November 27, 2014, 10:04:38 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 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 111
I have never purchased a non-canon lens, but I must admit I am interested in this one. Looking forward to the reviews.

I once only owned Canon lenses.  I now have three Tamrons and a Sigma.  Both are doing great things at a great price, compared  to Canon.

That's my story, too. I've even got a Rokinon thrown in there now and am considering keeping the 12mm f/2 Rokinon in the EOS M mount that I am testing right now.

I had a head's up that this was coming, and I can't wait to get my hands on one.  I'm currently testing the 16-35mm f/4L IS, so I have a pretty good frame of reference.  I'm hoping Tamron can get me one before I return the Canon 16-35L so I can compare them head to head.

Lenses / Re: DXOMark Reviews Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4
« on: September 10, 2014, 04:53:41 PM »
Has anyone noticed that the 'true' max apertures as indicate by the Tstop is nowhere near the manufacturers claim? The Zeis is closer to a f1.8 lens than f1.4 and the rest fare no better....

T value is not aperture value, an f1.4 lens is a "true" f1.4 if the apparent aperture diameter is focal length divided by 1.4. The T value relates to actual light transmission and is pretty much irrelevant with TTL metering stills cameras.

Aperture value is always lower than T (transmission) value because however good the glass is you always lose some.

Quite a few of the latest EF lenses do seem to have a T value that is the same as the aperture: the 24-70 IS, 40 pancake, 24/28/35 IS primes. These are all slower lenses but it does look like Canon are achieving a very high light transmission efficiency - you know - to make up for the sensor.........

LOL - but a solid point, and part of why I was surprised that the T-stop lagged so much with the Otus 85.  I raised the point in my 35IS review that the light transmission between the Sigma 1.4Art and the 35IS wasn't all that big.  The 35IS feels like it has a wider aperture than f/2 (although it actually just REALLY has an f/2 aperture, instead of a f/2.3 or such.)

It's probably just me, but I wasn't blown away by the images in the video.  Maybe I am now just jaded.

I know what you mean.  Several of them seemed really underexposed, but the crops certainly showed the great detail rendering.

Lenses / Re: DXOMark Reviews Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4
« on: September 10, 2014, 03:44:51 PM »
I'm actually surprised by the light transmission issue here.  The front element on the Otus is HUGE (86mm, if I recall).  I would expect light transmission to be better.

Still, watching this video makes it clear how HUGE of a difference there is in microcontrast with this lens:

Where I reviewed the Zeiss Sonnar T 135/2, it literally destroyed my beloved 135L in this regard.

Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM
« on: September 09, 2014, 11:24:39 AM »
I'm currently in the processing of reviewing this lens.  There's not much to criticize; it's pretty great!

Late Summer Bliss by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Here's another example created with this blending process:

Late Summer Bliss by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Not sure which version of photoshop you're using, but certainly on CS6 I'm finding that the stitching is as good as, if not better than, PTGui pro.

You're certainly right about the need to still B&B despite the likes of Exmor, just need to write it in really BIG letters.

I'm using the most recent version of Photoshop, which is CC 2014 edition.

I was really impressed when I moved to the 6D by the ability to pull shadows (and to a lesser extent, recover highlights), but there are still a lot of scenes that require far more dynamic range than what current sensors are capable of recording in a single exposure.

Thanks, Dustin. Looks helpful.

My pleasure.  It was really helpful to me when I learned the workflow.  I like using luminosity masks, too, but that can be a very time consuming process.

This is about a six minute video tutorial on how to easily blend multiple exposures into first a 32bit HDR, tone it in Adobe Camera Raw, and then convert it into a fully editable 16B file with the full range of the blended exposures.  Easy to use, and now that the there is the "Photography" option for Creative Cloud it is also a very reasonable way to get high end landscape imagery.

The link to the brief article and video tutorial is here:

Here is the image that we blend in the tutorial with no processing other the blend of three exposures:

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
« on: September 08, 2014, 09:48:22 AM »
I don't use it particularly often, but this lens is always a treat to pull out and use:

Unfolding by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Portrait / Re: We, The Photographers......Self Portaits..a Who's Who on CR
« on: September 06, 2014, 08:31:36 AM »
Taking advantage of four days worth of scruff after camping and shooting in Algonquin Provincial Park in Ontario, Canada.

Just Me by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: SIGMA 150-600!!
« on: September 05, 2014, 10:22:47 AM »
Well, here it is:
I believe this will be a better option than the Tamron optically, maybe I'll buy one for myself  ::)

I wouldn't be surprised if the optics are marginally better (bigger, heavier, larger front element), but my biggest concern (as with all Sigma products) will be AF accuracy.  At longer focal lengths even a little miss produces an out of focus image.

Still, options are good.  If this is a better lens than the Tamron it might attract the middle tier of buyers, but the fact that it may cost twice as much means that Tamron will probably still claim the majority of amateur sales.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: September 05, 2014, 10:11:09 AM »

This is an excellent shot. We have Ibis here a couple times of the year for a very short time. I've tried to get pictures of them in flight, but they are usually too far away. This pose is really excellent though.

I agree.  Not an easy pose to land, but this is done nicely.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!
« on: September 04, 2014, 09:54:49 AM »
Here's a little coyote snarl for you:

Come Close, I Won't Bite by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!
« on: September 03, 2014, 03:40:07 PM »
Dustin, is that a wild or captive wolf?

It's in a preserve, so does that qualify as a wild or captive?

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 111