March 02, 2015, 07:50:20 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 ... 40 41 [42] 43 44 ... 119
616
Reviews / Re: Review - Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD with Pictures
« on: December 08, 2013, 08:11:03 AM »
I just did a tour to Israel and Rome, and ended up using the Tamron for about 75% of the shots.  I brought home great results despite dealing with often less than ideal lighting conditions:  Here's a few samples:





617
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: December 08, 2013, 08:06:39 AM »
Helping with the lights.

Very cute shot!

618
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: December 08, 2013, 08:05:43 AM »


Here's another from Israel.  This is the ancient city of Tiberius by night.  The body of water is the Sea of Galilee, or Lake Kenneret.

Beautiful
Here's another from Israel.  This is the ancient city of Tiberius by night.  The body of water is the Sea of Galilee, or Lake Kenneret.

Another great shot Dustin. Nicely done.

Thanks, guys.  Here's another - a dawn shot over the Sea of Galilee:


619
Reviews / Re: Review: EOS M System
« on: December 07, 2013, 08:57:02 PM »
I was really excited to see this lens coming for one huge reason:  towards the end of the video I saw this and took a screenshot of it:

This is the first third party lens I have seen that supports the EOS-M mount.  That's exciting, because it speaks to at least some confidence that the mount isn't going to be abandoned.  I've already put in a request to review the lens when it launched in an M mount, so here's hoping that will happen.

I thought that Samyang 16mm f/2.0 ED AS UMC CS and 300mm f/6.3 ED UMC CS Reflex Mirror Lens was the first third party lenses for Canon M mount.

I checked the Samyang site, and you are right, although I've not yet seen a retailer selling them in that mount.

620
Reviews / Re: Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 Wide Angle Review
« on: December 07, 2013, 02:11:26 PM »
@Dustin
Thanks for the advice.  I did some test shots on the roof of our apartment.  I've tested at aperture f2.8 and f5.6 while varying the focusing distance between beyond infinity up to 1 meter.  The photos are uploaded to Flickr.  There are no extra sharpening or adjustment; only what ever was done during exporting from LR4 to Flickr.  All photos are handheld.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/31505768@N08/sets/72157638425870414/

Couple things I've noticed when looking at the apartment windows at the center of the picture:
- at f2.8, none of the pictures are sharp. 
- at f5.6, the sharpest is at 3m focusing distance
- at f4.0, the sharpest seems to be right at infinity mark but still not where as sharp as f5.6
- If I want to take stars at night, f2.8 could be a problem.  Should I continue to Now updated test at f4.0?
- How to I get sharper images at f2.8?  Is this possible?
- Am I doing something wrong?

I found a website that describes a solution to the focusing issue.

(emadeloc.blogspot.com.es/2013/01/brico-como-calibrar-el-enfoque-de-un.html)

I would assume most of the 14mm users in this forum have seen or even used this fix.  Has anyone try to fix the lens themselves?  I would like to hear your feedback.

What are your thoughts if I try this fix myself.  Does it look like I need it?  It seems easy enough even for an amateur like myself.

----------------------------------------------------------

I haven't tried to fix anything on mine.  I have just familiarized myself with where focus is for different applications, and my keeper rate is basically 100%.  My copy is sharp from wide open - you just need to be more careful with focus.  Live view is the best bet with wider aperture.


Thanks again for the advice from everyone.  Do you think I have a bad copy or it's just I haven't found the 'sweet spot' yet?  It seems like there is very little room for error when shooting wide open, maybe just a mm turn on the focus ring is enough.  I guess I need to play with it more and try smaller increments to get the right sharpness near and far.

BTW, I always enjoy looking at your photos.

To be honest, at the size that the photos are on Flickr, I thought they looked fine.  If you feel like you don't have a good copy, I would exchange it.  The time to do that is when the lens is new!

621
Reviews / Re: Review: EOS M System
« on: December 07, 2013, 01:07:47 PM »
I was really excited to see this lens coming for one huge reason:  towards the end of the video I saw this and took a screenshot of it:

This is the first third party lens I have seen that supports the EOS-M mount.  That's exciting, because it speaks to at least some confidence that the mount isn't going to be abandoned.  I've already put in a request to review the lens when it launched in an M mount, so here's hoping that will happen.

622
Reviews / Re: Review: EOS M System
« on: December 07, 2013, 01:05:58 PM »

623
Reviews / Re: Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 Wide Angle Review
« on: December 07, 2013, 08:32:43 AM »
@Dustin
Thanks for the advice.  I did some test shots on the roof of our apartment.  I've tested at aperture f2.8 and f5.6 while varying the focusing distance between beyond infinity up to 1 meter.  The photos are uploaded to Flickr.  There are no extra sharpening or adjustment; only what ever was done during exporting from LR4 to Flickr.  All photos are handheld.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/31505768@N08/sets/72157638425870414/

Couple things I've noticed when looking at the apartment windows at the center of the picture:
- at f2.8, none of the pictures are sharp. 
- at f5.6, the sharpest is at 3m focusing distance
- at f4.0, the sharpest seems to be right at infinity mark but still not where as sharp as f5.6
- If I want to take stars at night, f2.8 could be a problem.  Should I continue to Now updated test at f4.0?
- How to I get sharper images at f2.8?  Is this possible?
- Am I doing something wrong?

I found a website that describes a solution to the focusing issue.

(emadeloc.blogspot.com.es/2013/01/brico-como-calibrar-el-enfoque-de-un.html)

I would assume most of the 14mm users in this forum have seen or even used this fix.  Has anyone try to fix the lens themselves?  I would like to hear your feedback.

What are your thoughts if I try this fix myself.  Does it look like I need it?  It seems easy enough even for an amateur like myself.

----------------------------------------------------------

I haven't tried to fix anything on mine.  I have just familiarized myself with where focus is for different applications, and my keeper rate is basically 100%.  My copy is sharp from wide open - you just need to be more careful with focus.  Live view is the best bet with wider aperture.

624

625
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: December 07, 2013, 08:25:52 AM »


Here's another from Israel.  This is the ancient city of Tiberius by night.  The body of water is the Sea of Galilee, or Lake Kenneret.

626
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Unthinkable: Swapped out 5D3 for 6D
« on: December 06, 2013, 06:31:18 PM »
Putting aside all the battling about which one is better than the other in which way...

At the end of the day, I think the biggest takeaway from the whole experience for me was the self-assessment aspect. I think that many of us suffer from a compulsion centered on acquiring more and/or better gear which is what has led me to owning as much as I do. Going through the thought process and truly evaluating what my needs are was really eye-opening and valuable. I think it will be easier for me to let go of some of the gear that I kept around merely because I thought there "may be" a chance I'll need it. Coming to grips with need vs. want or potential need will ultimately help me to triage what will remain in the collection. Consolidating and downsizing not only lets me get rid of the unnecessary stuff, but will allow me to save up money for a single high dollar item that I'll use all the time i.e. the new ff body/bodies to come.

That's a great point, John.  Ego is undoubtedly a part of our profession/hobby.  I have learned the hard way that I don't have to have everything, and I have reached a point where I don't add anything to my kit without subtracting something.  I'm in the process of selling one of my cheapest pieces (85mm f/1.8) and am replacing it in my bag with the new 35mm f/2 IS.  I have a great zoom covering the focal length (70-300L), and I also have the 100L and the 135L.  I decided that I don't really need the 85mm, and a friend is very happily buying it off me.

P.S.  I've also learned that there are some very good lenses out there that don't have a red ring on them.  I've actually replaced two red rings with other branded lenses.

Good points, true.

However, it isn't necessarily all about ego. I spent over ten grand on a lens this year, a $12,800 lens to be exact. While I believe there may be a very few people who have egos so large that they might actually drop that kind of money on a lens "just to have it so they can brag it"...I think such individuals are VERY, VERY few and far between.

I bought the EF 600mm f/4 L IS II lens because I needed it. I'd been shooting with the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L lens for a while. The 100-400 is an excellent lens, it produces wonderful shots that can be very sharp. Don't get me wrong, I love my 100-400. That said, it wasn't letting me realize the kind of results I really wanted. A 71mm entrance pupil at 400mm just wasn't large enough to produce the kind of soft, creamy boke that I felt was necessary for my work. Not only that, the lens only performed ideally when stopped down to f/7.1...anything wider and the image softened, visibly (even with AFMA and a trip to Canon for calibration.)

The 600/4 L lens has a 150mm entrance pupil, which does WONDERS for background boke. The lens is razor sharp wide open, so I can get more light and use lower ISO settings. Combined with a TC, it gets me 840mm of significantly greater reach (subject size in the frame is relative to the ratio of focal lengths squared...(840/400)^2...my subjects increased in the frame by a factor of 4.4x!) Overall, between brighter and larger subjects with blurrier backgrounds, I have more detailed photos with more isolated birds and wildlife. I'm able to start realizing the kind of results in my work that I have worked for for years.

I currently own a 7D. The 7D is a great camera. I got it for an incredible deal ($1200 in 2011!) It has a fast frame rate, and does reasonably well at high ISO. However, similar to my 100-400mm lens, it has become the primary limiting factor. It does not do all that well, relatively speaking, at any ISO above 1600. Even ISO 1600 is lacking by todays standards, and can be too noisy in sunrise or sunset light (even with an f/4 lens). The AF system, while certainly better than the 9pt systems I started out with, has it's issues (namely, the constant inter-frame jitter that results in some frames being tack sharp and others being just the smallest degree too much out of focus that they can't be keepers.)

My only two options, given the expenditure of thousands of dollars on the 600mm lens, are the 1D X and 5D III. The 1D X would certainly be my ideal choice...but the 5D III is absolutely no slouch. It's AF system is blazing fast and extremely consistent compared to the 7D, and it supports f/8 AF, meaning I don't necessarily have to give up my reach (1200mm f/8 vs. an effective 1344 f/5.6...given equivalence, the f/8 on a FF sensor is actually just as good, from a total light gathering standpoint, as f/5.6 on APS-C). If I had the money, I'd buy the 1D X. It has absolutely amazing quality at unheard of ISO settings, and at every ISO setting from 400 up, it performs visibly better than any other camera I know of, including the 6D. Since I cannot afford the 1D X, the 5D III is my choice.

My desire to own the 5D III and 600mm f/4 L II lens has nothing to do with ego. It has everything to do with achieving my goals in my work. I am fairly humble about my work as well...personally, I am never quite satisfied with it...there is ALWAYS something I can do better, something I can improve. I hope someday I'll have developed the skill to achieve exactly what I want when I point my lens and press the shutter button, but I know quite thouroughly that day hasn't arrived yet, and won't arrive for some time still.

@John, I applaud your decision to step down to the 6D. For your needs and goals, it sounded like the ideal decision. It got rid of a camera you were rarely using, replaced it with a camera you use more, allowed you to continue to gain value from your collection of EF lenses, and gave you some extra funds to put towards a future camera that you will use even more. I can't think of a better reason to make the decision you did.

That said, @TWI, not everyone who uses or wants something better than the 6D is only out for an ego trip. There are legitimate reasons to NEED the 5D III, to even NEED something much better than the 5D III. Sometimes debating the minutia of technical details helps people figure out what they truly need, and make the appropriate decisions to buy the gear that best fits their goals. I need the 1D X for my birds and wildlife photography, and I'll "settle" for the 5D III. For my astrophotography, the 6D's lower high ISO noise levels actually make it the better camera, and a lens like the new Samyang 10mm f/2.8 manual focus lens would be ideal.

Different needs demand different things. It's ok if all you need is a 6D. I think where the debate enters in is when you get people saying the 6D is a superior camera to the 5D III, simply because it has a "better" sensor. While it may have some superior attributes, it is by no means a superior camera.

I think you may have missed my point.  I certainly think that in many cases high end gear is needed, and I can see perfectly where you are coming from.  I was simply commending John for having the maturity to take assessment of his needs and adjusting his kit accordingly.  I don't think the 6D is a better camera than the 5DIII.  I do think for certain applications the 6D is better, and for other applications the 5DIII is far superior.

627
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: December 06, 2013, 05:15:57 PM »
at 40mm, it's probably close to infinity focus.  My guess is that if you pixel peep at 100%, you'll be able to see areas that are just slightly out of focus.

Great capture Justin.  I've been practicing my "zoom" guessing, and my first inclination was 35mm... not bad :p.

You've pretty much nailed it.  It's all about where you focus.

628
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Unthinkable: Swapped out 5D3 for 6D
« on: December 06, 2013, 05:14:22 PM »
Putting aside all the battling about which one is better than the other in which way...

At the end of the day, I think the biggest takeaway from the whole experience for me was the self-assessment aspect. I think that many of us suffer from a compulsion centered on acquiring more and/or better gear which is what has led me to owning as much as I do. Going through the thought process and truly evaluating what my needs are was really eye-opening and valuable. I think it will be easier for me to let go of some of the gear that I kept around merely because I thought there "may be" a chance I'll need it. Coming to grips with need vs. want or potential need will ultimately help me to triage what will remain in the collection. Consolidating and downsizing not only lets me get rid of the unnecessary stuff, but will allow me to save up money for a single high dollar item that I'll use all the time i.e. the new ff body/bodies to come.

That's a great point, John.  Ego is undoubtedly a part of our profession/hobby.  I have learned the hard way that I don't have to have everything, and I have reached a point where I don't add anything to my kit without subtracting something.  I'm in the process of selling one of my cheapest pieces (85mm f/1.8) and am replacing it in my bag with the new 35mm f/2 IS.  I have a great zoom covering the focal length (70-300L), and I also have the 100L and the 135L.  I decided that I don't really need the 85mm, and a friend is very happily buying it off me.

P.S.  I've also learned that there are some very good lenses out there that don't have a red ring on them.  I've actually replaced two red rings with other branded lenses.

629
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: December 06, 2013, 02:55:28 PM »
"Vatican Secrets" - a roped off hall descending into the Vatican...


Very nice shot indeed. What´s the exif on this image?

ISO 200, 40mm, f/3.5, 1/40th.

630
"Vatican Secrets"...


Pages: 1 ... 40 41 [42] 43 44 ... 119