Messages

121

Lenses / Re: Reikan FoCal EF 24-70L version comparison

« on: November 21, 2012, 04:23:24 PM »

Charts aside, I know from both the 24L and 35L I get great 1.4 images. May not be as textbook sharp as at F2 but in real life shooting I have found 1.4 to be impressively sharp. The 24 is a whisker sharper too at least on my copy.
I don't dispute the charts but I don't care to dwell on them too much. I don't need to. My point is that calling the 35 terrible at 1.4 is IMO inaccurate. But granted what's terrible to me may be quite different to you.

122

Lenses / Re: Reikan FoCal EF 24-70L version comparison

« on: November 21, 2012, 03:19:47 PM »

"Terrible" IQ at 1.4 for the 35? Have you used it? Mine is sharp at 1.4 where it counts. It allows for gorgeous images at 1.4.

123

Canon General / Re: Photography websites. Where are you posting?

« on: November 18, 2012, 05:58:03 AM »

Flickr for a lot of things:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/56462773@N07/

My Facebook page for particular highlights and other bits and pieces:

www.facebook.com/waynegrivellartandphotography

That's what I stick to at present...

124

Lenses / Re: Advice 5d3, wide angle

« on: November 13, 2012, 07:36:42 PM »

I have the 17-40L and I rate it highly at F8 despite what a lot of others seem to think. As I understand it, the 16-35 isn't much better overall IQ-wise (if at all) but obviously has the advantage of being a stop faster.

I also recently bought the 24 1.4 which is fantastic but for my purposes, I tend to find it's best strength as a wide portrait lens (for that it's excellent). The type of wide angle work I do is mostly night photography and usually demands some FL flexibility given tricky spots and opportune moments etc.

Thus, my vote would go to the 17-40L for the best value/overall solution.

Dream lens still? The Zeiss 21 but at $2K-ish, I have other goals such as one of the Canon TS's (17 or 24)

125

Lenses / Re: How often do you use 35L @1.4

« on: November 13, 2012, 07:27:59 PM »

I use mine between 1.4-2.0 90% of the time. I find even at 1.4, it's very sharp (better than I thought it would be, to be honest). As most of it's for portraiture, this works well for me.

126

Video & Movie / Re: Looking for some feedback

« on: November 07, 2012, 02:09:25 PM »

Agreed.... Well done. Good score, too.

127

Lenses / Re: 24 1.4 II- wow

« on: November 07, 2012, 01:37:16 PM »

Sure to soon!

128

Lenses / 24 1.4 II- wow

« on: November 07, 2012, 05:59:49 AM »

Being a wide angle shooter with an occasional penchant for portraits, this lens seemed to fit the bill for me and despite it's hefty price, I'm convinced of it's excellence. I simply cannot believe how razor sharp it is at 1.4 let alone 2.8. Despite comments I've read to the contrary, this has the sharpness/clarity edge on the 35 1.4 (and I rate that lens very highly). The shallow DOF at that focal length has a particularly 'journalistic' effect which is truly wonderful.

Just thought I'd put it out there at how chuffed I am.

Sold!

129

Lenses / Re: Hold out for EF 35/2 IS or jump in with classic 35 1.4L

« on: November 06, 2012, 04:06:47 PM »

I cant agree that the 35L and the 50 1.4 are of similar build quality. The 35L is a league ahead in that regard, despite it's age, IMO.

130

Canon General / Re: I have more money than I do needs... so what should be my next step?

« on: November 04, 2012, 03:56:38 PM »

Ha... In the context of that particular statement I can understand the response. Methinks that perhaps wasnt quite the sentiment you intended to express?

With 60d sell off, the 5d2 and the 135l seems a reasonably good answer to me.

131

Lenses / Re: Trip to Namibia next year... what gear?

« on: November 03, 2012, 05:23:47 AM »

So open ended. A 5d3 with a 24-105L kit lens would be a reasonable start.

132

Lenses / Re: Thinking about a 17-40 f4L USM. Thoughts?

« on: November 03, 2012, 01:12:41 AM »

I've said this before but this lens is a champion for the price. I agree at f8 it's damned sharp and for most landscapes that's what you'd be shooting at. I also hand hold f8 iso200 city / urban shots with it too and rarely get blurry images. The reciprocal guide for shutter speed relative to FL invariably means sharp shots. On FF its an excellent commonsense landscape lens which also happens to perform more than ably.

133

EOS Bodies / Re: Sell T4i for 5d ii?

« on: October 26, 2012, 05:35:04 PM »

There are things that are older and less up-to-speed about it but the 5d2 is still a great camera. Your 24-105 will suddenly shine. I'd do it.

134

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Tripod - Help

« on: October 24, 2012, 04:26:31 PM »

I'd recommend the Manfrotto 190XPROB or if you're tall as I am, the Manfrotto 055XPROB. Heavy but reliable. Love it. I've paired mine with a Giottos ballhead which I recall was about $150 and it is also perfectly fine. Both will hold a 70-200L ii and a 5d2 with ease.

135

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III LCD Brightness Preview Too Dark

« on: October 22, 2012, 03:37:45 PM »

I use my histogram for that sort of thing anyway. I find it more reliable than a preview.