lexptr said:

ecka said:

My missing Art lens list is:
Sigma 12mm f/2.8 DG ART
Sigma 20mm f/1.8 DG ART
Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG MACRO (1:3-ish) ART
Sigma 85mm f/1.4 DG ART
Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG OS ART
Sigma 100-300 f/4 DG OS ART

Click to expand...

The Sigma 100-300 f/4 DG OS ART is an interesting option. I have the old one, but it is the worst lens I have and the only one of my lenses I would prefer not to buy. It is capable to give very good results. Sometimes... Look at any birds on my website: www.len-lex.com/gallery.asp - all ware taken with that lens. But sometimes it just keeps failing. E.g. I shoot in good light from tripod with remote release and fine-focusing with liveview, fast shutter, no wind or earthquakes, but the result is damn blurry! Very inconsistent. Maybe it is just a bad copy. Anyway, with current level of Sigma's lenses it is very interesting to see such lens reworked. And OS would be a very useful thing on it. Kinda love and hate story, which probably would be better with the renewed version
And if we speak about birding – 100-300 is too short actually. Even with TC x1.4. So the rumored 300-600mm f/? OS Sport would also be interesting. I hope it will be constant f/4. It is not an easy task, but really isn't something impossible for Sigma. What I would be even more interested to see is a refresh of their super-telephoto primes! I do hope one day to get something like 500mm f/4 IS, but Canon's options are insanely expensive. Something IQ-comparable from Sigma for half the price and I'm in!

Click to expand...

Yes, I remember all the old Σ100-300/4 reviews being very controversial, due to obvious reasons like bad QC and copy variation. Now, the new Σ120-300/2.8 is just crazy good (for a sigma zoom ), even with TCs. IMHO, the updated Σ100-300/4 (or 300-600mm) should be really good.

I'm glad your back up and running.

pablo said:

I hope you are insured. Maybe next visit to a poor country take a small pocket camera that won't attract the thieves, and won't hurt you too much if you lose it.

Click to expand...

A tranquilizer gun is cheaper....

At least on my 6D, I've always found the 40mm to be amazingly sharp from corner to corner. Judging from TDP's sample crops, the 35mm f/2 IS doesn't look to be significantly sharper. They look to be very comparable in IQ from about f/2.8 up.

So I don't think you got a dud. The 40 is just an absolutely amazing lens for the price.

As far as I can tell, the big advantages of the 35mm are the image stabilization, less CA at smaller apertures (at least judging by the sample crops), ring USM, and the ability to focus while the camera/lens is asleep.

And, of course, the fact that it goes to f/2, but that goes without saying.

Ruined said:

I agree - with a zoom lens if you drop it bad enough that it cracks or damages the plastic it will likely need to be sent in for service to be re-aligned anyway.

Click to expand...

At least on this particular lens, that wasn't the case. The lens took about a two foot drop onto asphalt (relatively soft as materials go). The thin threads literally disintegrated into half a dozen splinters of plastic, half a millimeter by a millimeter by an inch long each, give or take, each of which was basically one thread. You could readily snap them in two by using only three fingers and applying a fairly small amount of force. There's probably no way you can make the threads thicker and still be compatible with existing filters, so you're pretty much stuck with something a little thicker than a piece of pencil lead taking the full brunt of the impact.

In spite of the impact, though, I kept using the lens for the remainder of that trip, and it worked approximately as well as did before (it wasn't a great lens to begin with, mind you), except that I couldn't put filters on it anymore, the lens cap kept falling off, and I got glare if the sun hit the scratches just right.

I think it's more a question of luck whether an end impact will cause plastic threads to disintegrate or not. It has less to do with the force of the impact and more to do with the angle of the impact, as to whether the razor-thin threads or the body itself takes most of the hit. That's why I feel that lenses should always use metal threads. In the worst case, metal threads bend and must be replaced. In the worst case, plastic threads shatter, and your front glass must be replaced. And even if it does require a recalibration afterwards, that's still likely to be cheaper than recalibration plus replacing the front glass.

Looking to buy a full-frame body with sensor shift that will accommodate (via adapters) my small stash of Nikkor, Takumar and Olympus OM legacy lenses. I know nothing about these bodies, so suggestions would be welcome. Not willing to spend a fortune, so a discontinued or used one would be great. Thanks.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

adamsnapper said:

My 6D is a donkey...don't get me wrong the image quality, WHEN it focuses properly, is sublime. I too mostly use the centre focus spot. I shoot ceremonies for my local council with the Mayor and participants. The hit rate was less than 20%, so much so that I now resort to manual focus for these.

I also take ID/Passport type images at theses ceremonies, I focus on the right eye, the focus beeps to confirm lock, hold and recompose and when you check the images, a huge percentage are soft, some by quite a margin.

Click to expand...

Don't hold and recompose and then expect the shot to be in focus, if you are at f/8 or far away, its ok, but up close at f/4 or wider, the depth of field is shallow, and the error due to a poor technique is going to cause oof images.

Don't blame the camera.

Click to expand...

Shooting a reasonably close-up head shot and focusing on one eye and moving the camera back just to slightly recentralise the image...the fact that the camera is bleeping to tell me that it has locked focus even with a very slight, and it is an absolutely minute, recompose, that eye/face at F8 should be sharp. Some are tack sharp and yet the second shot taken within 2 seconds is off, and sometimes it's way off. I've been a pro shooter for nearly 30 years and it's certainly not my 'poor' technique, I have NEVER had a canon camera that misbehaved/ mis-focused this much across so many differing shooting conditions, indoors and out, long shots and close shots and across so many of my lenses all of which are 2.8L glass except that F4 24-105.

Steve said:

dgatwood said:

You're subtly misinterpreting what I said. What I said was that there's no benefit to the shorter flange distance for lenses longer than 40mm, and as a result, most Canon lenses (particularly longer lenses) are built exclusively in EF or EF-S format, and require an adapter to use them on an EF-M camera.

Click to expand...

So your post was only outlining the problems of the EOS M system and not mirrorless technology in general?

Click to expand...

That part was, anyway.

Hi Y'all

Noob here, first time poster, long time follower.... I have a 40D and shoot primarily landscape, mainly sunrises and sunsets.... West Texas is FLAT.... Currently, I have a 18-55MM f/3.5 & 24-135MM Std stock stuff... My drainpipe is from my 1D days 15 years ago and is in pristine condition Any insights ? Any Trades offered?

eninja said:

So I got myself a part time shooting client on weekends in the park.
I like the simplicity of a prime lens so I got 35mm IS and 85mm 1.8. - plus one body 6D.
To avoid changing lens all the time, I decided to get another body.
with low budget I only get to choose crop body. - I got a brand new 700D with 18-55 stm at bargain price.

On the first night, testing view finder AF - its so cheap that I could not use it professionally, plus no back button focus, very hard to choose af points - i was like holding a toddler's toy camera. Live view auto focus is good but I could not find myself moving my hand here and there while taking shots. So I post it for sale on the next day.

Nobody confirmed to buy it. So I play it on my second night.
Trying my best to give it a place on my shoot.
Mount my 85mm. and say I might as well try Manual Focus on this thing.

Suddenly, bam! bam! Its so easy and fast to nail manual focus on this thing using live view. And the swivel screen was perfect for this.

I suddenly fall inlove with manual focus, not the 700D. lol.
big problem with 700D, exposure setting. - NO MINIMUM SHUTTER SPEED AND ISO step is 1 STOP?????!!
so now im keeping 700D for a while, upgrade to 70D later.

now its the lens issue. 85mm on crop is to narrow for me.
looking on a good manual focus prime now!

Click to expand...

Might want to try 50mm f/1.2L. It is a superb manual focus lens (does auto, too) and the aperture is ideal for crop's low ISO requirements. Plus, it will give the the 80mm FOV you likely desired out of the 85mm. Results are very similar to the 85L II, just less sharp.

Heh, its kind of funny and y'all are gonna jump down my throat but the a77 II is basically what everyone here is saying they want the 7DII to be: a high mp crop camera with ultra fast burst speed and 1DX/5DIII style AF system for <$2k

Khufu said:

Sporgon said:

Khufu said:

Sporgon said:

Khufu said:

Maybe it's something a little different, like a Square Format sensor which could utilise many current EF lenses' image circle? 36 x 36mm may be a little much but perhaps something greater than the 24mm width/height. Even if the lenses projected a solid circular outline right up to the 3:2 sensor's corners rather than fading, there'd still be room to extend the lesser of the two dimensions as the other's reduced to, say, 4:3 or 1:1?... maybe that's what's going on with this new 7D2 sensor tech - a taller APS-C width sensor to shoot Square Format images at around 23 x 23mm?!

Oooooh...

I'm done. Carry on

Click to expand...

You just failed your 'Ordinary' level maths

Click to expand...

I really must have 'cause I've no idea where you're saying I've messed up, ha! Really, before everyone else notices, where'd I screw up and how many times?

EDIT: Wait... is it because this thread's about >35mm Film size? Heh, alright, how's 24 x 24.1mm for that 7D2? It's greater than a 35mm frame in one dimension then, at least

Click to expand...

No, it's because you can fit a rectangle inside a circle of a given diameter that has a longer side closer to the circle diameter than a square can be. Because circles are round and squares are, well, square

Click to expand...

Dude, that was taken into consideration, repeatedly, hence the notes on reducing the wider dimension as the shorter one's increased to achieve the mentioned aspect ratios and the statement about 36 x 36mm being a little much but something from 24mm upwards being a possibility - I really thought I'd missed something but now I'm just wondering if "you just failed your Ordinary Level Reading Skills" - which is a much bitchier thing to say on these forums than I care to but... you started it

Click to expand...

Don't take it personally, I was only joking. Don't try a career in photography if you're this thin skinned - you'll end up a nervous wreck.

You say "36x36 being a little too much." Wrong. It would be far too much as far as practical use is concerned. Draw a 36x24 rectangle, then use a compass to draw a circle around it. Then try lifting the 24mm sides to form a 36x36 square and you will see just how large the image circle would have to be to accommodate this format.

You say make it a 4:3 ratio by shortening the long side and increasing the short, and this was made in the context of your post referring to larger sensors, yet that would give precisely the same size sensor in terms of area.

With regard to making the APS-c size square to increase sensor size, this could be accommodated using the EF FF lenses but you would still end up with a sensor that is smaller ( in area ) than the APS-h, so again that would be pointless unless you happen to like square pictures which few people do.

lo lite said:

wickidwombat said:

I agree i find it a ho hum focal length not wide enough or not tight enough
I really like 20mm though its a really nice wide focal length

Click to expand...

I second that. I really love my CZJ Flektogon 20/2.8 although I miss autofocus. A 24mm f/1.4 is already made by Canon so I don't see the need for Sigma to do this too. I'd rather had a 20mm f/1.4 with a close focusing distance of 19mm like the Flek. And yeah, I know there's the 20mm F1.8 EX DG by Sigma but that lens is dated, it has no hypersonic AF (HSM).

Click to expand...

Sigma made a 35mm f/1.4 that beats the Canon 35mm f/1.4 on many fronts, including price and it has been a big seller so I suspect Sigma will see a makrket for a 24mm.

I agree the 20mm is dated but honestly its AF is plenty fast for a wide angle prime. It does have a weird dual clutch system which is a poor mechanical workaround to engage or disengage the focus ring vs AF or MF. It is not a big issue for me, but it is possible to set the lens in MF mode and have the focus ring disengaged as well.

troppobash said:

Yes happy to have G1X II and not to have dslr when travelling or need to have minimum (sparse) equipment.

8)

Click to expand...

+1

tat3406 said:

Is that the focal length more longer, the higher percentage the lens need to AFMA?

Click to expand...

I think its really about narrow depths of field, particularly near MFD, which faster apertures and/or longer focal lengths exacerbate.

At 600mm on my Tamron 150-600, at 20 feet you have a DOF of 2" with f/11 and 1" with f/8 so it matters on long lenses even with small apertures. The 135L has a similar 2" depth of field at 10 feet with f/2. The 50L has a 2" depth of field at 5 feet with f/1.2. These are all about twice MFD.

Most kit lenses aren't that fast or that long so they tend to be acceptable without AFMA. But fast lenses and long telephotos can benefit from AFMA.

I thought about buying a mirror less Nikon for around a hundred bucks... but then I didn't think I would ever use it so I didn't bother.

FEBS said:

Gary W. said:

Hey all,

How about a mix? ST-E3 for use with your current, and possible future 600's, and 622's to use if you decide to purchase flashes that don't operate on the Canon radio system. Put the 622 trigger in the camera's hot shoes with the ST-E3 on top of that. Start with the 622's to start less expensively, the add as the funds allow.

Gary W.

Click to expand...

I would not advice to stack, as the more contacts and the less reliability you can expect. I would use the yn622, or a second 600 on top of the camera.

Click to expand...

Hey all,

A lot of quality triggers (transmitters) have a hot shoe on top of the transmitter specifically to add a flash on top of the camera so it can be used as an optical trigger, or direct or fill flash. It seems to me that reducing the weight by adding only an ST-E3 vs a top mounted flash seems reasonable... granted, not optimal, but perfectly feasible.

Gary W.

brianftpc said:

I dont really believe it to be confusing unless someone just doesnt know what they are buying or why.

Click to expand...

Right, that's why I put in those last two sentences. Buying things like this requires research, which is something a lot of people won't put too much effort into or simply don't know what or how to research.

brianftpc said:

toothpaste is only confusing because its all about the same price.

Click to expand...

Yes, that's one reason why its really dumb to compare selling cameras to selling toothpaste.

bornshooter said:

I hated it then gave in, http://instagram.com/sommervillephotography

Click to expand...

I hated it too when it was just people slapping crappy vintage filters on iPhone photos, but it has evolved. I just followed you - nice portraits!

FEBS said:

mackguyver said:

No apology necessary and I love to handhold my 300 f/2.8 IS II with extenders as well - it's my most-used lens. The 5DIII is a great body as well, no matter what lens is attached.

Click to expand...

Me too. Love that 300 on the 5d3. However, is even better on the 1dx as I find that body easier to keep that big white still to shoot handhold. Think the higher height of the body is causing this.

My love for the big White became that big I ordered a new baby, 200-400 1,4, which I am going to pickup at Thursday.

Click to expand...

Yep, love the 1D X even more, too, and congrats on the new addition to the big white arsenal! I'm sure that you'll have a killer kit with the combination.

Well if it will not impact their regular lenses update schedule – I don't mind. But I'm afraid it will. Just wish all their lenses to be renewed to Sigma's latest amazing quality level!

Mt Spokane Photography said:

Battery geometry can be a big issue. That little nub on the positive end varies in length from AA type to type. Some electronica will accept them all, but some have a barrier that stops the short nubs from making contact. I had this issue with electronics I import, some batteries would not make contact.

However, that obviously is not Jims issue.

Click to expand...

Battery geometry shouldn't be a big issue. It's not exactly rocket science to design a battery holder that can firmly make contact with a battery given some tolerance. I just don't see it as a complicated design requirement, and certainly not for a $600 piece of equipment. As to applicability to Jim's issue, I agree, this shouldn't be the cause of it, but it is what's stated in the instructions for the 600ex. And every time I've heard of similar complaints with the 600ex someone puts alkalines in and the problem goes away. So either Canon poorly designed the battery contacts, or they put some fluff in the labeling instead of design a battery indicator that can handle various rechargeables.

tomscott said:

When in a pinch the 70-200mm F2.8 MKII with 2x converter work pretty well. I only have the V2 converter, its easier than carrying two lenses and the IQ is pretty good IMO close to the 100-400mm at 400 but the AF is slower... but with the 5DMKIII I missed very few shots, also the 4 stop IS works great with the 2x.

Click to expand...

I think that combo works quite well, but I find it pretty unbalanced in terms of weight.

tomscott said:

Although like the above image Bokeh can be a little distracting. The problem is I want to pull the trigger on a 400mm but the one I want doesn't exist atm and I think the 400mm F2.8s are overkill, too big and heavy and definitely too expensive, although the isolation of 2.8 would be great.

Click to expand...

I gave up waiting for the 400 f/5.6 IS...and ended up with the 300 f/2.8 IS II (and both converters, which I already had). It's quite expensive and a beast compared to the 400 f/5.6, but gives excellent results and is much smaller and lighter than the 400 f/2.8 IS II, but I'd love to have 800mm...and f/2.8 at 400mm sometimes...

As for the

wtlloyd said:

I see what you did there.

mrsfotografie said:

It would be strange for a manufacturer renowned for their AF camera's...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I see it too now, I guess that's what happens when you don't fully read into the topic :-[

I would honestly love the 135 but I'm moving out soon, getting engaged and need a PS4 so paying 1k for the 135 is sadly out of my budget. As I said I feel the monitor and calibrator is a better move over another lens although if I did decide to venture into professional portraits, I figure I could do them with the 100L then save the money to buy the 135 from each job I do.

I used the 100L the other weekend and I was more than impressed with what I could do with it, because of that I feel it's too close to the 85. See if I'm shooting indoors, I can easily shoot wider and use the 35 then if I need a tighter headshot of sorts indoors, I can use the 100L like I did here.

Malcom by Daniel E Lee, on Flickr

The other advantage I see to selling my Sigma 50 is that if they release a new Canon 85 1.8 that is similar to the 35mm F2 IS, I don't have the hassle of selling a lens to buy it.