December 20, 2014, 04:55:19 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 ... 27 28 [29] 30 31 ... 112
421
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: December 27, 2013, 08:51:19 AM »
Here's a Christmas themed nightscape (and yes, the Bethlehem Star was added in post):


One Silent Night by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr


422
Reviews / Re: Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 Wide Angle Review
« on: December 27, 2013, 08:47:54 AM »
Here's a Christmas themed image, and another example of why the Rokinon is such a great choice for shooting at night.  (And yes, the "Bethlehem Star" was added in post, but the rest of the scene is a single exposure.


One Silent Night by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

423
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Unthinkable: Swapped out 5D3 for 6D
« on: December 23, 2013, 05:35:03 PM »
Just a note for the OP regarding FoCal - be very careful to have the proper EV for running the tests.  Slightly dim lighting produces a different result (sometimes consistently) than the tests run with properly bright EV.  That may not have been your problem at all, but I wanted to throw that out as a possibility.

Good point, Dustin. The thought had actually crossed my mind as well but haven't had the chance to redo the testing in a more ideal scenario. I actually performed the tests at my office during my break and it is not the same lighting that I normally use for FoCal. Will definitely be redoing them when I get some time at home.

I actually just ordered an EG-S focusing screen as well. Hopefully I will also be able to better see through the vf whether the AF is doing it's job properly on my faster lenses. Completely forgot that I could easily swap out the screen on the 6D since I had been used to the thought of not doing it with the 5D3 based on it's restrictions.

Since I had two 6D's, I may do the same on one of mine as I do have quite a few manual focus lenses.  I would be particularly tempted if I picked up a Zeiss to add to the kit.

424
Lenses / Re: Review: Samyang/Rokinon 14mm f/2.8
« on: December 22, 2013, 03:34:12 PM »
When you guys talk about lens profiles, is that for the in-camera correction or some kind of preset for Photoshop?

Is there any available from 5D Mark III. This lens is definitely interesting, but the distortion is a tad bit off-putting.

This is referring to a Lightroom/Photoshop profile to correct distortion. The 5DII profile will work fine for your 5DIII.

425
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: December 22, 2013, 10:18:22 AM »
Here's another winter scene taken with the 6D/Rokinon 14mm combo:


Winterflare by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

426
Lenses / Re: Review: Samyang/Rokinon 14mm f/2.8
« on: December 21, 2013, 08:43:05 PM »
Best star-lens for Canon IMHO, I LOVE mine.

I was a skeptic until I tried one for myself, now I'm a believer.

Do you have an idea of the amount of coma for the lens?

About like this:



It is exceptionally low, and many people who do a lot of nightscapes choose this lens over any other.

427
Lenses / Re: Review: Samyang/Rokinon 14mm f/2.8
« on: December 21, 2013, 07:10:12 PM »
Excellent, balanced review.  Its neither fanboyish or skeptical.  Well done.

428
Reviews / Re: A Samyang 14mm f/2.8 Wide Angle Review
« on: December 21, 2013, 07:09:30 PM »
Just to add to the collection, I recently completed a review of the Samyang branded version of the 14mm

Surprisingly good for the money, if you can live with its foibles

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/lenses/samyang14.html

Hope it adds some info of interest ;-)

I just read the review.  It is very well done, and your conclusions are very similar to my own.  Unlike me, however, you were able to directly compare it to the 14L, and I found that very helpful.  Thanks for sharing!

429
Lenses / Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« on: December 21, 2013, 04:43:22 PM »
Just my 2 cents, but I think that Canon really needs to stop charging such ridiculous initials MSRP's for their new lens.

$2499 for 24-70II to well under $2000 in just over a year.
$1699 for 24-70 f/4 to under a $1000 street price (as cheap as $899) in less than a year.
$849 for 35mm f/2 IS to $549 in about a year.
Etc... (and don't even get started on the EOS M)

I've heard the arguments that early adopters pay the premium.  Fine, but when a clear trend emerges that new products start well above market value and reach their true value in a year or less some light bulbs start going off, and that core, important audience starts closing their wallets and waiting.  I just think it is a bad business practice.  Yes, market forces often drive the value of new goods down over time, but, in the case of the EOS and the 24-70 f/4 you are talking about near 50%.

I'm a value conscious shopper.  I personally am not inclined to buy any new Canon product within 6 months of release because I fear that my investment is going to be wasted.  Premium lenses are often exceptional at holding their value, but try telling that to someone who is trying to sell a year old 24-70 variant when new prices have dropped by $600+.

The Tamron 24-70 entered the market at a $1299 price point.  Current price is about $1049 for the Canon version, although the Nikon is still at about $1299 for some reason.  That is what I consider more like typical market forces.  One of the advantages in the past to buying a Canon over a third party was the conventional wisdom that the Canon would have a higher resale value.  But what if that advantage is removed?  I bought my Tamron for $1149 by negotiating and shopping around.  I can sell it for at least $900, possibly more.  But at worst I have lost $250.  If I had paid $2499 for the 24-70MKII and was looking at a market of, say, $1800, to sell it, I think I would be pretty ticked.

In conclusion:  if Canon does release a new 24-70mm f/2.8 IS, I think it pricing it over $2500 is a mistake.

You came to the wrong conclusion.

Your conclusion should have been this: I care more for how much I can sell my lens for than the photographs I create with it.

Wow, that is a pretty huge generalization with absolutely no merit to discussion at hand.  You've never sold a lens to invest in something else that fits a need or to upgrade to a newer/better product?  You don't care about your gear holding value?  If the answer to both of those questions is no, then we certainly are different.
 
I categorically reject your final assessment.  I believe my work speaks for itself.

430
Lenses / Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« on: December 21, 2013, 12:51:33 PM »
Just my 2 cents, but I think that Canon really needs to stop charging such ridiculous initials MSRP's for their new lens.

$2499 for 24-70II to well under $2000 in just over a year.
$1699 for 24-70 f/4 to under a $1000 street price (as cheap as $899) in less than a year.
$849 for 35mm f/2 IS to $549 in about a year.
Etc... (and don't even get started on the EOS M)

I've heard the arguments that early adopters pay the premium.  Fine, but when a clear trend emerges that new products start well above market value and reach their true value in a year or less some light bulbs start going off, and that core, important audience starts closing their wallets and waiting.  I just think it is a bad business practice.  Yes, market forces often drive the value of new goods down over time, but, in the case of the EOS and the 24-70 f/4 you are talking about near 50%.

I'm a value conscious shopper.  I personally am not inclined to buy any new Canon product within 6 months of release because I fear that my investment is going to be wasted.  Premium lenses are often exceptional at holding their value, but try telling that to someone who is trying to sell a year old 24-70 variant when new prices have dropped by $600+.

The Tamron 24-70 entered the market at a $1299 price point.  Current price is about $1049 for the Canon version, although the Nikon is still at about $1299 for some reason.  That is what I consider more like typical market forces.  One of the advantages in the past to buying a Canon over a third party was the conventional wisdom that the Canon would have a higher resale value.  But what if that advantage is removed?  I bought my Tamron for $1149 by negotiating and shopping around.  I can sell it for at least $900, possibly more.  But at worst I have lost $250.  If I had paid $2499 for the 24-70MKII and was looking at a market of, say, $1800, to sell it, I think I would be pretty ticked.

In conclusion:  if Canon does release a new 24-70mm f/2.8 IS, I think it pricing it over $2500 is a mistake. 

431
Reviews / Re: Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 Wide Angle Review
« on: December 21, 2013, 12:36:21 PM »


Brrrr that looks cold! Credit to you sir for dealing with the cold to get the shot!

Close to -30C out there.

432
Third Party Lenses (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) / Re: Helios 44-2 58mm f/2.0 M42
« on: December 21, 2013, 09:32:51 AM »
This, and I am embarrased to say, is the firs time I hear about these lenses. Can someone give some background?

After WWII the Soviets took apart a Zeiss lens factory shipped it back to Russia.  It is basically a copy of the  Carl Zeiss Biotar optical formula.  The were one of the kit options on the Zenit cameras which were one of the most manufactured cameras in the world.  This make old Helios 44 lens a very common lens in Europe.  They are rather expensive in US but if you are willing to Ebay from Europe you can get one for a very reasonable price. 

I don't have one but do have a Helios 40-4f 1.8 that is not quite as good.

Ok, thanks. I guess that they are manual focus only?

They are manual everything.  They have a very unique bokeh signature and great color.  Very sharp in the middle of the frame even wide open.  Useful both artistically wide open and stopped down because very sharp across the frame.

433
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Unthinkable: Swapped out 5D3 for 6D
« on: December 21, 2013, 09:30:15 AM »


AFMA'd with Reikan FoCal three consecutive times yielding the same result. Figured it was good enough. I surprisingly have had the same findings as you regarding the 135 on the 6D. Seems to be just fine. But for some reason, the 85II on both occasions has been somewhat unreliable compared to when it was paired with my 5d3. The other ones that have given me the most problems is the 24II and the 24-70II. The zoom wasn't unreliable as far as AF goes, just seemed to hunt noticeably more in and in decent light which was odd. Most the other stuff has been fine.

The AF on my 24-70 2.8 II works great with my 6D, fast and accurate!  I also have good luck with my 135L, 100L and 85 1.8 at wide apertures.  My only lens that struggles to focus accurately at times is my 50 1.4, but that same lens didn't focus that well with my 7D or T2i either.

Good feedback.  Thanks!  Just a note for the OP regarding FoCal - be very careful to have the proper EV for running the tests.  Slightly dim lighting produces a different result (sometimes consistently) than the tests run with properly bright EV.  That may not have been your problem at all, but I wanted to throw that out as a possibility.

434
Reviews / Re: Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 Wide Angle Review
« on: December 21, 2013, 09:21:33 AM »

435
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: December 21, 2013, 09:21:14 AM »
Here's another one I took out on the ice:


Pages: 1 ... 27 28 [29] 30 31 ... 112