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

Page 4 has this reviewer's opinion about the coma:

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.

Click to expand...

But frankly the examples look pretty much the same as the ones on the lenstip.com review. So, what is one person's "very low indeed" is another's "simply outrageous"?

Someone tell me what to think!

jdramirez said:

Mt Spokane Photography said:

I've driven a 700 mile round trip to purchase a hard to find item from a Craigslist seller.

Click to expand...

700. I think my driving radius is about 50 miles... but the range increases as the price gets better... I've driven 15 hours to St. Louis before... but i was young... and I thought I liked driving... not so much.

Click to expand...

I'm retired, and a 700 mile round trip is not so bad since I got to play with the equipment before coming back home. I'd just spend the night in a motel if I was too tired.

Zv said:

privatebydesign said:

Random Orbits said:

LovePhotography said:

Isn't there a fisheye straightening tool in Photoshop? (Or something?)
How good is it How much does it degrade the image? Can you get close?
I've got an 8-15mm, but my old PS crashed and I haven't bought a new one yet, and I really balk at the Creative Cloud blackmail.

Click to expand...

I've typically applied the Canon 15mm fisheye profile in LR to defish the 8-15 and adjust as needed. It stretches out the fisheye projection to the edges and corners, and the further away from the center the pixels are the worse the stretching. You can crop the defished imaged to eliminate the worst of the artifacts, but then you're sacrificing AOV. Images with geometric patterns (think cabinets, floors and ceilings) are easier to interpolate and look OK, but for details (landscapes), it'll be pretty poor.

Click to expand...

The very cheap Plugin FisheyeHemi is a fantastic tool for defishing fisheye images, it doesn't do full rectilinear corrections so doesn't have the edge projection issues a simple remap can introduce, it uses a more complicated remapping algorithm and the pixel level IQ remains very high.

http://www.imagetrendsinc.com/products/prodpage_hemi.asp

Click to expand...

Have you seen this guys method of defishing using FisheyeHemi? He changes the canvas size for a landscape shot into a portrait shot to run it through Hemi again so that it corrects both axis.

http://www.lonelyspeck.com/defish/

The FisheyeHemi stuff is near the end of the article.

Click to expand...

I had not seen that or used that technique, thanks. I don't seem to get the same results as him on the second run but I'll keep playing.

One thing I will say, and always do, that old Canon EF 15mm f2.8 fisheye is an outstandingly good lens.

Tex, once again thanks for showing us what the 400mm 2.8 can do, and now on a 7DII. Beautiful shots, and very informative.

As for ephcto, get that surfer's ear checked out, Dude. (Nice shots, though.)

quick shots/comparisons between the 16-35L II and the 24-70L II

https://www.flickr.com/photos/bgateb/sets/72157651273548765/

i'll have more sample images soon.

I see 2 black lens amongst the white ones

R1-7D said:

bholliman said:

Mt Spokane Photography said:

BTW You can order one from Canada for considerably less if you need it right away. The price in US dollars runs around 80% of the Canadian dollar right now, or around $1920.


http://www.cameracanada.com/enet-cart/product.asp?pid=9524B002

Click to expand...

Any duties apply for shipping to the US? Any idea of shipping cost?

Thanks

Click to expand...

Under our free trade agreement there should be no duty on camera equipment. It's one of the few things about the agreement that actually benefits consumers.

There will still be state taxes. Shipping will probably be reasonable too.

I HIGHLY a recommend ordering from The Camera Store if you order from Canada. The level of service from them is simply amazing.

Click to expand...

Will it come with a USA warranty card? Not thrilled with the 7 day return policy.

privatebydesign said:

sagittariansrock said:

privatebydesign said:

Elac2 said:

To Privatebydesign... I had not thought to use a 1.4 TCR on my 24TSe II, other than the resulting hit of Max aperature, any other "side effects" you'd report? Sounds like a great solution.
And with repose to to the thread, I would love to see a second gen' 45TSe with the same axial rotations as my 24.

Click to expand...

None that I know of, though some people have said the 1.4TC MkIII (the one I use) is so close a fit that the rubber ring on the end actually brushes the rear lens element, but nobody has ever reported any damage that I have seen, and I have looked!

The IQ from the 24TS-E MkII and 1.4TC MkIII is much higher than both the 24TS-E MkI alone and the FD 35TS.

Hope this helps.

Click to expand...

Is this true for both the 17 and 24mm TS-Es or just the 24mm one?

Click to expand...

Which bit!

Both 24TS-E MkII and 17TS-E take the Canon MkI, MkII and MkIII 1.4 and 2X TC's without interference and retain full tilt and shift function. I haven't seen anybody say the 17 has as close a fit as the 24, I use the 17 and 1.4 TC MkIII all the time and infrequently with the 2X TC MkII.

The IQ from the 17TS-E and 1.4TC MkIII is higher than the 24mm TS-E MkI.

Click to expand...

Ah, I was wondering who asked the vague question and realized it was me... :-X
I was thinking about the brushing rear element part. I am away from my extenders at the moment (and from more than half my gear)

I'm looking for a budget video setup for my 60D... has anyone try flying with the 24mm 2.8. eventually i want to get a tokina 11-16 in thr future. also I am curious if I should get a fly cam nano or fly cam jr? What are the differences.

Unfortunately, its common for third party flashes to be incompatible with newer model Canon DSLR's. When a flash model is still in production, a firmware update may be developed, but a out of production flash may not work on newer bodies.

I've bought Sigma EF compatible lenses that became doorstops as well for the same reason, they did not work on Canon DSLR's and could not be updated. It was even worse for those who bought Quantaray rebranded Sigma lenses.

Tamron has not been hit so hard this way, they have had a couple of lenses with this type of issue, but Sigma's entire lineup would not work when the change from EOS film to EOS DSLR's happened. I had five Sigma's and a couple of Quantarays, and only one could be upgraded. I dumped the rest.

-Gamer- said:

Hello, I just got a Pixma Pro 10 yesterday and after several hours figuring stuff out (downloading the right software, etc) as my cd/dvd drive is not working. I finally was able to print a test print.

My issue is that after I made a print, on one side of the print the border is cut off, there's like only a hair's width of a border on the left side its like someone cut off the border on the one side with a pair of scissors I'm printing in Landscape orientation if that helps. So only three sides have the white border. I used Canon's Print Studio Pro as well as printing from Lightroom. Printing from Lightroom left a tiny bit more border on the left side but far from matching the opposite border.

Any help appreciated

Click to expand...

It sounds like a case of settings. Lightroom lets you view the image as it will print, and also lets you control the borders.

However, if you try to place text in a white area on the margin, it can get cutoff.

Lightroom 5.X

1. I set the aspect ratio of the print in the develop module to match the paper, and crop the image if needed.
2. In the print window, first go to page setup, and select paper size. I like to set it to borderless.
3. In the layout setting and make sure the cell size is correct for the paper you are using. Then adjust all 4 borders. You might find that there is 0.01 in difference between top and sides, but this is not visible.

It should print just as you see it.

http://www.canon-asia.com/snapshot/eos-5ds-5dsr-691/3/

http://www.canon-asia.com/snapshot/eos-5ds-5dsr-693/

More teasers.

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
;D

Thanks for sharing mackguyver.

I received my 11-24L last week and did what was SUPPOSED to be a quick writeup (ended up taking longer than I anticipated -- I even drafted up a few points before I received my lens) of my new toy on my site here:

http://www.bgateb.com/2015/03/canon-ef-11-24-f4l-usm-lens-review/

There are a few (okay, maybe more than a few) things I did wrong, but I plan on revisiting these issues in a future post.

Foxdude said:

So, I sold the Sigma, and have been using the EF 35 IS about 2 months now.
To compare them, here are few my thoughts. First, I didn't use them side by side, but I feel they are equally sharp, even wide open. Or at least the difference is that small I can't see that on 40 inch TV, or zooming in in computer.
F 1.4 would be nice sometimes, but I haven't missed that too much. I much prefer the smaller size and weight. You definetely feel the difference, it is so much nicer to carry around. IS is also nice to have. Bokeh seems to be a little pleasant in Canon.
I agree, there is pretty bad coma, until you stod down to F4. Doesn't bother me, though.
I have no regrets at all, I also pocketed some money when sold Sigma and bought the New EF35 IS.
With all that hype around Sigma Art lenses, I would say this Canon is just as good. Even better overall, when we think versatility, weight, IS, size, price...
Unless you really need the F1.4, or you like to shoot test charts wide open and print them large, I would say the Canon EF 35 IS is a better choice. Just my thoughts

Click to expand...

I see quite a few people switching over now. There is a guy in the Flickr group for this lens that just switched from the Sigma and he's pretty much said exactly what you did. His main issue with the Art was the size of the lens. If you want to see the discussion you can have a look if you like https://www.flickr.com/groups/canon35mm_is_usm/discuss/72157644351053006/
Glad to see you're happy with the Canon 35 IS, I know after one year of owning mine I love it to bits!

skoobey said:

I you want to be seriously good, neither.

Invest in art books, trips to museums and libraries.

Click to expand...

You should explain this comment a bit - so the OP (very young) understands WHY you say it. That will help.

Mitch.Conner said:

Impressive. I sort of want one of those Hoya glass cakes. Coolest paperweight ever.

I honestly never stopped to think about what Hoya makes beyond filters.

Click to expand...

I agree, I'd love a glass cake too.

The categories are coming back, they should go live tonight. They aren't going to be as broad as they were previously, that was too difficult to manage, especially going forward with some of the new site features that will also come live soon.

LensTip has completed their review of the 24 Art:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=25443.0;topicseen

Worth a read!

- A

On the higher end Canon had some C300 / C500 on features they only did action shots and not many, why they were used on these films was due to some good marketing by Canon shall we say! The C300 is a capable camera and at the time filled a gap in the market and our lower end rental fleet has them. The pictures however from the F5 / F55 family if treated properly far exceed the C300, and the FS7 has the same family roots, less noise, more dynamic range and a bigger colour gamut.
The C300 sales have dried-up and as stated elsewhere the Sony FS7 is on back-order and for a good reason its a superior camera technically.

However at the high-end neither Canon or Sony look likely to challenge Red or Arri who remarkably dont even have a 4K camera. Reasons are complex but Sony, Canon, Panasonic et al dont understand simple, dont understand how crews work on film sets or TV drama sets they over complicate their cameras rather than devoting that time as Arri do to perfecting colorimagery and in an aspect ratio filmmakers want (4:3 for anamorphic & re-framing).

If Canon want to remain serious in Cinematography, listen to end users first long before the engineers get involved, 4K is a number not a right of passage and resolution is but one element.

NNature said:

Here is a link to a review.
https://photographylife.com/shooting-hand-held-with-the-sigma-150-600mm-sport

I took this image yesterday @ 600mm/6,3

Click to expand...

Welcome to the forum, and thanks for posting. Very nice. But please post details of its crop size etc or leave the EXIF data on the jpeg. What camera was it on, what iso, what speed? Is it a 100% crop, is it reduced in size or what? Otherwise it is so difficult to judge the quality. If you get close enough, which the secret of high quality images, all lenses give good results. I look for lenses that give sharp images from a 1000x800 central crop of a small bird at 20 metres. The Sigma does look first class so far.

Thanks, Mt Spokane. This is a great explanation of how AF works and what might go wrong. Much appreciated.

IMG_0001 said:

By the way, Ph.D is itself an acronym for a specific stem of PTSD. Permenant Head Damage, never fully recoverable...

Click to expand...

I had not heard that one. ;D

To me a PHD meant Piled Higher and Deeper.

takesome1 said:

jdramirez said:

So is it wrong I didn't bother reading the requirements... I have something like $10,000 in gear... and I had a crap ton of points... so I signed up...

Click to expand...

You will have to take that up with your Priest / Rabbi / Minister. Hopefully it will not go on your permanent record and count against you some time in the future.

Click to expand...

I don't bother with PRMs... or church... I've lost interest... there's a lot less guilt. Though I wouldn't mind hanging out with a flying spaghetti monster...