February 26, 2015, 06:22:40 PM

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 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 119
541
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Unthinkable: Swapped out 5D3 for 6D
« on: December 20, 2013, 09:16:33 AM »
Used the 85II on a portrait session yesterday and was getting a pretty high percentage of slight misses on a relatively static subject. I did pretty well with the same lens on my 5D3. Since switching over, the 85II has been pulled out twice for any significant amount of shooting and both times have been tough with regard to getting a lot of misses.

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you have done a proper AFMA with the lens.  I haven't used the 85II myself with a 6D or otherwise, but I don't have any issues with the 135L; I get consistent, repeatable results.  The 85II should be usable on a 6D; plenty of people were shooting with it on a 5DII, which I can attest had a slightly inferior AF system to the 6D.

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.

That is interesting.  I wonder if it due to the nature of the newer lenses being optimized for 1DX and 5III AF?  I'm actually very surprised at more hunting with the center point, which has (on paper) greater sensitivity to anything else Canon has.  I always use single point AF, myself, and in good light I don't have problems with any of my lenses on my 6Ds.  And that center point can lock onto just about anything in any light.

543
Reviews / Re: Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 Wide Angle Review
« on: December 20, 2013, 09:08:42 AM »
This lens just rocks for landscape work:


The Big Freeze by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

544
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: December 20, 2013, 09:07:47 AM »

The Big Freeze by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Shot in -25 to -30C temperatures, but a gorgeous morning nonetheless.  6D + Rokinon 14mm

545
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Unthinkable: Swapped out 5D3 for 6D
« on: December 19, 2013, 06:27:26 PM »
Used the 85II on a portrait session yesterday and was getting a pretty high percentage of slight misses on a relatively static subject. I did pretty well with the same lens on my 5D3. Since switching over, the 85II has been pulled out twice for any significant amount of shooting and both times have been tough with regard to getting a lot of misses.

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you have done a proper AFMA with the lens.  I haven't used the 85II myself with a 6D or otherwise, but I don't have any issues with the 135L; I get consistent, repeatable results.  The 85II should be usable on a 6D; plenty of people were shooting with it on a 5DII, which I can attest had a slightly inferior AF system to the 6D.

546
Canon EF-S and EF-M Lenses / Re: Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
« on: December 19, 2013, 11:16:14 AM »
This is the city of Tiberius in Israel:


547
Lenses / Re: DXOMark: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Reviewed
« on: December 19, 2013, 11:10:38 AM »
DXO gives this lens the same sharpness score (18) as the Canon 24-70 2.8 II and the Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC.  Perhaps I don't understand what their sharpness scores mean, but I'm pretty sure I've not seen any other review claim or show that the Tamron, however much they may like it, is as sharp as the Canon, or that the new Sigma, while a bit sharper than the 24-105, is also as sharp as the Canon 24-70 2.8 II.  What am I missing?

Roger here at Lens Rentals has the Tamron splitting the difference between the MK1 and MK2 versions the Canon both at 24mm and 70mm.  http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/01/canon-24-70-f4-is-resolution-tests 

Since he tested multiple copies, I would take his conclusions very strongly.  Some reviews have the Tamron as good at certain focal lengths, and most conclude that stopped down they are pretty much equal, but I have never heard anyone claim that the Tamron has more resolving power.  The only way that the Tamron resolves higher (according to Roger in another article) is if it is mounted on a D800E and the 24-70II is mounted on a 5DIII (in other words, just because of the difference in sensors).

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/01/a-24-70mm-system-comparison

548
Lenses / Re: DXOMark: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Reviewed
« on: December 19, 2013, 09:46:44 AM »
Interesting discussion!

Now I think I understand practical purpose of this parameter in DxO stats.

Did anyone see lenses with calculated T-stop equal to F-number on them?

Many of the better primes (particularly the new ones) are much closer.  I've already mentioned the new EF 35mm f/2IS, which has both an f-number and t-stop of 2.  In the past, I would say that many primes are more likely to be close than zooms (where more compromises are made), and that does speak well of the light transmission of the new Sigma 24-105. because it manages to transmit just about (almost) the amount of light that the f-stop suggests.

How can the T value be the same as the f number if the lens clearly vignettes wide open? Is T value only measured in the center?

Just asking, I have no clue how the T value is actually determined.

Good question.  I can't see it being anything else, as the average from almost every lens towards the periphery would bring the score down

549
Lenses / Re: DXOMark: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Reviewed
« on: December 19, 2013, 09:30:48 AM »
Interesting discussion!

Now I think I understand practical purpose of this parameter in DxO stats.

Did anyone see lenses with calculated T-stop equal to F-number on them?

Many of the better primes (particularly the new ones) are much closer.  I've already mentioned the new EF 35mm f/2IS, which has both an f-number and t-stop of 2.  In the past, I would say that many primes are more likely to be close than zooms (where more compromises are made), and that does speak well of the light transmission of the new Sigma 24-105. because it manages to transmit just about (almost) the amount of light that the f-stop suggests.

550
Lenses / Re: DXOMark: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Reviewed
« on: December 18, 2013, 03:16:00 PM »
Reading the trend in this thread regarding light transmission reminded me of something that I read in Bryan Carnethan's review of the 35mm f/2 IS.

"The above images were identically exposed with exception of the Sigma 35 that needed a 1/3 stop longer exposure to produce a histogram equal to the other lenses in this comparison. The Canon 35 f/2 is about 1/6 stop brighter in comparison, but its exposure was not adjusted in this comparison. "

Just to provide some balance.  Most manufacturers fudge a little on light transition and focal length to market lenses at certain acceptable standards.  While it's not a huge deal, it is worthy to note lenses that deliver better light transmission because you may be getting slightly more bang for your buck. 

551
Lenses / Re: DXOMark: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Reviewed
« on: December 18, 2013, 09:21:50 AM »
I wonder if this lens is really aimed at Nikon users.

As others have said, for Canon users this may be a nice lens, but it's not an "must have." The street price of the 24-105 "L" is less. Just about every full frame Canon user who would want this lens already has the Canon version. There are currently more than 500 in stock on the Canon refurbished store (selling for more than the street price of a new "white box" version).

Basically, the market is flooded already, so I wonder if Sigma may have made a mistake with this lens unless they are just targeting Nikon users.

I admire what Sigma has been doing lately and I appreciate the competition from third party manufacturers, but I'm scratching my head over this one. It runs contrary to most other recent releases from Sigma, Tamron and Tokina – where they have either been focusing on giving consumers choices that Canon and Nikon don't offer or they've been undercutting Canon and Nikon on price with staples like the 70-200 f2.8.

Big +1.  As soon as this lens was announced, I felt that the only way that it would be a success is if it destroyed the 24-105L optically.  It didn't seem to offer any other compelling reason to purchase:  focal length the same.  IS/OS.  Same maximum aperture. 

Downsides included:  Heavier and larger front element.  Not weather sealed.  Sigma's reputation for sometimes inconsistent AF accuracy.  Third party lens with potential downsides that come with that.

I think the consensus out there is that in SOME ways the Sigma is better optically, but it certainly doesn't blow the 24-105L out of the water.  That is going to make it a hard sell.  Just out of curiosity:  a lot of you own the 24-105L - are you planning on selling it to get the Sigma? 

I don't own the 24-105L right now.  I've owned two copies in the past and liked them considerably.  I own let my last copy go when I got the Tamron 24-70 VC and found that I wasn't using the Canon anymore.  But if I owned the 24-105L right I certainly wouldn't be selling it to get this lens.

552
Lenses / Re: Two Lenses Coming for CP+? [CR2]
« on: December 18, 2013, 09:12:27 AM »
These days it may seem anathema, but I have been so unimpressed with the Sigma's bokeh (a pretty huge deal in a wide aperture prime) that I went with the Canon 35mm f/2 IS instead, despite a slight sharpness downgrade from the Sigma.  I certainly think that Canon can improve on the Sigma design by offering a properly weather sealed prime that has both great sharpness, much more accurate AF, and smoother bokeh transition.

Where Canon has a problem is the price department.  If they aren't a bit more competitive with the pricing it will be very hard to market an only marginally better lens at a price point that could easily be more than double that of the Sigma.  I saw a sale on the Siggy yesterday for $699, so the price is certainly already dropping.  That's a tough sell for Canon.

The 24-70II is optically fantastic, but its very steep MSRP has meant that a LOT of people have opted for the almost as good but much cheaper + VC Tamron.  This a trend that Canon can't afford to keep repeating.

553
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: December 18, 2013, 09:01:33 AM »
Here's another Narrow DOF shot - this one in library under Wilson's Arch next to the Western Wall in Jerusalem.  These are Jewish sacred texts:


554
Abstract / Re: Beautiful bokeh! Let me see yours!
« on: December 17, 2013, 09:15:18 PM »
Shaggy Ink cap Coprinus comatus - 7D 300/2.8L


Nice.  Talk about some serious working distance!

555
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: December 17, 2013, 09:21:32 AM »
This is one of the many beautiful blossoms in the Galilee region of Northern Israel:


Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 119