January 30, 2015, 09:32:20 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 - Sporgon

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 144
46
.. I'd rather have a few lighter, high quality primes...
@Sporgon,
Hoping to not offend the many excellent landscape photographers here, from what I've seen of your landscapes posted here, I rather consider that you've mastered the landscape genre.

With that in mind and along the theme of this thread, I'd like to know;
1) What "few lighter, high quality primes" make up your preferred landscape lens kit?
2) Is there one of that kit that gets predominantly more use than the others?
3) Is there one of that kit you'd choose as the only one if different from 2?

---
@Sporgon the 2nd comment, please, get thee to the Grand Canyon.
Of the many landscape and cityscape photos I've seen here that spark an interest and make me want to visit, the resent 'scapes of the Grand Canyon simply blew me away with the grandeur of the place.
I'd sure love to see what you might bring back from there.

---
edit...
What comprises the 5% you mention in your profile?
...edit

That's very kind of you.

I'm not suggesting that using primes produces better landscape pictures; the quality and versatility of a good zoom is undeniable. The trouble is I don't like a relatively large, heavy lens on a camera when I am roaming around the countryside on foot, but I do want speed and quality, so there is a conflict. I'm happy to carry a few light primes in lowepro cases on a belt.

Also I don't like ultra wide lenses because they make far away detail microscopic, and although the light passing through them is very dense - bright - there is a low amount of volume. If my landscape pictures do have an edge it is probably that many of them are ultra wide angle but not shot on a wide angle lens, because they are stitches, so my prime landscape lenses are 135, 50, 40, and 28. Nothing wider. Of these I would say that the most commonly used are 50 and 40, followed by 28 followed by 135. I have an 85 but have never produced a panoramic with it.

However a lot of my panos have been shot with the 24-105L, using it at 28 to 60 off the top of my head, but the distortion at the wider end and longer nodal point can lead to problems that lead to more work. Again this is why I favour shorter primes; no distortion and you don't need a panoramic head as much for difficult to stitch scenes. The 24-105L is not a lens I would recommend as a single frame shooting landscape lens because it is weak at 24 - 30 region. the 24-70 f4 IS is much better here. The 24-70 f2.8II better still.

Does one get used the most ? Yes, and its the cheapest of the lot, the 40mm pancake ! I love the way the camera handles with this lens on it but I don't love the fact it has no focus scale.

If I didn't have the 40 then I'd most probably be using the 50/1.4. If I didn't already have the 40 I would almost certainly have got the 35/2 IS to compliment the 28/2.8 IS.

If I was shooting single frame landscapes then I would almost certainly be using the 24 TS-E in the mix. In fact I'm going to rent one of these shortly and do some back to back shooting comparisons between this lens and a vertical three frame 1.5 x 1 'pano' shot on the 40. A 40 mil in portrait has roughly the same vertical field of view as a 24 mil in landscape format. The advantage of the TS-E is that you can reduce the lower light volume by using a wider aperture and tilting, but I will be interested to see if i can see a difference at normal viewing sizes. If there is a difference it wont be the 50 mp of the stitch, it will be the larger format giving it the edge.

One day I will get out to the Grand Canyon, but I am just so flat out busy it is difficult to get away for long.

The 5% ? Well I have loads of gear that never gets used. In fact I'm having a clean out, so my little personal slogan may not be accurate soon. 95% of the time I am shooting with 5DII + 40 or 50. Loads of other gear, some that never get used: 300/4L, 100L, 100-400L, battery grip, 50 macro, 200/2.8L to name a few !

47
Each to their own. If someone want a Fuji XT-1 so what ? It's a great little camera.

Regarding Luminous Landscape: well let me put it this way. Many of the best images posted on Canon Rumors leave LL in the dust.

And some of their recent articles have just been  ???

48
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D autofocus point issue any one have this?
« on: January 05, 2015, 04:03:50 PM »
Thanks for the help guys  problem fixed.        I had no idea the AF sensor was so small in the bottom of the camera I had previously been blowing air at the screen up top.   But once I used the air down loan at the sensor my focus points started working again.    I was |  |   close to sending it in to canon for repair.

Yes, dust on the AF array is the usual problem, but something that no one really seems to take seriously, or even be aware of.

49
Incredible ! That guy looks like one nieve dude to me. And no, I don't think that was staged.

Private : I had no idea you were such a cool guy. To casually snap off a frame filling ultra wide  shot of an angry elephant about to rip your head of takes some doing ! Not even any shake - well not much !

50
EOS Bodies / Re: Wait for it ... Revolutionary or Evolutionary in 2015
« on: January 05, 2015, 02:41:35 PM »
for Canon: evolutionary ... at best.  :P

many others: revolutionary.

2015 will likely bring mirrorless cameras with APS-C and FF sensors that finally surpass DSLRs in every single aspect of imaginge capture and imaging. It will be a revolutionary move in the history of photography. From pseudo-analog digital camera-besats (DSLRs) to truly digital, fully electronic, solid-state, mechanics-free imaging. Looking forward to it.  8)

What's your issue with a reflex mirror that enabled you to optically view through your lens ? Would a camera that had interchangeable finders satisfy you; one pentaprism the other a high quality EVF that is interchangeable with the pentaprism and automatically locks the mirror up and the camera uses DPAF for autofocus ? Or would you still complain about the depth of the body being too fat ? ( I can sympathise with anyone finding some bodies to hold as too fat but not necessarily cameras).

An APS camera can hardly be described as having a 'flappy mirror' anyway. If ever you'd used a Pentax 6x7 I think you'd have dissolved into hysteria.

I can understand those that like the shooting experience without a mirror, it's a very subtle 'snick' compared with the dslr's 'thwack', but it's not something that I can really get excited about. As for mirror vibration damaging the IQ ( which only happens at very specific shutter speeds anyway - about 1/15 th ) - just use live view or mirror lock up on a dslr.

I can't help feeling those those who really resent mirrors so much don't like what they see when they look in one .....

51
Portrait / Re: New Arrival
« on: January 05, 2015, 07:59:45 AM »
Many thanks to all you guys for your encouraging comments and compliments.

But don't worry about any lack of sleep or restriction of photo gear acquiring funds: now I really an a grandfather rather than just looking like one !

There could be one issue though. The mother is my eldest daughter and when she was at uni she bought herself a polecat ( ferret) as a pet. Lasted about four months before it was moved in with me permanently. She then bought a very expensive chihuahua as a pet. This one lasted about six months before it was moved in with me permanently.

I've made it quite clear that I'm not having a baby moved in here in nine months or so, permanently or otherwise !

52
Lenses / Re: 24mm - Digital Photography's magical focal length?
« on: January 05, 2015, 06:38:09 AM »
It's interesting that you bring this up: years ago a 24 mil lens cost nearly twice as much as the equivalent 28 mil lens. Now they are about the same, and I think this legacy has something to do with the massive popularity over the 28 that we now see, even though you could argue that 28 is often a 'better' focal length in that they are normally much better in the corners than a 24, and generally make for easier composition in relation to foreground etc.

Personally speaking, give me a 28 over a 24 anyday.

53
EOS Bodies / Re: Wait for it ... Revolutionary or Evolutionary in 2015
« on: January 04, 2015, 02:10:53 PM »
Definitely evolutionary. I think we will see Canon do more with the DPAF other than just AF and provide interchangeable pentaprism finders on at least one of their bodies: one normal pentaprism, the other an EVF. Locks the mirror up and away you go. Ideal for the video crowd as well as those few that have something personal against mirrors.



54
Portrait / New Arrival
« on: January 04, 2015, 12:57:56 PM »
New arrival shot on 5DII & EF 50 / 1.4. ISO either 100 or 160

First at f2, second at f4, third at f2. More or less straight off the camera, medium jpeg. After a touch of unsharp mask I still find the 50/1.4 as good as anything for this type of stuff.

55
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: January 04, 2015, 12:10:01 PM »
Last light of the day lights up Etton West Woods, Yorkshire, England

5DII + 40mm pancake

Wonderful photo!

Thanks candyman ! One of my more subtle pictures.

56
Those who have used both 17mm and 24mm TS-E, which one you'd choose? Sounds like 24 is more popular, yes? Is it better? You'd think for landscape the wider is better, but not this time?

Due to the 1.5 x 1 format you get a lot of foreground and sky, with the rest of the landscape a tiny strip in the middle. That's fine if your landscape includes an interesting foreground - like at your feet in the case of the 17 mil, but this is often not the case. Narrower formats are often better adapted to many landscapes, so if you want to maintain resolution you have to stitch rather than crop top and bottom. Hence why I like the option of a longer focal length for landscape.

Also the 17 TSE has a huge bulbous front element that is all but impossible to shield when shooting across or towards the sun.

57
I'm tempted to say the 24 TSE as well, but as the OP has said only one lens I'd be concerned with being stuck with that focal length, as I find that in landscape shooting flexibility of focal length is important, but so also is lens quality. I never use ultra wides ( ie wider than 24) on landscapes, I'd rather stitch as the far away detail seen through an ultra wide is microscopic. This is the same reason why I would choose FF over APS. When photographing things that are relatively close, like you could throw a ball and hit it, I cannot in all honestly tell any difference between FF and APS in good light, but when you are trying to resolve detail that is hundreds of yards or miles away it is a different story; you are stuck with shorter focal lengths on APS. 

So I wouldn't choose the 16 to 35 f4 as my only landscape lens, outstanding though it is. I think I'd probably go for the 24 to 70 f2.8 II. Not a lens I actually own because when it comes to shorter focal length I'd rather have a few lighter, high quality primes.

58
Landscape / Re: Within Forests
« on: January 03, 2015, 04:05:28 PM »
Late afternoon sun in the woods of Skipwith Common, England

5DII + 24-105L @ 28mm, 1/30, f8, ISO 100

59
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms Development of High Megapixel Camera
« on: January 03, 2015, 11:56:02 AM »
Since it's getting touched on... I'm sure this a pipe dream but seeing as how I assume this new rig will be DPAF and have (perhaps) 7D2 like rack focus and AF features.... what's the chances we finally get a REAL C-LOG clean HDMI out instead of Mush-Log now?  Slim or none?

Not sure high megapixel sensor will have DPAF. Manufacturing could be expensive. And even decent Full HD alone could be expensive (in terms of scaling all that ~ 52MPix down to only ~2 for video).

If they're talking about scaling up the 7D Mark II sensor, it will.  I just hope they have the good sense to include a touchscreen so that live view focusing won't be such an epic pain in the a**.

I have a hunch that the AF part of DPAF is only scratching the surface of what this tech may realise, so I think it will have the dual pixel, with, hopefully, more to it than just live view AF.

60
Portrait / Re: Post photos of other photographers in action
« on: January 03, 2015, 11:22:31 AM »
My 6 year old photographer in training (and one of her images)...

Love the concentration on her face and a good image to boot !

Here's one of me in action. You have to look carefully and realise I'm not Peter Pan.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 144