February 26, 2015, 11:30:49 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 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 13
Lenses / Re: 135mm vs. 100mm macro
« on: April 25, 2013, 04:40:08 PM »
I also own both of them, I had a 100 non-L at first but wanted the IS, so got the 100L instead. I bothered quite a time if I'd need the 135L. Though they are not far away from each other regarding their focal lengths, they are both useful in their own ways. I used the 100L for macros a lot in the beginning (obviously) but also as a portrait lens. Also I have it with me, next to a wider lens, when I am only hiking around or so because it got an IS, and it's weather sealed while the 135L is not. Keep that in mind for snow or rain, I had a shoot with a girl when it snowed heavily and I could have cancelled that without the 100L. I use the 135L almost only for portrait work and then from a tripod.

The 135L is a bit better regarding sharpness and image quality but they are still both very, very sharp, probably the sharpest lenses in that price segment. If you can afford it, get both, unless you only plan indoor use or in very good weather conditions / at daylight, then I would consider the 135L.

Lenses / Re: 17-40 F4L or Wide Angle Prime?
« on: April 25, 2013, 04:23:40 PM »
3 is wrong. Once focused, you can zoom as much as you like and it's still sharp. And sharp it is!

well as long as you only look at the center at least....

Right that is. Mid-frame is still quite okay but the corners quite suck, even when you stop down to f/8 or f/11. I sold mine and got a Samyang 14mm again, it's another world.

Lenses / Re: Do you still love 24-105L?
« on: April 25, 2013, 04:22:19 PM »
Received my Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art today, what a lens. I have minor focus issues on my 5D Mark III but it's no focus shift, only a slight front focus which I corrected in the body settings and now it sits. Really sharp at 1.4. I had the 50 1.2L before and that was quite a bit too soft for me, now I am satisfied. Still it's not 50mm which I wanted at first, but hey, there has to be a new 50mm 1.4 by Canon or Sigma sometime in the near future anyway.


The Canon design is an ancient design with blurry corners and a blurry mid-frame. It's not a top of the line lens.

5D Mark III / 135mm 2.0L. Shove that down your "not a top of the line" opinion.

Lenses / Re: Canon 50mm f1.2 worth?
« on: April 21, 2013, 10:37:02 AM »
I owned both lenses and used them on my 5D Mark III.

The 50L comes with weather sealing, generally feels much much more worthy than that over 20 year old 1.4 and has a beautiful bokeh, but it's not the sharpest tool in the shed. Below f/2 the optical performance is mediocre, it's quite soft in the center and even worse in the corners. The 1.4 performs almost equally but the bokeh is not that beautiful, don't get me wrong it's still great.

They both perform very good from f/2 or f/2.8 upwards, the 50 1.4 is very sharp at f/4 but if you want to shoot at f/4 you wouldn't need a f/1.4 or f/1.2 lens in the first place.

If you don't care that much about tack sharp pictures like a 100L or 135L deliver, they are both good performers, it's your choice if weather sealing and that extra half stop is worth the quadruple.

I know that pixel peeping makes no one happy but the comparison shows the difference clearly:

50L vs. 50 1.4 @ f/1.4
50L vs. 50 1.4 @ f/4.0

I now finally gave up my hope for a good 50 with wide aperture, bought the excellent Sigma 35 1.4 Art and hope for a new 50 1.4 by either Canon or Sigma (Art series) that turns up the optical performance by many notches.

you would be surprised many great photos are taken by the Rebels and m4/3. With good technique, framing, story-telling and skills, people can produce greater photographs that rival the IQ of 1dx + 85 1.2.

You do realize that IQ does not mean quality regarding to technique, framing, story-telling and skills, but IMAGE quality, regarding noise, sharpness and so on? In that point it is absolutely ridiculous to compare these combinations.

Literally, the first thing that came to my mind when I read the title of this thread was:

Seriously, I highly doubt anyone can not tell that a body that can handle high Iso that perfect, and a 85mm 1.2 lens are probably the best base for shots in such circumstances.

my 6D + 50 1.8 can do great street photography at night too and many folds cheaper than your 1dx + 85 1.2.

talking about IQ/price ratio, my combo is greater than yours. ;)

You compare a 50 1.8 to a 85 1.2? Heck, even a 6D to a 1DX? That is almost more trolling than the original post here.

Software & Accessories / Re: Websites
« on: April 19, 2013, 09:32:40 AM »
I set up my website www.florianbieler.de with WordPress as it is absolutely easy to use and I can post content wherever I want without the need to access ftp or something else. You can customize it to a very minimal level which only makes it work as a kinda gallery.

Street & City / Re: My surroundings at night.
« on: April 07, 2013, 04:10:59 PM »
Very nice images!

I loved the last one the most :)

What F-stop did you use for the last photo?
How did you gained that "star" effect on the street lights?

Aperture 11 it was, it's also in the Exifs which you can see at flickr on the right side. Lights always behave that way when you close the aperture and do long time exposures. The more you close aperture and the longer you expose, the bigger and thinner they get.

Street & City / Re: My surroundings at night.
« on: April 07, 2013, 08:19:54 AM »
No, these first shots were only taken with the available light, they are actually lighted that way. I bought two focusable LED lensers though, to bring out points in structures that aren't so well lit.

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: April 07, 2013, 06:51:02 AM »

Street & City / My surroundings at night.
« on: April 07, 2013, 06:50:45 AM »
A little series I started.

Welcome to the Manor. von Florian Bieler auf Flickr

Emission von Florian Bieler auf Flickr

Blue Wonder von Florian Bieler auf Flickr

Origin of Symmetry von Florian Bieler auf Flickr

Principal Curvature von Florian Bieler auf Flickr

Lenses / Re: Is the upcoming 50mm F/2 IS USM for me?
« on: April 03, 2013, 04:40:32 PM »
I had all the 50's... first the 1.8 shortly after acquiring my first EOS (Rebel T1i 3 years ago) and I quite liked it for the first while despite its lack of build quality and the focus often not really hitting home. I then sold it and bought a 50 1.4, which definitely was my favourite lens on the old Rebel, I was satisfied with the performance. Then I got my 5D3 and suddenly was not so satisfied anymore. Pictures were quite soft at open apertures, of course they also were on the Rebel but when upgrading from a Rebel T1i to a 5D Mark III the difference really hits you in the face.

So, I tried the Sigma 50 1.4 which of course achieves a good sharpness and overall has great image quality but as many others I got one where the focus was completely off, it focused wrong and even differently wrong depending on the focal distance. Trashed it and the idea of sending my body to Sigma to adjust the lens to my camera. I decided to wait for a new Canon 50, which just has to happen in the near time after new 24, 28, 35 and 40 and probably will also sport an IS. There were rumours of an upcoming 1.4 IS, I don't think it's realistic, 2.0 IS is more likely. But, as we all know, that rumour has been out there for months now, there is nothing on the horizon. So... what to do?

I always - always - glanced at the 1.2L, but steered clear from it because I was blinded by test charts like the one on the first page where one is lead to the assumption that the 1.2 is not any better, no even worse than the 1.4 or even the 1.8.

Nevertheless, I took the jump and bought it. I tell you, once you use it, you won't notice. Bokeh, AF, the overall build quality and just that special look of the pictures make up for every lower result in some test chart. If I need sharp, I put on my 100L or 135L. Weather sealing is just another gimmick I love, it's a perfect walkaround lens for walks or snapshots and it's exceptional aperture also makes an IS quite obsolete for me and furthermore it's a perfect toy for indoor portraits, when the light is not-so-great. I love it and won't exchange it now if a new 50 comes out.

A new 85 on the other hand could be something for me  ::)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D as a Compliment to 5DMkiii
« on: April 02, 2013, 02:56:09 PM »
Well, in my opinion it is harsh to come at other members only because he owns and uses not one but two 1DX and a 5D3, but then on the other side he's got nothing to show but coverage of unknown sports events. With that gear it is not so special to do that and that provides no good base for a discussion about this camera detail crap whether to use the center point or one above, it probably makes absolutely no difference anyway.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D as a Compliment to 5DMkiii
« on: April 02, 2013, 12:20:51 PM »
Finally, I never use the center point either.  Why would I? 

Just for amusement I thumbed through the first three pages of your Flickr stream to see what you shoot.  I found it amusing that all but maybe 2 photos had the subject smack dab in the center.

This is just the stupid comment I was expecting from you.  The faces are in focus right?  They're faces aren't in the center.  They are two AF points up the vertical set of AF points on my camera. 

In other words, you're wrong.  See ya.

No offense but this seems to be the right time to ask what the heck you shoot there anyway. Two 1DX, a 5D3 and all I see is completely random sports boredom. Are you a professional booked solely for this purpose? I'd sure use that gear for other stuff in my spare time.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 13