January 25, 2015, 03:51:30 PM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
41
Lenses / Re: POLL: Which of these UWA options would you buy?
« Last post by StudentOfLight on Today at 01:27:00 PM »
Given that many people with FF cameras have a 24-xx L-series zoom...

In my case, I had the 16-35/2.8 II and swapped it for the TS-E 17mm as my ultra wide lens...

Neuro, do you use your TS-E exclusively on a tripod, or do you often find yourself shooting handheld?

Almost always on a tripod, though I have shot handheld a few times with the TS-E 24 (using shift, not tilt).
+1
42
Please, mrsfotografie, tell me why are you not happy with the Rokinon 12 mm f/2.0?
It is supposed to be of very high optical quality and reasonably priced. In fact, I though I might actually get one.
As you said, there is so much more tempting stuff from Canon for the EF that you'd really have to be a Sony fanatic to buy a Zeiss Touit or whatever for 1000 dollars when you can get a 16-35 f/4 at that price and it is quand meme something else, totally. Value is something where Sony is seriously lagging behind.

My experience with the Rokinon 12mm f/2 on the a6000 is very good. It has some CA but it's about what I expect from such a wide lens. Color is great.
It's very light weight and the focus ring is stiff but I have lots of practice with MF so it's not a problem for me.
Focus peaking is ok but I prefer to use focus magnification and I can nail the focus every time, easily.
The resolution is very good and works nicely with the high resolution sensor to produce great detail.
I gave my Canon gear away because I was so impressed with the results from the Sony system.


I'll upload some samples:
Note that the images were resized during upload, so some quality may be lost.
I always shoot in the "Neutral" profile, no HDR or heavy processing/manipulation.

This first one has no CA correction, -7 highlights, +11 shadows, +9 clarity, +15 saturation in Lightroom

(ISO 100; 1/50sec; f/5.6)


(ISO 400; 1/30sec; f/4ish)


(ISO 3200; 30sec; f/4ish)
43
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« Last post by nvsravank on Today at 01:21:45 PM »
If you compared images taken at ISO 1600 with a FF'd version of the 7D2 sensor and a 5D3 with both downsampled to the same resolution, the FF'd 7D2 sensor would almost certainly be cleaner due to the significantly higher QE.

It doesn't sound like you need 50mp for your purposes either...  ::)

I don't need 50 mp. Absolutely true. More to the point i think it would cause more trouble for my use.
I was looking at it as an upgrade to my current 5D Mark III / along with it. I think i am trying to convince myself to buy the 7D Mark II :)

1. When i moved from 5D to 5D Mark III, i noticed that I had to increase the shutter speed. Why you ask?, because i take dances where the dancers hands are moving very fast, what i noticed was even though the slow moving body was in perfect sharpness the hands were a bit blurry and it could only be attributed to the speed of movement. I could arrest movement only using higher shutter speed. Why was this not as much an issue in 5D with the same settings i wondered. My current hypothesis is that the size of the photo sites was much smaller in the Mark III and so i needed faster shutter speeds. with 50 MP, i am afraid it will be true again. I am going to test this hypothesis with a rental of the 7D Mark II this year.

2. Yes i can try reducing the resolution but already it is very slow in lightroom to review photos just for sharpness. Don't want to spend time and money on processing photos that are not good. 50 MP resolution wont be of use. I print at 12x12 inches for the most part. So even the old 5D's 12 MP was enough if fully utilized. The 5D Mark III just allows me to crop and so i don't have to worry so much about tight cropping which means i get more usable shots. Less number of photos with hands and feet cutoff due to sudden dancer movements. So more resolution not really useful for me.

3. The lure of the 7D Mark II is the additional reach of my 70-200 lens. I shoot my photos at F3.5 to F4 to keep enough of the dancer in focus. So I think i will have additional reach due to the 1.6 crop factor. With a full frame 50 MP monster, i surely will get reach but  then i just have to crop out more. So why buy this instead of the 7D Mark II.
44
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Which Sigma?
« Last post by ecka on Today at 01:17:46 PM »
Definitely Sigma 18-35/1.8 Art.
45
Lenses / Re: POLL: Which of these UWA options would you buy?
« Last post by pedro on Today at 01:11:08 PM »
I have the 16-35 F/2.8 USM II

An 11-24 F/4.0 would be a nice lens, but Canon are asking way too much for a hobbyist like me. But, maybe sometime down the road a third party manufacturer like Sigma or Tamron comes up with a similar product, I mean a 12-24 update from Sigma with a permanent aperture like F/4.0 would be great. Or as Tamron just announced the 15-30 F/2.8, who knows what they have in their sleeve next...;-)
46
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« Last post by Marsu42 on Today at 01:05:09 PM »
The 5D3 was released after the 1DX so just because a camera is a "later release" from Canon means nothing.

Development cycles count, not release dates. 5d3/1dx were developed in conjunction, so they are both "later releases" vs. 5d2 - same goes for the 6d's improved readout system.

The problem was the 5D3's sensor is more like they took the 5D2 sensor and just put it back in the oven to reheat. Will  Canon do that again? Wait and see.

You're confusing the sensor with the whole imaging chain. Esp. in the current Canon design, the sensor die is only part of what matters, the analog readout and further analog/digital processing is different between 5d3/1dx/6d.

You can see the result in the different noise patterns 5d2->5d3 and the big differences in dynamic range curve on the 1dx. And while the 5d2 sensor is the same generation as 5d3/1dx/6d, the whole system is a big improvement.
47
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« Last post by mrsfotografie on Today at 01:00:08 PM »
...
But concerning clean shadows: Your wish is granted instantly, because the 1dx/6d sensors are a *big* leap from the 5d2. I recently shot with a 5d2 from a friend of mine and was stunned how much banding it produced after postprocessing operations that I do with the 6d raw files all the time.

The 5D3 was released after the 1DX so just because a camera is a "later release" from Canon means nothing. The problem was the 5D3's sensor is more like they took the 5D2 sensor and just put it back in the oven to reheat. Will  Canon do that again? Wait and see.

The MkIII is not too bad, really. I find it gives me about one more stop than the MkII and much,much less banding. Mind I shoot in MRAW/SRAW1 with both bodies so this includes the downsampling effect (~10.5 megapixels effectively). Yes, ~10 megapixels really is enough for my purposes.
48
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D vs 5DIII images
« Last post by Marsu42 on Today at 12:57:50 PM »
Apart from missing the AF system in the 5D, the thing is I like the images of the 6D more than the ones of the 5DIII, I somehow find them more pleasing. I know the specs of both cameras have some little differences, but I'm not sure they explain this difference.

As you recognize yourself, your perception cannot be explained with specs. If you downsample the 5d3 to 6d resolution and account for the little bit softer 6d images (btw 5d2 is even a tiny bit sharper at low iso), it's a wash- they're same generation sensors. Differences only show if you really make use of the bit larger dynamic range of the 6d or raise the shadows a lot and run into the 5d3's larger amount of banding.

Could that be related to the type of post-processing I usually do in lightroom? Do any of you have a similar experience?

My general experience is that good post-processing makes a *vast* amount of difference, esp. if it's interwoven with a shooting style that has post-processing in mind and doesn't go for an ok "straight out of camera" look.
49
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« Last post by privatebydesign on Today at 12:56:24 PM »
agree..  just bunged the numbers through cambridge in colours diffraction limit calculator and it suggests around 1Gpix required to fully resolve a nifty fifty wide open..  (if it's diffraction limited that is)

LOL. Now go and shoot a resolution chart with that nifty fifty wide open and tell me what you are getting off center.............................
50
Please, mrsfotografie, tell me why are you not happy with the Rokinon 12 mm f/2.0?
It is supposed to be of very high optical quality and reasonably priced. In fact, I though I might actually get one.
As you said, there is so much more tempting stuff from Canon for the EF that you'd really have to be a Sony fanatic to buy a Zeiss Touit or whatever for 1000 dollars when you can get a 16-35 f/4 at that price and it is quand meme something else, totally. Value is something where Sony is seriously lagging behind.

martti, the 12mm is a very good optic and lives up to its reputation, there's some CA but that's easily corrected. Reason for selling it would be that it is a pain to correctly focus manually, even with focus peaking enabled and especially when stopped down. The focus peaking does not clearly enough identify what is in focus and what is not, when dealing with such a short focal length. This is not really a problem in itself because you can check the result on the screen or in the viewfinder, but it means that shooting with this lens is cumbersome if you want to shoot fast and move on. I don't see myself using this lens if I would have the zoom because the times when I need a fast aperture in such a wide angle lens are fairly limited (and for low light use I'd be shooting with my 5DMkIII anyway).

And yes I totally agree the Sony lenses are overpriced. I have the 16-70mm but comparing it to my 24-105L (size, weathersealing), the price just isn't right. The 10-18 is also a pricey piece of glass. And as for those Touit's, something like that deserves a full frame sensor.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10