May 01, 2016, 09:27:20 PM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 ... 10
I'm very happy with this lens.  I used to shoot a Vivitar 20mm on my Canon T60 about a hundred years ago and the distortion in the corners was extreme.  Not so with the Voigtlander.  I took it to Italy in 2015 and used it mostly for landscapes, mostly at f/8.  But you'll see the first one below was actually at f/3.5.  A great little lens.  I use it on the 5D3.  With focus confirmation light I was able to get sharp images even with a foreground subject.  For landscapes I set it at f/8 and crank the focus to infinity, no problem.  I was also lucky in that I have an old 52mm thread Canon circular polarizing filter that I have un-retired to use on this lens (see second image below).   

f/3.5, 1/4s, ISO 1600:

The Pantheon
on Flickr

f/8, 1/250, ISO 200:

on Flickr

f/8, 1/250, ISO 400:

Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II
on Flickr

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Dpreview of the 80D
« Last post by 3kramd5 on Today at 07:33:51 PM »
Low ISO is where the camera is meant to perform best.

Can you point to any evidence that camera designers intend their products to perform better at one setting than another?

You could state perhaps that by some measures (e.g. dynamic range) cameras *do* perform better at low ISO (and by other measures, e.g. amplification, they perform better at high ISO). But to state they are supposed to perform better at low ISO is a huge stretch.
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Dpreview of the 80D
« Last post by Don Haines on Today at 07:33:22 PM »
when people leave in disgust, it does not mean that you won the debate or that your point of view is valid.


If sanity returns, so shall I..... but I expect to be silent on this thread.
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Dpreview of the 80D
« Last post by Orangutan on Today at 07:20:31 PM »
No, our real-world comparisons are perfectly ETTR'd - there is not even 1/3 EV headroom. We bracket hundreds of shots and take the one that is just short of clipping tones we wish to preserve in the Raw file, as explained repeatedly every time we present our results.

I wonder if this is the problem.  Perhaps in future reviews you could publish several of your bracketed shots so readers could decide for themselves which tones they would choose to preserve in the raw file.
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 DC HSM ART Reportage
« Last post by Alex_M on Today at 07:19:25 PM »

can you rotate the tripod collar to 180 degree so that it sits on top of the lens? If you can, then it should not get in the way of the zoom ring operation? It is not ideal, of course, but apart from being annoying / visually displeasing functionally still could serve as a simple solution to the issue.
Can you ask Sigma as to what was the reason behind their non-removable tripod collar solution for the lens?
Thank you.

I checked the manual and there is no mention of removing the tripod collar - only the ability to rotate it.  I'm afraid it is as bad as it seems.
Industry News / Re: Leica Announces the LEICA M-D Digital Rangefinder
« Last post by pwp on Today at 07:17:13 PM »
You guys are all over-thinking it....

Perhaps, but I'd suggest Leica is over-thinking it.  :)

I don't find Lightroom to be slow, its not in the same league as slow for DXO.  I just finished editing 2500 images. 

I am not a fan of sidecar files used by DXO and Capture one.  They seem to get separated over the years.  I much prefer the LR database.

I think that everyone has their preferred method of operation, so its good to have competition.
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Last post by AlanF on Today at 07:14:50 PM »
It was raining in Washington DC most of today. Last year, in bright sun I got a shot of a blackcrowned night heron using my SX50 at Rock Creek on the border with Georgetown. This afternoon, I got him again with the 100-400mm II on the 5DS R.  He was barely visible with the naked eye and is only a tiny dot in the middle of the shot. Here are the SX50 shot and the 5DS R for a comparison, plus a mockingbird which perched for a few seconds. Not wonderful, but it shows you can get useful images at 1/80 s under poor conditions with decent IS.
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Dpreview of the 80D
« Last post by dilbert on Today at 07:14:19 PM »
I think you missed the part where I said that we CR readers and DPR readers are in the minority....

I'm not so sure that those who read DPR reviews are in the minority. They're widely published and referred to.

Do you not comprehend what Don Wrote?

I did, but I wonder if you comprehended what I wrote.
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Dpreview of the 80D
« Last post by dilbert on Today at 07:13:05 PM »
A bird that is 200m away is going to be small even with a 600mm lens.

Again, I can only assume you have little experience with bird photography. Yes it'll be small, but 200m is by no means excessive in this genre. Also depends a lot on the size of the bird!

A 2' long bird will be 5% of a FF sensor at 200m away (where m = meters, not miles.) You're going to need a really big bird for it to take up significant sensor real estate. Which is why it doesn't interest me.

To be honest, most everything looks crap on overcast days when there is no sunlight because colors are muted.  Or maybe those that shoot ISO 3200 and above don't like color very much? Would explain a lot.

Now you've way overreached. Actually lots of things look good on overcast days - sometimes they look *better* because of the reduced contrast and more neutral colours.

I can only assume that you've grown up in a part of the world where it is overcast most of the time. I've never been anywhere that looks better with neutral colors and dull gray skies. And if there are parts of the world that are overcast most of the time, so what? Just as you can't turn a pig into a princess just by adding lipstick, so too you can't make overcast days look good.

You're being excessively narrow-minded as to what constitutes normal/reasonable/acceptable photographic conditions. I'd add that you wouldn't do much shooting at all in a lot of the world if you took this attitude...

Do you have an example location for this "in a lot of the world"?

Last time I checked the photos on the front page of flickr, there were vastly more photos ISO 100-800 than there were 1600 and above.

There could be a lot of reasons for that. According to Flickr's own blog
..., the top 6 camera models for 2015 were iPhones - which don't even have ISO settings of 3200-6400. So there's a sampling bias. To state you can deduce what most DSLR customers want or need from this is... absurd, to say the least.

I counted only images taken with DSLRs, not iPhones.

So yes, canonrumors has an obsession with high ISO that is generally not representative of the wider population.

Absolutely - but you are even less representative than us, judging by what you say. And your pronouncements on the average camera buyer are at least as biased by your own experience and judgment as everyone else here.

Or maybe in not being representative of the average CR shooter I'm more representative of the average Joe.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 ... 10