July 30, 2014, 02:22:48 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 - florianbieler.de

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 13
136
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: February 05, 2013, 04:49:07 PM »
I think the best landscape I've ever taken is this one:



Taken with 5D Mark III and the Samyang 14mm 2.8, honestly my first shot with that lens, it amazed the S___ out of me.

The next best I've done would be



that is also 5D3/Samyang 14



5D3/100L handheld

137
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: February 05, 2013, 04:47:30 PM »
I think the best landscape I've ever taken is this one:



Taken with 5D Mark III and the Samyang 14mm 2.8, honestly my first shot with that lens, it amazed the S___ out of me.

The next best I've done would be



that is also 5D3/Samyang 14



5D3/100L handheld

138
EOS Bodies / Re: on the verge of buying, just need some final moral support
« on: February 04, 2013, 02:02:08 PM »
Back to topic then,

I am also only an amateur photographer, started out with Rebel T1i / 500D in 2010, then went full, well almost full ack six months ago after a sudden money shower and bought a 5D3. I must say, if I had waited some more months till it was announced I *think* I might have also gotten the 6D plus a nice lens instead. Image wise that's not that much of a difference, but sure the autofocus system of the 5D3 is better plus maybe a bit more ISO capable. Regardless I do not regret the purchase, it's a great cam even if you only shoot as a hobby - as soon as you learn your way around the camera with all it's settings, you're going to produce great shots. Still it's a whole lot of money for only a hobby, so be really sure you're going to use it regularly.

Two years ago I choked when lenses were more expensive than, say 400$. Today I own the Tamron 24-70, Canon 100L and 135L, which are all around 800$ each. Once you go into that high priced area, you probably won't go back.

139
Portrait / Re: My 5D Mark III portraits
« on: February 04, 2013, 12:28:22 AM »
If I wasn't married, that first one would be my desktop photo

Yes, I always have some explaining to do to my girlfriend after such a shooting.  8)

140
Portrait / Re: My 5D Mark III portraits
« on: February 03, 2013, 04:09:05 PM »
More here, these with 100mm 2.8L







And this is Tamron 24-70


141
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
« on: February 03, 2013, 04:07:46 PM »







142
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: February 03, 2013, 04:05:00 PM »
The Fireblossom. 1/2000s, Iso 250.


143
Lenses / Re: 100mm 2.8L Macro IS as a portrait lens
« on: January 30, 2013, 11:47:02 AM »

So, I'll be able to buy a 135L soon and have both lenses!  Life is good.  :)

Exactly what I did now. The 100L is great for short range portraits, but somehow lacks quality when the subject is further away. There the 135 kicks in, oh I will probably use it for any portrait when I got the space available. 100L is still a keeper for its weather sealing and IS.

Also got a Kenko MC4 1,4x converter and this grants me 189mm 2.8 too  8)

144
Lenses / Re: 100mm 2.8L Macro IS as a portrait lens
« on: January 27, 2013, 09:45:23 AM »
My concern with the 100L macro for my intended use is that I've heard it is soft beyond 10-15 feet

This had my curiosity and after shooting new portraits yesterday and looking closer at older shots I must say:

Well, f*ck.

I shot two full body portraits from a distance of about 3 meters. They both show not "softness" but something that looks like slight movement or when you can't hold the camera steady in your hands:

I then crammed in my archives and found other shots taken in distance, here is a portrait that was heavily edited of course but you also can see it was not sharp in the first place

And in a winter shot this also applies

These are 100% crops.

This pulls my opinion on that lens down so much right now I think about selling it for a 135L.

I did some extensive testing of my 100L and discovered that it has mechanical issues in the focus mechanism. It produced similar results to what you are showing, but only did that part of the time. I tested another copy and it did not have the issue. I sent mine to Canon but haven't received it back yet...we'll see and I'll comment when I test it out. But given that, if OP goes for the 100L I'd definitely test it upon arrival or just go for the 135 instead.

Well I calmed down a bit now, the 100L has always been my favourite lens but I highly desired the 135L also. So I decided to finally get the 135L. That will probably eradicate the use of my 100L for portrait work but it's still great for macro and product photography.

145
Lenses / Re: 100mm 2.8L Macro IS as a portrait lens
« on: January 27, 2013, 08:05:14 AM »
My concern with the 100L macro for my intended use is that I've heard it is soft beyond 10-15 feet


This had my curiosity and after shooting new portraits yesterday and looking closer at older shots I must say:

Well, f*ck.

I shot two full body portraits from a distance of about 3 meters. They both show not "softness" but something that looks like slight movement or when you can't hold the camera steady in your hands:





I then crammed in my archives and found other shots taken in distance, here is a portrait that was heavily edited of course but you also can see it was not sharp in the first place



And in a winter shot this also applies



These are 100% crops.

This pulls my opinion on that lens down so much right now I think about selling it for a 135L.

146
Lenses / Re: 100mm 2.8L Macro IS as a portrait lens
« on: January 25, 2013, 02:47:21 PM »
As for using it for portrait, florianbieler.de has a couple of nice examples on this thread page from the Lens Gallery:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=1195.45


Hey thanks for pointin' me out ;)

I also played with the 135L a bit, definitely also a very desirable portrait lens and even another tad sharper than the 100L. As I couldn't really afford both I sticked with the 100L because the difference is not that big (also not bokeh-wise) and you got IS and Macro on top. I say if you can afford both, get them both but if not then think about if you need IS and Macro. When you only want to do portrait and that mainly from a tripod, get the 135 instead.

The 100mm macro has harsh bokeh past macro distance. It should never be chosen as a portrait lens.


Well that's just rubbish. Throw your face at my shots with the 100mm and show me "harsh bokeh".

147
Lenses / Re: problems with canon 50 f1.8
« on: December 14, 2012, 04:06:56 PM »
The 50mm 1.8 is one of the cheapest lenses Canon sells and its build and optical quality is equivalent to its price. It's cheap, it's soft at 1.8 and it focuses not correctly roughly every third or fourth picture. At ChilledXpress says - you pay for what you get.

148
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50 f/1.4 IS in 2013 [CR2]
« on: December 12, 2012, 06:06:56 PM »
If by any means the image quality is comparable to their new 35mm IS, I know a guy who will definitely get that asap.

149
EF 100mm 2.8L IS USM Macro, at the verge of winter:


150
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: December 09, 2012, 03:42:56 PM »
Samyang 14mm 2.8


Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 13