scyrene said:

I can go from 16mm to 1600mm, what do I win?

Click to expand...

danfaz said:

10-1000 here, with 3 lenses and a 2x extender.

Click to expand...

Del Paso said:

You beat me, mine is from 15mm to 560mm.
Life is so unfair!

Click to expand...

Ozarker said:

I'm very interested in the 10-20/4, Neuro. You are the go to guy for knowledge. How do you like the lens? Thanks.

Click to expand...

Ozarker said:

I'm dying here! So many great lenses, so little

Click to expand...

Del Paso said:

You beat me, mine is from 15mm to 560mm.
Life is so unfair!

Click to expand...

neuroanatomist said:

When I go out to shoot birds, I now bring only the supertele. I used to bring along a standard zoom, 'just in case', but after a few years of never using it I no longer bother unless I know there will be landscape opportunities.

However, when traveling I am always opportunistic. I bring the 10-20/4, a standard zoom (typically 24-105/4), the 100-500L or RF 100-400, and several lenses in between...usually a TS-E, a fast prime for indoor shooting, etc.). I bring several lenses in a carryon, but use a shoulder bag with a subset of them for any given outing.

Click to expand...

Dragon said:

No argument re the best being a good image to start with. I find with Topaz that I have to experiment with the different modes and the slider level to get the best result with the least artifacts. Note that they do update the models almost weekly (so you do need a wideband connection to keep up) and some of the models are getting pretty good. AI will (almost by definition) add detail (i.e. artifacts) that were not in the original image exactly as presented. That is also the virtual case when a human eye looks at a noisy picture and interpolates a better result. For most work, I think the AI programs will be able to produce much improved images from noisy originals that meet the test of a critical eye, but they are clearly going to be a challenge for legal images in court cases (where exacting detail is critical). I also dislike the subscription model, but It seems that all software is eventually going to go that way. Kind of like phone companies charging a flat fee every month instead of billing by the call. They want to know what their revenue is going to be. The model I really dislike is the one where the processing (and backup) is in the "cloud". Topaz at least gives you the choice of not processing in the cloud (i.e. on their computers). Apple and Microsoft are really bad about that.

Click to expand...

Noreaster said:

I was riding in the car to go birding. Saw the fox on the side of the road so the driver pulled over, in a very dangerous spot (only gave me about 20 seconds). I reached over got out my big lens and took a pic as the fox was running past me. I did not have time to check camera settings and obviously the shutter speed was way too low. I got lucky that I tracked the kit well and the result is its face was ok but everything else a blur.

Click to expand...

AlanF said:

I am still on the final Topaz AI as I didn't like the way it is has changed in recent years and also going on to a subscription model. Their sharpening is throwing up more artefacts as it adopts more AI. For an image that is fully or partly a wreck, the motion and very strong corrections can make it presentable. Trouble is, I see the artefacts, and can then see them in some images that are posted. For upscaling, generative upscaling in Photoshop is pretty faithful, but the Topaz used in PS adds more detail, and as in Topaz AI more so. The best is to have a good sharp image straight out of camera!

Click to expand...

neuroanatomist said:

When I go out to shoot birds, I now bring only the supertele. I used to bring along a standard zoom, 'just in case', but after a few years of never using it I no longer bother unless I know there will be landscape opportunities.

However, when traveling I am always opportunistic. I bring the 10-20/4, a standard zoom (typically 24-105/4), the 100-500L or RF 100-400, and several lenses in between...usually a TS-E, a fast prime for indoor shooting, etc.). I bring several lenses in a carryon, but use a shoulder bag with a subset of them for any given outing.

Click to expand...

candyman said:

Such a challenge is nothing new to me. One lens on the camera with which I do all the photography work. But when I head out and know what I will encounter along the way, I like to be prepared with a bit more flexibility. And 10mm to 560mm gives me a lot of flexibility. Incidentally, I see no need for f/1.2 for myself.

Click to expand...

Peter Ebel said:

Isn't the 45 1.2 all you need?

Click to expand...

candyman said:

Soon I have a "holy trio" for travelling. It covers 10mm to 560mm. RF10-20mm, 20-50mm (pre-order) and RF100-400 with 1.4x. Pretty light in weight too.

Click to expand...

neuroanatomist said:

Of those, I've only heard of Makita. I have a nice Makita circular saw, and I once used a Makita reciprocating saw for purposes very far afield from what the manufacturer intended (you probably don't want to know specifics, given that it relates to my forum username).

Click to expand...

Del Paso said:

Sorry guys, but I only order Makita, Hikoki, Fein or Festool.

Click to expand...

Malm said:

I agree! I don't understand how the 'lens business' works in China. What I see is that 'Pergear' is a distributor of several brands (Viltrox, TTArtisan and 7Artisans etc.), but the brands/manufacturers are looking independent to me (or am I wrong?).
A speculation: Who is the patent owner of that 14/2.8 lens design? Can the same - successful - patent be licenced to different manufacturers?

Click to expand...

AlanF said:

I don’t understand the marketing under so many different names. You would think it would lower the appeal.

Click to expand...