January 31, 2015, 03:43:56 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 - TommyLee

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 135mm f/2 DG OS Art Coming? [CR1]
« on: December 16, 2013, 08:21:34 PM »
love my 35 sig A

have 135L ...it is great

if Sig makes one with OS AND has similar performance as 135L...
and ...for like $1,000....well...hello Canon   anyone in there?.... knock knock.....

will be nice to see what the 35L II looks like  in performance....  now that they retreated and redesigned and MAY reissue... to combat sig 35 f1.4...............

this Canon/sigma 35 f1-4 saga.......
is part of the hint/equation for the 135 path...how this is all handled....

I love my Canon lenses..
but the sig 35  1.4   is so lovely...   got my money back on the 35L f1.4.......

a 135 sigma f2 OS is JUST what I need....IFF it does the job right


had a 5D II and used it with my 35L and 85L II
nice gear all around...

when I got the 5D3...the lenses came alive .... all over the place....finally
accurate, more reliably sharper.... all points ar4e now useful....
(both cameras having been set up with MA)

then the sigma 35 replaced the 35L ... wow ...buh bye ...Canon
and the new SYSTEM with these 2  lenses is great... 
I love this pair walking the city as the sun arrives... ...the sigma keeps up with the 85L - IMO
I also carry the 14L.... it is nice...within its own limits

likely.... these two fast primes are the only stuff that works (for me) in low light of a bar / jazz club....
....and at the outer points too.... much better than the 5D II...
my 35 sig DOES work fast accurate and on outer points....

as for the 6D...have not used one... but I 'understand' the centerpoint is the reliable option..

my vote - for you - is for the 5D III

the two primes are the correct ones...
I also have the 135L...lovely,,,, but not the same ability as the 85L II... for what I like...

yes 135 is faster to focus ...and  better for some work... and with a flash ...likely beats the 85L..
but for those very low light ...special shots... the sigma the 35 and 85 and a 5D3  are where it art..

in my opinion


Lenses / Re: Is it still the time for the 16-35 ?
« on: October 27, 2013, 05:46:10 PM »
oops i forgot to write that my doubts are also because i take a lot of industrial photos to very big machines that the company where i work manufactures. Now i've the 10-22 but i've bought the 5D mkIII and i need to replace it.
I shoot :

10% landscape
20% travel reportage
30% event reportage
40% industrial photos

so the high distorsion of the 16-35 wouldn't be the best solution, but it seems the only one (counting also the big discount applied)

I had the 10-22 canon  and it was great
the 16-35 gives you the same picture but on a full frame....and same performance ...maybe a little better...  when I switched to FF from crop I missed the 10-22 and filled that longing
...in slightly better quality...but nearly exact view....with the 16-35 II

just sayin


Lenses / Re: 24-70 II with IS
« on: October 27, 2013, 09:51:52 AM »
as good as the Canon 24-70 II is...  a nice lens

the missing I.S.   ...is covered by 'errors and omissions...' clause in their insurance.

I bought and returned the 24-70 II ...almost sharp enough @ 70... not quite... for the price
BUT the missing I.S. just killed it for me.....
it would be used RIGHT WHERE the I.S. needs to kick-in.... so I get that shot....
silly not to have this available..

I will wait..
and that may include a new Sigma 24-70-ish  range too.......the 35 f1.4 wiped my (sold) 35L ....
Sigma knows how to please...

I believe Canon issued the non-I.S. first because it wouldn't sell...later
when the one with I.S. was available

just my thought


Lenses / Re: Is it still the time for the 16-35 ?
« on: October 27, 2013, 09:39:11 AM »
I have the 14LII,  sig 35 f1.4....  wow, yum, whoopee!
if you want aperture-speed and lowest distortion...they are wonderful

I kept the 16-35 II because it is also great
has more distortion but less chromatics  than 14L II
sigma is a class in itself...fagetaboutit Canon

the 16-35 II  really is the best, most versatile range to get that ultrawide bit included
look for a deal on a new one and add it...

if you want the next level of quality from...14-24 or what ever ...maybe...canon brings ...someday...
I believe you would do better from the two primes....
get the 16-35 II....I cant let mine go....

16-35 II and a 100 macro-L in a little side-case..
and I can tackle a whole city....crushing museums, bridges, tall buildings and people on the street...
just like Godzilla

you will likely get most of your money back because others also know this

Just my ideas


Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II $1699 at B&H Photo
« on: October 16, 2013, 04:11:02 PM »
are you sure about this....?

see attached ....from your link

Add it to your cart then go through the checkout process, and you'll see the $1999 price.

I am assuming then that..... THE - additional (= $1699 total) - REBATE of $300 comes from a later pdf fill-in and send?   after purchase

if this is the case

NOTE: I suppose this means the I.S. version is getting ready?....


Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II $1699 at B&H Photo
« on: October 16, 2013, 01:50:41 PM »
are you sure about this....?

see attached ....from your link....  10:51am wednesday


Lenses / Re: Sell my 85L for these two lenses?
« on: October 08, 2013, 01:20:13 PM »
As someone else has suggested, unless 2.8 isn't fast enough you may want to consider the 100L instead of an 85 - the Canon 85s, whatever other virtues they plainly have, suffer horribly from blueish fringing (different from the standard purple CA) wide open around pale objects that aren't quite in focus.  I've never seen that (or any other visible flaw for that matter) with my 100L, whose only flaw is one all macro lenses have - it doesn't focus fast if you switch suddenly from a close subject to a distant one (or vice versa).  And, thanks to its greater focal length and very short minimal focus distance, you can conjure up marvelous background blur that gives the 85L and 135L a run for their money (for all I know all this is true of the non-L 100mm macro too).  Its advantage over the the Sigma 85mm lens (which is otherwise excellent - or at least the copy I rented was) is greater mechanical consistency - i.e. you will be less likely to need to return it.  The 100L's advantage over all the 85mm and other 100mm lenses for Canon is that it has IS, which can be useful.

As for 35mm, I've not used the 35mm L.  The 35mm IS is excellent, as is the Sigma. both of which I rented when they were new.  The advantage of the former is its IS; the advantage of the latter, aside from the obvious speed factor, is its superior performance with regard to coma - which matters if you do much shooting in low light where there are small, bright points of light; this is nicely shown in the respective reviews at lenstip.  (Unable to decide which one's relative advantages mattered to me more, I procrastinated until the ridiculous short-lived Adorama price reduction on the 28mm IS occurred and bought one of those instead - it's excellent too.)

yes...I agree..............
 by the way...the non-L macro performs pretty similar to the L - I.S. version

my DO-ALL kit is a 14mm II, sigma 35 f1.4 (one of the best performing lenses I have owned) and the 100L because it does so much...
MAYBE the 135 f2 or maybe the 85L II ... but these are specialized and yes they are great..

but to go for a walk in Portland, Paris or Chicago... I want ultra wide (14),   ultra-fast normal(35 sig) and maybe a bit of telephoto from the 100L macro...  for a close up museum or flower shot
these do most of what I need....and have nearly flawless delivery

14L II has removable fringing but NO distortion, Sigma has NO ISSUES IMO, 100 macro is not as fast aperture  as ...say ....85L or 135L but ...as stated here ...can get close and MAYBE derive more back-blur than the other two teles... 100L is plenty fast to focus... if you dont ask it to go from 8" to 100 feet in an instant..and back again

the kit is small...
if really small is wanted try 14L II, 35 I.S. and 85/100 non-L(but they have fringing wide open..)

I.S. becomes very useful on the 100mm length... with no optical issues IMO
nothing touches the 35 sigma ...that has autofocus...

I await Canon's re-attempt at a re-release ...another try...with a 35mm L   II   ....
of course the price will be 2-3 times the sigma....

Lenses / Re: Sell my 85L for these two lenses?
« on: October 07, 2013, 09:34:46 PM »
first off ...the 85L mk I is pretty good  and   compares fairly well to 85 f1.8....
of course except for the extra aperture of the 'L'

I would guess you would enjoy the quicker focus of the f1.8....

it is nice to have a little  more than f2 aperture.. but the performance wideopen should be examined carefully .... as to purple fringing....which the L has also....
check out  some review sites on this

ME...I would maybe choose the 135 f2
.... or maybe even the excellent 100 f2.8 L   macro  for some more versatility...

I cant speak to the Sigma 85mm, but hear it is quite good

on the 35mm choices.......

I STRONGLY advise the Sigma 35 f1.4 OVER the 35L.
the sigma is sharp from the start @ f1.4... and much better performance/cleaner than the 35L

one last note:
 the canon 35 f2 I.S.  is quite good also...and about the same physical size as the 85 f1.8

maybe those smaller TWO would address the issue of weight you mentioned...
a pair of f2 lenses  about the same small size/weight

I say ...get the 35 f2 I.S.  or Sigma 35 f1.4  OVER the OLD 35L

Lenses / Re: Good, relatively cheap prime that work well across formats
« on: October 05, 2013, 03:12:16 AM »
I personally love the 35/2 IS. I shoot a lot at 35 and 50 which is roughly (yes, 35mm at 1.6x not exactly 50, but 50ish) what it would give you transitioning between a crop sensor and full frame. As I've stated before in another thread, it is a great deal at $549 after the recent price drop.

It is the fastest lens with IS next to the 200/2, has modern optics, and is actually on par with the L at f2 with regard to resolution. If you are willing to spend a few hundred more, there is always the Sigma 35.

+1   a perfect choice between the two 35s

there are reviews of 35 sig and 35 f2 I.S. .....in my opinion... the best lenses avail that work on FF(35mm) or 1.6 crop(50mm+) ... either are the top choices ...

I say the 70-300L

a good range... and seems to be a sharp lens...I dont have it
had the non-L.... it was pretty good...even at 300mm.....but the range was VERY useful..
and it matched with a second (or third) lens for travel very well..

you seem to want reach... that 70-300L likely does better than most for that

I am SURE the 70-200 II is too heavy
IMO it is almost a specialized lens because of the weight.. it is a real fine optic and a problem solver...but is truly 'baggage' sometimes
unless that is specifically what you use and want regularly(does ok with 2xTC too)

frankly the 35L and 70-300 cover a lot ...
add a less expensive 14mm (I prefer the 14L II) and these three do a ton of work on a trip
(or a fisheye)
I wouldn't enter a big city - as a tourist - without 14mm or 16mm...... gets a tall building in a single bound...and if you have the 70-300, you can reach waayy up those bldgs and bridges...to grab a gargoyle...



Lenses / Re: Best 35mm wide open????
« on: September 26, 2013, 12:29:42 AM »


When it comes to bokeh, I find PZ to be pretty useless. I do not find their sharpness charts much useful either.

I own the 35L. Tell me what you want me to prove to you - that it has great bokeh, or that it has poor one. I can prove both with examples.

this is such an accurate comment...thanks for summarizing all this in such a short statement......

yes...we start with some superb equipment....but then....
I am sure a lens' owner is responsible for SOME of the blur quality...by selecting what works in the background.....  it must be a lot like getting a good sound out of a musical instrument...all these variables.... distance, repeating objects, different size objects, light angles...

that is part of the mystery...ain't it grand?


Abstract / Re: Beautiful bokeh! Let me see yours!
« on: September 23, 2013, 11:42:55 PM »
Here's one of my favorites.

in all ways

Lenses / Re: Best 35mm wide open????
« on: September 23, 2013, 11:29:03 PM »
Nice Photo!

thanks.... MonteGraham
I like these people...and this shot
my daughter, her mother ...my replacement - NewDad - ha!..
all very nice folks....
I -old dad- had just been fed by NewDad.... a master Chef...

this 35 Sigma is PERFECT for these liv room shots... I just love it for that....

sometimes it is as good (bokeh) as the 135 / 85....

but the king is the 85 for sure...it solves all lo light problems...

I swear the 35 bokeh CAN BE very smooth....
sometimes it is awful with leaves ...repeating small stuff..etc

thre lenses ......  14L, 35 Sigma, 85L II = case closed

Lenses / Re: Best 35mm wide open????
« on: September 23, 2013, 11:45:20 AM »
Optically, the Sigma looks very good, and the bokeh is excellent.
There is a reason I warned against making generalizations from one comparison only. Here is an example of less than excellent bokeh:

You must have used a lens extensively to know its weak and strong sides. The bokeh performance can really surprise you in many situations.

the sigma 35 CAN get busy...and  not handle busy backgrounds as well ...as ...say the 85L II,  but this shot below is ALSO how well it can do....  you have to be careful with any lens if you are shooting for bokeh..

here I see
smooth and nearly identifiable secondary figures...smooth transitions...all judgement of course

love mine

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10