like to buy second hand..   I got my old 30D second hand and will probably get my next body second hand.

The shutter count is an important feature on any sales comments.  However as an engineer I know how you get a usually get a "bathtub" failure rate curve.

Now I found a website showing shutter life:


I chose the 5DII as I've been wanting to get one.. just need to find the cash.  Anyway what's interesting is that there appear to be several cameras failing at low shutter count.  So I worked out from the data what the chance was that a known used working camera would fail in the next 10,000 shots.

(aplogies for the formatting..  the pertinent column is the right most, being the chance of failure in next 10k shots)

Number of shots on camera   Recorded working   Recorded failed   Cameras surviving   Failures in next 10k shots   Chance of failure in next 10k shots
100   0   1   1526   26.3   0.0172
200   1   1   1525   25.5   0.0167
500   7   2   1523   24.2   0.0159
1000   3   2   1514   23.3   0.0154
2000   3   2   1509   23.8   0.0157
5000   32   2   1504   45.0   0.0299
10000   67   17   1470   13.0   0.0088
20000   114   13   1386   10.7   0.0077
35000   148   16   1259   5.3   0.0042
50000   122   8   1095   3.4   0.0031
100000   296   17   965   1.2   0.0012
150000   262   6   652   1.5   0.0023
250000   233   15   384   0.6   0.0016
500000   93   15   136   0.1   0.0006
1000000   17   4   28   0.0   0.0011
2.00E+006   4   3   7      

By the looks of things I need to look above 50k shutter actuations.. and there's nothing to be feared by looking well beyond.

There are a couple of things to consider when using population statistics:
1. How do the odds favor you? As you interpret, if it was a faulty (or suboptimal, in any case) shutter assembly to begin with it would fail below 50K, and if it survives that number there is a good chance it would serve you for quite sometime. Here, you are correct to look for a 50K+ camera.
2. On the other hand, yours might be the one to break. Question is, how much did you save by buying a used (or well-used, in this case) camera to dole out the cost of shutter repair? Here too, it makes sense to go for a high-mileage camera as the cost of a potential repair is offset by the low price. You buy a "5K only" camera for $ 1300 and then end up paying $ 200 for repairs- that would suck.
So I support your conclusion. However, I wonder- considering the low price differential between the 5DII and a new 6D, the much better features of the latter, and the fact that a new camera will come with a couple of years of warranty (the second year through your credit card), why are you considering a 5DII?

Reviews / Re: 85mm 1.8 vs other 85mm Primes for portraits
« on: January 21, 2015, 12:43:48 AM »
It is a pity that Sigma is suffering from the lack of knowledge of Canon's AF algorithms. Can't blame Canon either, of course. If I understand correctly the Sigma Art lenses for Nikon don't suffer from the same AF inconsistencies?
I wish Canon made an 85/1.4. But I can't see why they would. And the Sigma one will likely have the same problems... Ah, well!
At apertures larger than f/2.8, the 85/1.8 is softer than the 70-200@85mm wide open at 2.8. Therefore, there is little reason to get the prime if you plan to shoot at or above f/2.8, already have a 70-200 and don't mind the weight. If you want to shoot faster than f/2.8 and don't care about sharp images, then it makes sense, but for me to buy a lens with overlapping FL, there has to be a more compelling reason (incidentally, same deal with 50/1.4 and 24-70 II). Especially given the fact that the 135L is such a solid performer wide open (same deal with the 35L).
However, I do often wish there was a fast 85 in my arsenal to make up for my lack of ability to create stunning portraits otherwise.

FWIW, I feel the Clutch is better for me than the Camdapter.

Got a link? Googling for "clutch wrist strap" sent me to endless pages of straps for ladies handbags  ;D

Boy, that totally cracked me up :D
Thanks to Tsuru, you must have found it by now.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 107