November 24, 2014, 09:05:41 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 5 ... 110
31
Reviews / Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Di III VC Review (EOS M and NEX)
« on: October 10, 2014, 09:52:57 AM »
Here is a new review of the Tamron 18-200 VC for mirrorless bodies.  I was pretty impressed with this lens other than the fact that it is a bit on the large side for the tiny bodies it is mounting too.  I’ve done both a written review:

http://dustinabbott.net/2014/10/tamron-18-200mm-vc-review/

A video review:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExA7Nlza7Gk

And a lens image gallery with some samples/full size images for download:

http://dustinabbott.net/2014/10/tamron-18-200vc-lens-gallery/

For those of you with either an M or a NEX, this is a pretty compelling choice because the IQ is very good.  It makes for a really convenient all in one package or something to bring along to compliment a more focused DSLR setup (with primes, etc...)

The Moira River by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

32
Dustin, very effective use of the 14mm FL, nice compositions. Thanks for sharing. I find 14 mm challenging on FF cameras.

Filters are very expensive.  I actually enjoying using the 14mm focal length as I find it very dramatic.  It does require a completely different way of thinking in composition, though.

P.S. Everyone:  I was out in the field with Camdiox filter.  Unlike the homemade solid ND filter I made (using LEE film), the Camdiox combined with the Samyang/Cokin ND grad produced a magenta cast.  Bummer.  It seems to be fine on it's own, but I really got it mostly to use in combination with the ND grad.  Something doesn't agree there.

33
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS USM
« on: October 09, 2014, 10:56:19 AM »
This lens remains one of my absolute favorites.  It doubles as a relatively easy to pack along, super sturdy landscape lens:

Valley of Autumn by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

It's color reproduction always impresses...

34
Always hitting us with really good (and much needed) reviews, thank you for that!

And awesome tie :P

Thanks!  Here's one more example:  I did the light painting and everything in a single frame - this is unedited, SOOC.  It can really produce dynamic images.

Rain Keeps Fallin' on My Head by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

35
Thanks for the review, Dustin. :)

I'm on the market for a wide angle landscape lens that could double as an astro/starscape lens, and this filter holder would make the Samyang 14/2.8 a great candidate for it. Do you have any info about the pricing? I saw some for sale in Italy on ebay at 229€, which i think is just too much for just the filter holder.

Wow - that price is way too high for just the filter holder.  If you are in Italy, you might want to consider taking a look at the UK site - http://www.samyang-lens.co.uk/samyang-sfh-14-filter-holder.html.  It is under 30 pounds for the filter holder.  This is the solid ND filter that I just got for the system:  http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Camdiox-165mm-Neutral-Density-ND8-Filter-3-stops-for-Samyang-160-Hitech-Lee-165-/400777816095?pt=Camera_Filters&hash=item5d5038281f.  I see from the box that they also make a ND16 (which might be even more valuable), but I haven't see one on Ebay yet. 

Distribution is really weak for this system, but it is very effective.  The ND grad is the single biggest deal to me.  Here's another single frame shot that I just took with the system that I have literally given only a one click processing to up the contrast and saturation a bit.

36
Here's another example from this setup.  I was able to get a nice ND8 solid grad filter for the system from Camdiox off of Ebay.  Anyway, these tools make this lens even more dynamic:

Driftwood by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

37
Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: October 03, 2014, 07:51:42 PM »
(doleful)

Hard to resist those eyes!


+1
beautiful
Yup! Lovely shot Dustin. The trouble is they do not stay this size for long...

Thanks, all.  She's actually about 9 months old, so won't get a whole lot bigger.  She weighs about 18 pounds.

38
Those are some lovely images, Eldar. Thanks for sharing!

39
Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: October 02, 2014, 08:32:13 AM »

40
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS by Dustin Abbott
« on: September 30, 2014, 09:15:33 PM »
I have one question. I am serious as I don't know. Who needs f2.8 lens in a uwa lens?
what type of photography needs more open lenses?

I always thought uwa are for more landscape photography. I always thought that smaller apertures are better for landscape.

If the f4 lens is so good who would want the f2.8 lens.

Wedding photographers, for one.  Or event shooters that need a faster aperture to help compensate for less than ideal lighting.  People that shoot nightscapes.  There's a surprising number of applications for a wider aperture even at wide angles.  There's a reason why Canon makes a 24mm f/1.4...and why a number of people here are clamoring for Sigma to make a competitor.

But yes, landscape shooters are not ones who typically need a wider aperture.

41
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS by Dustin Abbott
« on: September 30, 2014, 09:01:40 AM »
I hate review like this. It always push me to get one, even though I don't have a need for UWA yet.

Awesome as always Dustin  :)
I just have to copy that. (Dylan, thanks for letting me ;) )

I was out the last days in the forest with my 17-40 to get more used to UWA. If I was to... oh, my...
The only thing keeping me from going for this piece of glass is that I have other desires, too.


@Dustin:
Thank you for this really good and informative review.
Just one ;) point of criticism:
"• Not incredibly exciting?? " Where did you get this idea:
A really sharp, fantastic UWA with IS, good looking Bokeh and star bursts and you call it "not exciting" (even with those question marks)
Not really? ;)

I know, I know.  Maybe it's just me, but the lenses that I most enjoy using tend to be primes or lenses with which I can produce something more dramatic and unique.  Good zooms like a 24-70, 70-200, or this 16-35 are tools, but something like an old Helios 44-2 - that's for fun!!

42
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS by Dustin Abbott
« on: September 30, 2014, 07:39:34 AM »
I replied earlier that I reall liked the review, but I did come across a statement that Dustin made that to my knowledge is at the very least an exaggeration:
"figure out now whereas before they were like a mystery.  After being with a BPD, the simple games normal women play just don't work on me now. Get their attention, DENY them narcissistic supply and watch them chase you for it, if you look half decent and have the ability to put on a bit of an act it's easy"

If I am not mistaken the canon 24-70mm  f/2.8 II was introduced at approximately $2499.  I purchased mine not long after release for $2399. Right now B&H Photo is offering the lens at $2099 and do remember seeing it recently around the web perhaps in the $1800  range for very short periods of time...but I definitely have not seen that lens at half it's initial offering price which would be in the $1250 range. Correct? Maybe I missed some super sale or something but I do not think that the lens has sold that low. Maybe the initial selling price upon release was higher than I remember?

At any rate, the price on this new wide angle was a nice surprise compare to the Canon pricing trend beforehand! Definitely.

Also just checked out Dustin's video portion of the review and it was concise and excellent. Good speaking ability there!

Wow!  I don't know where that quote came from, but it wasn't from my review!  Wrong cut and paste?

P.S.  I understand the confusion, but I wasn't referring to the 24-70 f/2.8 II, but the 24-70 f/4, which debuted at $1599 and has been as cheap as $800-$900 already.

43
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS by Dustin Abbott
« on: September 29, 2014, 03:48:47 PM »
Thanks to everyone for the nice feedback.  I have yet to see anyone that is really down on this lens.  Not very controversial...just good.

44
Abstract / Re: Beautiful bokeh! Let me see yours!
« on: September 29, 2014, 09:23:25 AM »
My Favourite Branch...

That's lovely.  The autumn tones really compliment!

45
Lenses / Re: Shootout: EF 16-35 f/4L IS vs EF 17-40 f/4L
« on: September 29, 2014, 09:13:31 AM »
Stopped watching after a few seconds. A photographer that uses a white background while wearing a white and blue t-shirt, and is himself very pale white. Weird. All far too bright, I would need sunglasses to watch that.

And not even a few seconds of intro to ease you into the video.

I will stick to TDP for my reviews as Bryan knows what he is doing.

Wasn't focusing on the t-shirt this time around, rather the lens

My comment had nothing to do with your choice of t-shirt. Seriously?! That's what you took from my comment. lol.

Choosing a bright white background like that is not wise. Plus you need a 2 or 3 second intro of something.

Very poor video, and I personally would not take any camera advice from someone that produces someone like that about a camera product.

Oh no... I'm heartbroken  ;D

Graham

Graham - thanks for taking the time to do such a thorough review of the lens.  I have learned that doing reviews always opens you up to criticisms, but I notice from your KBID number that you have also learned the upside of doing them, too.  ;)  Keep up the good work.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 110