April 21, 2014, 03:12:28 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 - TWI by Dustin Abbott

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 99
16
I got a 44M-4 about a month ago along with a fotodiox adapter for my 5d mkii.  It does have mirror hang so I put a very thing rubber band in between the adapter and the lens.  The lens now doesn't focus to infinity but it does allow for a little bit closer focusing distance and stopped all the way down you can get everything in focus.  Love the lens so far but haven't gotten to use it to much yet, but I picked mine up for $10 with a body at a thrift shop, friend ended up wanting the body and gave me more then what I payed for the whole thing, so far I have made a profit on this lens without even selling a print!  Below are some fun shots with the cats eye bokeh.


Really fab shots.  Great examples of the unique character of the lens.  It is a special one to me!

17
Reviews / Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« on: April 10, 2014, 10:28:06 AM »
It was a difficult choice between the sigma and the canon for me

I really liked the canon and the IS but I decided for me the extra sharpness wide open and extra stop of light of the sigma was worth more, but that was when prices were equal with the big drop in price the canon is alot more appealing especially because its ALOT smaller and lighter.

And that is exactly why I do feel that Canon made a mistake with initial pricing.  There are those that argue that a high price for early adopters is the way to go and perfectly justifiable.  It may be justifiable, but it is also a mistake, IMO.  How many others like you would have purchased the Canon instead of the Sigma if the initial price had been $200-300 less for the Canon?  This excellent lens has had next to zero buzz because it was initially overpriced.  Contrast that with, say, the new Tamron 150-600mm, which has a waiting list of months everywhere in large part because it is a a good lens at an excellent price.  For that matter, look at the "shorty-forty".  It seems like it has ended up in just about everyone's bag (including my own).  Would that have been the case if it was even $100 more expensive?

I don't even use my 40mm very much, but I don't sell it because it represents such a small investment that it is worth hanging on to.

18
Reviews / Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« on: April 08, 2014, 02:03:14 AM »
Thanks to everyone for weighing in with your personal observations.  I'm actually just happy to see some dialogue about this lens; it doesn't seem to have gotten on many people's radar.  Too bad, as it is a deserving little lens.

19
Reviews / Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« on: April 08, 2014, 02:00:46 AM »
Very nice review Dustin!

It is good to see an image and photography based review, rather than chart porn. I have the Sigma and despite it´s phenomenal sharpness, I can relate to all your concerns and worries and why you decided not to get one. Clinical is a descriptive word.

Thanks for the valuable feedback.  My goal was not to bash the Sigma, but rather to demonstrate my reasons for choosing the Canon.

20
Dustin,

Great idea and nicely written article. I'll have to try this the next time I'm at the national aquarium in Baltimore.

Would you mind posting the ISO, f-stop, and shutter speeds of some of the photos you took?

Thanks again!

Vivid

Most all of the shots are in the ISO 10K-12.8K range.  Shutter speed is typically around 1/100th second, and all of the shots are wide open in terms of aperture.  With the 70-300L, however, that means that at best it was usually f/5 and more typically f/5.6.

Thank you, Dustin!

No problem.  The great high ISO performance of the 6D makes the 70-300L a viable option in what would have previously been unfavorable conditions.

21
I'm shooting a wedding there early April.  I grew up in the Scottsdale area, but haven't lived in AZ for nearly 20 years and haven't ever really shot the Tucson area.

22
I agree.  That being said, if a genuinely sharp wide open 50mm f/1.8 IS came to market (with the modern reduction in CA, etc...) along with curved aperture blades, I would take it over the 50mm f/1.4 all day.  I actually own the newer 35mm f/2 IS and it is a fantastic lens.  I rarely find myself wishing for a wider aperture as it is so completely usable wide open and the DOF is already pretty shallow.
I would be interested in a 50 f/1.8 IS as well, but find that the 50L does extremely well at portraiture, which is what I use it for 95% of the time.  I have heard great things about the 35 f/2 IS and would definitely like to try one out.  As the only Canon IS lens under f/2.8 that costs less than $5k, it's always intrigued me.  Have you reviewed it or blogged about it on your site?  If not, I'm sure more than a few of us would be interested to read your take on the lens.  I don't think I've seen a real-world review of it by anyone - just the usual charts and graphs...

I've got the review about 85% done, but it's been on the back burner recently.  I need to get it done!

23
Nice article Dustin and it's pretty amazing what the combination of new technologies (high ISO bodies) and old ones (polarizers) can achieve in the right hands.  I liked the photos as well and think the jellyfish one turned out really well.

The High ISO performance of this current generation is really pretty stunning.  If another stop or so can be gained in the MKIV of the 5D line or the 6DII, it really changes the game.  If you could treat ISO 12800 or even 25600 like you do 6400 now...wow!

The downside for the manufacturers is that photographer's need for primes is dropping.  A two lens kit of a couple f/2.8 zooms (particularly with stabilizers) really covers most every need.  Primes offer more creativity and flexibility with shallow DOF (and I love them), but I'm going out of the country to shoot a wedding next week and am only packing a 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 zooms.
I know and I hate to see the new lenses coming out with slower apertures because the shallow DOF is what makes [D]SLR photos so unique and different from compact cameras and phones.  I hope the camera companies realize that this is the one trump card that they will always hold over camera phones :).

I agree.  That being said, if a genuinely sharp wide open 50mm f/1.8 IS came to market (with the modern reduction in CA, etc...) along with curved aperture blades, I would take it over the 50mm f/1.4 all day.  I actually own the newer 35mm f/2 IS and it is a fantastic lens.  I rarely find myself wishing for a wider aperture as it is so completely usable wide open and the DOF is already pretty shallow.

24
Thanks for the info Dustin.  I didn't think of using the polarizer before.   :(  I had difficulty shading the incoming light outside just to get this.  Off-topic, the current display from flickr changed and take sometime to getting used to.





These look nice.  I've been toggling back and forth between the two looks on Flickr for months, so I am pretty familiar with the interface already.  I like it for viewing and commenting, but finding some of the other functionality of Flickr is a little clunky.  They are definitely changing their focus.  I'm a little concerned about the death the Getty Images partnership with Flickr, too.  I liked the approach of Getty inviting images through Flickr rather than going through the work of submitting images directly that might not get accepted.

25
Was planing on doing just the same thing in a month in Beijing and/or Shanghai aquarium. But I have my doubts. CPL is effective in removing reflections when there is a nice angle between the camera and the glass. And even then it would not be a 100% result. Wouldn’t it be more efficient to lean the lens flat to the glass (or at a small angle with hand covering) and discard all reflections whatsoever and gain more than a stop of light?.. I guess I'll have to find out myself.

I've done those things but a polarizer might (I'll also do some tests) make it easier.  Sometimes, a wide angle causes distortion of the subject which you might not want.  A longer focal length + CPL + high ISO might do the work.

If you have opportunity to both have full access to the glass and you can frame your shot effectively that way, your technique should work.  The polarizer approach has the advantage that you don't have to wait for people to get out of the way, you can frame freely, and you can get your shots off faster.  The aquarium I was in was particularly busy, but I didn't really have an issue getting the shots I wanted.  In fact, I shot the lead image in the article of the stingray from a crowd during a "show".  I wasn't even close to being in the front of the crowd (for some crazy reason they don't want the 6+ foot tall guy standing in front of the kids.  Weird 8) )

26
Dustin,

Great idea and nicely written article. I'll have to try this the next time I'm at the national aquarium in Baltimore.

Would you mind posting the ISO, f-stop, and shutter speeds of some of the photos you took?

Thanks again!

Vivid

Most all of the shots are in the ISO 10K-12.8K range.  Shutter speed is typically around 1/100th second, and all of the shots are wide open in terms of aperture.  With the 70-300L, however, that means that at best it was usually f/5 and more typically f/5.6.

27
Nice article Dustin and it's pretty amazing what the combination of new technologies (high ISO bodies) and old ones (polarizers) can achieve in the right hands.  I liked the photos as well and think the jellyfish one turned out really well.

The High ISO performance of this current generation is really pretty stunning.  If another stop or so can be gained in the MKIV of the 5D line or the 6DII, it really changes the game.  If you could treat ISO 12800 or even 25600 like you do 6400 now...wow!

The downside for the manufacturers is that photographer's need for primes is dropping.  A two lens kit of a couple f/2.8 zooms (particularly with stabilizers) really covers most every need.  Primes offer more creativity and flexibility with shallow DOF (and I love them), but I'm going out of the country to shoot a wedding next week and am only packing a 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 zooms.

28
Very good information. Thanks for sharing Dustin.

My pleasure

29
Here's a little technique article for those interested on utilizing a polarizer even in lower lighting conditions like indoor exhibits or (as the example photos in the article) an aquarium.

http://dustinabbott.net/2014/03/circular-polarizer-where/



"...In the perfect world for photographers, it would always be “golden hour”.  The light would be soft and directional, making even mundane things appear rich and interesting.  But in the real world golden hour only comes (at best) twice a day, and often not at all.  Experienced photographers learn to use things like circular polarizers and ND (neutral density) filters to help control the light in less than ideal conditions.  These filters are particularly helpful when the light is more harsh and glaring.  I personally like to have a circular polarizer available for all my lenses.

But this little article isn’t about using a circular polarizer in a conventional way.

It’s about why I screw on a circular polarizer in a very dark place like interior spaces at zoos and, most recently, at an aquarium.  What?!!"
...to read more click the link above...

30
I just got mine a couple days ago, today is the first time I got to shoot it, impressed so far.

https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/102275892907916454902/albums/5981941679104710113/5981941677733606626

That's very nice, how much is the sky held back?  If it's not, it looks like it is a bit.  But it looks natural, so nice job.  Not sure I would have put the sun in the center like that for this shot, but I have to admit it does work this way anyway.  I need to get one of these lenses.  I don't like the idea of the corner stretching projection (I'd prefer 16 to 20mm), but there's really no other wide angle that comes close in IQ, that I can justify blowing the money on right now.  Anyhoo...again bravo...and my favorite part is the snow and trees in the bottom half.

Thank you.  I almost always go for the natural look, even though the facebook folks seem to love the gaudy HDR ones.  This is a 7 shot bracket, enfused, no other processing.  The wind up on this tower was crazy too, so I know sharpness suffered because of that.  This was just a quick test of the lens, since winter in Wisconsin you take any sunshine you can get.  Once it warms up I'll get some real shots.

A nice image, and very natural looking.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 99