August 23, 2014, 03:53:34 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 ... 50 51 [52] 53 54 ... 118
Lenses / Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« on: November 14, 2013, 10:09:33 AM »
Great Thread. I just purchased the 24-70II and I have the 24-105, I was wondering the same question.

I don't think I would need IS for general walk around use and still be able to produce sharp images. Anyone care to shed light on this?

If you read form the beginning of the thread you'll find some interesting comments and observations.

The 24-70II is a superlative lens; the best there is optically, and I can well understand people who have purchased it ditching the 24-105. But the former doesn't have IS and it depend on how much you value this. Over the years I have come to realise that I need IS.

Here's a shot that has made me a fair bit of dosh. I was shooting at the school, thought the evening light was a wash out, then literally five minutes before sun set the sun began to break through. I ran down the hill with the 5D and 24-105, waited briefly to get my breath back and then began shooting the sequence at 1/30s because I needed through DoF and low ISO (100 ). There was no time to take or set up the tripod. I've included a 100% crop which is straight of camera, converted and un sharp mask of 100% 0.3 pixel as I have sharpening set to zero for these shots.  The final image is sharp enough to be blown up to 3 metres across and is on display at the school. We sell smaller ones 1 metre across the the 'old' boys and girls of the school.

Without IS this shot would not exist.

Landscape / Re: Stars above.
« on: November 13, 2013, 04:04:24 PM »
Practising for a moonlight landscape that I have in mind.

85/1.8 @2.8 1 sec 320 ISO 5DII

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
« on: November 13, 2013, 02:07:14 PM »
Night shot with the 85mm f1.8.

Shot a f2.8 1sec ISO 320

Lenses / Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« on: November 13, 2013, 11:54:56 AM »
I think the troubling conflict starts once you own both

I think this issue was addressed a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away….

Quote from: Darth Vader
There is no conflict.


(I also sold my 24-105L…)

I would expect a Neurosurgeon to have hands as steady as a rock. A Neuroanatomist must be a close relation.

Me, I shake like a leaf. And that's before the morning coffees.  ;)

1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: November 13, 2013, 09:11:47 AM »

Now i am excited to get there but it's winter so they will have too much clothes on lol :P

Yea but the hotels are warm  ;)

Lenses / Re: 85mm
« on: November 13, 2013, 09:08:08 AM »
But I don't shoot like that so sold my 135L but kept the 85 1.8. It's very good value and flexible, producing a pleasing bokeh that's on a par with the 135L IMO.

Thanks - can you (or anyone) tell me how the 85/1.8 bokeh compares to the 100L?

The bokeh of the 100L is very plain and even to the point of being boring which makes sense on a macro lens, quite unlike my 70-300L with a much more vivid but not disturbing bokeh, though it's radial on the edges on ff which would be due to the small lens diameter (67mm) and large zoom range.

i do have the 100L macro which doesn't suffer from CA but it doesn't melt the background like the 85 1.8 :(

Are there samples anywhere for the background blur difference in comparable/same images? Since my fastest lens around this focal length currently is f2.8 I have no idea how large the difference is.

We do have a 100L at Building ~Panoramics but I haven't used it much, certainly not for shallow DOF shooting. In reality there is also very little depth of field difference. An 85 @1.8 @ 3.75 metres has a dof of 11 cms according to the Canon dof calculator. Assuming you'd be a little further off for the slightly longer lens, say 3 metres for the same framing dof is calculated at 15cms.

I believe the 85 1.8 was designed with little chromatic aberration correction to give a smooth out of focus blur, hence bad purple fringing, but in practice, as with so many other things I think you would be splitting hairs with the difference.

Lenses / Re: 85mm
« on: November 13, 2013, 05:10:31 AM »
I'm talking about head portraits mostly. The 100L macro which i own, is fringless on that matter.

Um, this is a bit off topic (sorry), but I was wondering about getting the very reasonably priced 85/1.8 in combination to my 100L...

... but I somehow doubt this is really necessary, the aperture difference isn't that large and the 100L has IS. For which occasions do you find the 100L too long, or are you set upon getting an even shallower dof than f2.8?

Personally I think the 85 is too short for tightly cropped head portraits it you want to flatter your model with FF. Even 100 for that matter. This is where the 135 focal length is at its best. But I don't shoot like that so sold my 135L but kept the 85 1.8. It's very good value and flexible, producing a pleasing bokeh that's on a par with the 135L IMO.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!
« on: November 13, 2013, 04:40:03 AM »

 shot with a Nikon D3x during one of my flirtations with the Dark Side.
Just goes to show: 'gear doesn't matter'  ;)

Canon General / Re: Missing member RPT
« on: November 13, 2013, 03:39:14 AM »
Does anyone know the whereabouts/well being of RPT? He has been missing for a bit now. And has not responded to emails either.

He's just commented on black and White landscapes, so he's certainly alive and ...., well if not kicking then typing.

Lenses / Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« on: November 13, 2013, 03:14:27 AM »
The 24-105s trump card over the 24-70II is of course IS. Its usefulness depends upon your technique, but if you're hand holding shots where you want to hold small fine detail, I find IS incredibly useful.

I've actually tested this for my own benefit, and I've found that without IS I can get camera shake at random with shutter speeds up to about 1/320 with 50mm focal length. I'm not that shaky, but I do drink a lot of coffee, and tend to arrive late and be in a rush. However for myself the 24-70 II, despite it's superlative optical performance, could result in softer images than the 24-105 when off the tripod. So I stick to a 'general purpose' lens with IS.

In your case you might want to look at the 24-70 f/4 IS.  It has the sharpness of the 24-70 II, with better IS than the 24-105.  But, it is overpriced at the moment for sure as its now a 5diii kit lens.  Probably will be in the $1000 range in 3-6 months.

Already have ! In fact we've now two copies at Building Panoramics, but one is with our man in the States. Changed a Tamron 24-70 2.8 VS GTi for it.

A fine lens, much better than the reviews give it credit for. However I do like the 70-105 range but may eventually give it up for the better qualities of the 24-70 IS and its more compact, handy size.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!
« on: November 13, 2013, 03:06:41 AM »

The attached is more my own Backyard shooting, Kids Diving down to watch us shooting under a Jetty, Raja Empat Papua Indonesia.

Edward, that is a brilliant picture ! In fact I'd say the best you have posted. Like Lemmy's picture of the surfer this one is as good as it gets.

Black & White / Re: Black and White Landscapes!
« on: November 12, 2013, 09:32:20 AM »
Couple more shots from around Seathwaite Bridge during my washed out trip to the English Lakes. Black & White is still such a great medium for photography; lets make this thread larger !

Taken early in the morning with very low cloud.

Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 11, 2013, 05:09:30 AM »
Will Canon really produce a 135L IS ? It would be larger than the current one and undoubtably much more expensive, putting it in more conflict with the 70-200 2.8 II. Add 1.8 and both the fore mentioned problems grow. The current lens is the 'holy Grail' of L lenses because it is affordable to many. Put it out of reach and the only thing that will happen is the second hand value of the current one will go up !

It's also relevant that the likes of Sigma haven't (yet) produced a stabilised 135.

Black & White / Re: Black and White Landscapes!
« on: November 10, 2013, 02:25:03 PM »
Malham Cove, North of England, a huge extinct waterfall from before the last ice age. Larger than Victoria Falls in its day.

Duuuuddddeeee!  I love this!!  Man, I've got to get there!  Here's to the Motherland!  Awesome image, I had no idea that this place even existed!  Really cool, thanks for sharing my friend!  ;D

Thanks Ken, it's worth going to see. If ever you visit the North of England be sure to look me up !

Black & White / Re: Black & White
« on: November 10, 2013, 01:43:09 PM »
An old tree trunk decaying in a remarkable way. Very rarely seen this happening.

Pages: 1 ... 50 51 [52] 53 54 ... 118