Posts

casperl · Mar 19, 2015

Just received my M2 two days ago, and my Sigma 30mm is focusing perfectly fine on it. So I guess it is indeed DPAF affecting its performance on the 70D.

danielm · Mar 19, 2015

Another take on the coma of the lens:

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/reviews/lenses/sigma-24mm-f1-4-dg-hsm-a-review/4

At the other end of the light-level scale, anyone interested in shooting star fields or cityscapes at night will be pleased to hear that coma is very low indeed, meaning that point light sources in the corner of the frame don’t distort excessively in shape, even when shooting wide open.

But the samples look pretty much the same between this and the lenstip sites.

Niki · Mar 19, 2015

next month will be very interesting...

Eldar · Mar 19, 2015

leGreve said:
Eldar said:

Leaked from Zeiss says 24/1.4 (but you never know until you know )

Click to expand...

Is this based off that comment from the zeiss engineer who it "sitting on his desk".
Or is there a new rumor?

The 24 would be their wisest choice. I can understand why they would out out an 85 for the portrait people, but above that I would have no sympathy for their choice.

I´m enjoying the Otus 85 just as much as the Otus 55. A phenomenal lens, provided the focal length is within your area of interest. It clearly is within mine. The only Otuses I am missing now are a 24/1.4 and a 35/1.4. The Distagon 15mm/2.8 and the Apo Sonnar 135/2.0 are so good I don´t see the point in upgrading those (I actually don´t believe they can be made much better).

The 24/1.4 rumour is from Zeiss. I did not read it at Fred Miranda first (if that is where you saw it), but I don´t remember specifically who leaked it. Considering the available lenses out there, that would be the natural choice (if I had anything to say about it). And I believe it´s a focal length people would be willing to pay the premium price for, if it is as good as the others.

mackguyver · Mar 19, 2015

Memdroid said:
Ruined said:

I've had both and I can say this:

If you are frequently shooting moving subjects (i.e. people) in poor light, I would get the 16-35mm f/2.8L II over the F/4L IS - or even better the 24mm f/1.4L II if you are able to use a prime as f/1.4 will bring in a ton more light than f/2.8. If you think about it, it is very challenging to capture groups of moving people wider than 24mm without severe distortion approaching the edges; even 24mm has some noticeable distortion at the edges, though you can crop a bit of the pic out if that happens. That edge distortion looks great with landscape but poor with people. Cool people/portrait shots w/o distortion are possible at 16mm but it generally requires a carefully setup shot with the subject posing near the center of the frame.

If you are frequently shooting still subjects in poor light, I would get the 16-35mm f/4L IS.

That decision tree should guide you pretty well. For wide angle, personally I now use a 24L (wide event) + 16-35 f/4L (landscape) combo which I am very happy with. I also have a 24-70 f/2.8 II in the range which I can use if I want an f/2.8 zoom that can hit 24mm, but I love the extra light the 24mm f/1.4 II gives me to stop motion in dim light.

Click to expand...

Thanks Ruined and the rest.
I have the 24-70 II and the 24L II in my bag as well, and I mix and match all the time, depending on the venue and the subjects I shoot. The range is pretty covered but sometimes I just got go a little wider. I have acquired a loan 16-35 F4 just now from CPS (delivered in 1 day! thanks Canon!) and I am going to use it tonight on an event and see how it works for me. I like the build, just like the 24-70 II, which is already a plus!

@Mackguyver. No I rarely bump the ISO that high.

Okay, I didn't think so, but I used to shoot a lot of outdoor events at night and I would often be at ISO1600+ & f/1.4 just to get 1/30s so the 16-35 and 24-70 f/2.8s were no good for me. I think you'll like the 16-35 f/4 IS - and that is a fast loan from CPS! It should be a great compliment to your other lenses and unless you're shooting sports, I imagine you'll get 1/60 - 1/100s at f/4 at an acceptable ISO with those camera bodies.

Houndog · Mar 19, 2015

I always use lens hood with my 100-400 II. It looks like protective filter may slightly affect sharpness so, in some circumstances, I will remove protective filter.

mackguyver · Mar 19, 2015

...and another review:
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-ef-11-24mm-f-4l-usm-review-27176

EDIT: For comparisons, here are the comparable reviews from them:

EF 16-35 f/4 IS

Tamron SP 15-30 f/2.8 Di VC

Nikon AF-S 14-24 f/2.8 ED

Khufu · Mar 19, 2015

Ahaha! I've got a couple of those, they could market them to Physicists as Particle/Wave Duality Capturing equipment; there's no way of knowing where those photos are landing until you observe their distribution after the affect...

Chaitanya · Mar 19, 2015

Light_Pilgrim said:
What does it mean, a soft shutter sound? Is it more like Nikon or Leica, a beautiful melody...or it is more like 5D MKII?

take a look at this hands on video to get an idea of the soft shutter and delay shutter mode on this camera:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFjUnDb-dbw

RGF · Mar 18, 2015

Dylan777 said:
On a7s, Press then Hold will give magnify view on LCD.

Not sure if same for a7r.

I think there are subtle differences between the A7s and A7R plus a sony lens versus a canon lens attached via a MetaBones adapter?

sulla · Mar 18, 2015

Well, the lens is totally new. Deliveries have not yet started in sufficient quantities...
You'll have to wait a dew months.
I would NOT buy the old 400-DO-I, the v II is said to improve IQ greatly, especially the bokeh. Also, it should work much better with canons v.III extenders.

So, wait just A LITTLE. Prices are rather stable on the big whites, - the price on 400-i is 5800 and 400-ii is listed as 6500, so when the lens is in stock, i see no point in waiting too long, my expectation would be prices won't go down as quickly as with the smaller lenses - but i might be wrong.

Hjalmarg1 · Mar 18, 2015

Harv said:
Watch for your feet and your shadow in the shot. ;D Been there, done that.

Agreed. Make sure that all your frame has interesting subjects (foregroud and background) since most of the image will be in focus due to wide angle DOF. Considering/calculating the hyperfocal distance with wide angle lenses is lot more important than with telephotos.

lintoni · Mar 17, 2015

I'm less likely to use a polariser or grad ND <24mm. I'm not saying that it's rare that I use them, but I'm a lot less likely to - so that is not a deal breaker by itself for me when considering a UWA for landscapes, but it is a major consideration.

Mt Spokane Photography · Mar 17, 2015

Khufu said:
Are they your own product shots, Mt Spokane? I like the use of that soft, white material, regardless; works great with the light and adds a nice, fuzzy touch!

Yes, I use white velvet (or other colors) for a backdrop. It does not reflect like a lot of fabric. I've sold all of my 50mm lenses, I've dropped my lens count to about 9 from a lot more.

BeenThere · Mar 17, 2015

Re: Sigma 24 f/1.4 Art & 150-600 Contemporary Lens Due to Ship in March

It's true. My Sigma 24 Art preorder is shipping today.

Vern · Mar 17, 2015

A question for Neuro or another imaging expert: would moire ever be a problem with the repeating patterns in avian feathers? I understand that it is rare in most natural scenes due to the general absence of repetition, but feather structure seems like a potential problem.

I am toying with the idea of the 5DS R mostly for landscape b/c I make very large prints on occasion (and could be inspired to do more). I can achieve very high resolutions with panos, but that technique is limiting for moving subjects (waves, leaves, even clouds etc) and results in a lot of post capture fiddling around (not my strength). However, I could see this body being helpful for more pixels on small subjects (birds) when the light is good and lower ISOs achievable. A dual utility would help me pull the trigger.

Thoughts? (Thanks)

Sporgon · Mar 17, 2015

tron said:
Sporgon said:

tron said:

Sporgon said:

nc0b said:

On a 5D classic, is there any difference between a S/N starting with 2 vs. 3? The color LCD screen was improved with 2. A 5Dc was my first FF body, I still have it, and it I have taken some really nice pictures with it. The 6D is better at high ISO, but in daylight ISO 400 is usuall all I need.

Click to expand...

No, 2 and 3 are the same. I just suggest 3 because they were the last ones. Avoid 1 & 2 - poor colour lcd and has a habit of converting itself to a FF mirrorless unless modified.

Click to expand...

;D ;D ;D

Click to expand...

Glad you like that tron ! Your quote has made me realise my mistake: I meant avoid 0 and 1 - because, well you know ....

Click to expand...

I have heard of this mirror problem rather late (after getting my first FF DSLR which was the 5D2) and certainly I didn't know that serial numbers indicated a 5D camera with this potential problem. But why not? That was the case too with 1D3 and 5D3 when Canon had published affected serial numbers for various problems.

So I learnt something from this post

Canon will still honour the free of charge modification, even though the camera ceased production in 2009. But if you get one with serial number beginning with 2 or 3 the mod was factory done at assembly. The 5DII mirror is the same as the later 5D version.

zlatko · Mar 17, 2015

jrista said:
The only truly absurd thing is to get irate and bent out of shape over what people say online. You seem to do that on a daily basis as well. Sad. Well, later Zlatko...enjoy your time on CR.

No, that's not the "only" absurd thing. Your pretense of having "stopped debating" takes the prize on absurdity.

lintoni · Mar 17, 2015

Enjoy your new lens!

I'm undecided. If its handling of coma had been better, I'd definitely have got one. As it is... I dunno...

mackguyver · Mar 17, 2015

benique said:
I have only had the chance to take a few photos with the Canon 100 F2.0. Here is a 100% crop @F5.6. I don't know if it was in perfect focus since I used auto focus. I opened the RAW file in Photoshop with the standard settings without editing anything. This lens is very sharp and the CA goes away when you stop down a little.

That looks sharp to me - I'm happy to see the lens is working out well for you.

Dekaner · Mar 17, 2015

I'm surprised no one has mentioned it, but the 15mm f/2.8 is significantly smaller and lighter as well. I'd wager half the size of the 8-15mm. This is important to me as it makes it much easier to slide into my bag, meaning I'll use the lens more - even if it is for the occasional fisheye shot.

leichenmuehle · Mar 17, 2015

Hello, i have already the Eos 6D and a 24mm 1.4 L II. My plan is to upgrade the 24mm even with a wider 14mm Korean lens or the 16-35 4.0 L to get such stunning night shots. My question, is the 14mm such sharp as my 24mm L?

Maybe the 16-35 4.0 L? Or is the aperture to low for such shots? Sorry for my horrible English. :-[

privatebydesign · Mar 16, 2015

Zeidora said:
Haven't read all 5 pages, so forgive me if it has already been mentioned.

IQ is limited by the weakest link. That is the lens, assuming you shoot on tripod, mirror lock-up, cable release etc. If you compare a small crop sensor body with a large sensor body, but use a bad lens, you will not see any improvements, because the lens if limiting the potential of the large sensor with small pixels.

The important thing is also not MP count, but pixel size. So that limitation already applies on 20 MP crop sensor bodies that today have the same pixel dimensions as the 5dsr. There are very few lenses than can resolve those pixels. Look a bit more at the microscopy literature, particularly on "empty magnification", which is analogous to small pixels. Higher magnification/more pixels are not giving you more information, but only enlarged/detailed blur circles. Also check out Airy disks under optics. MF bodies with 50 MP backs have much lager pixels sizes, so have a distinct advantage in this respect. Both for resolution/sharpness, as well as tonality and shadow noise.
Bottom line: you want to take advantage of a 50 MP dSLR body, forget about zoom lenses. Some of the best prime glass money can buy may just about be sufficient.

The downsampling of a 50 MP to a 20 MP file and comparing it to a 20 MP capture most likely does give you a better image, as mentioned by another person. You can do rough image adjustments on the 50 MP file, and tonality gets much smoother on the 20 MP resize, even if you edit in 16 bit/channel.

my 389'900 cents

I think you mistook cents for Tiyin.

Your opinions are demonstrably incorrect and had you taken the time to read the preceding 5 pages you would have read that.

awinphoto · Mar 16, 2015

neuroanatomist said:
davidmurray said:

Going by the number of camera bags ive been buying for my one camera body I guess that means it's been just me and maybe one other propping up the industry.

Click to expand...

I suspect I'm that other person….

Neuro, in my household, that right there would be grounds for a divorce lol

DJD · Mar 16, 2015

I filed an issue with Canon USA but I haven't gotten a reply yet.

I did one more interesting test though. I tried this same scenario on my original 7D and it behaves the same way. So maybe this is a tuning to the Evaluative exposure mode that is in multiple cameras.

I would be interested in having someone with a 5D MK III try this test and report how it behaves in a similar situation.

Thanks,
Doug

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics