New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Canon Thread - Page 155

post #2311 of 2526
11/6/12 at 7:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by leftnose View Post

I don't know too much about it as I've never paid a ton of attention to the lens as I'll never buy one but I think the upgrade to the 85L II was much less drastic than some of the other upgrades.  Were there any external changes?  I think it was just new coatings on the optics and a different drive ratio for the AF, no?  Correct me if I'm wrong.  But if I'm right, the 85L is still really a 90s lens.

Not sure if I agree with you at all on this (other than doubling the price, that's sure to happen).  Traditionally, I think 35mm is much more common than 24mm and probably second in popularity only to 50mm for prime lenses (possibly even more popular now with crop sensors).  And again, traditionally, 85/90mm and 135mm are both much more common than 100mm.  Actually, to me, 100mm is kind of a weird focal length and it isn't necessarily one that I would think to buy other than the fact that it is available as a macro lens.

So, ultimately, I think 50mm is the most popular lens but I think 35/85/135 is a much more common combo than 24/50/100.

True 35mm was definetly more common than the 24mm before 1980 but the zoom came into fashion and replaced all the primes for all but the pros and few who demanded the best image quality. 35 and 50 are probably more common but if canon were to SELL NEW lenses they obviously started with the 24 before the 35. I think each is equally important but for different reasons.
Reply

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

post #2312 of 2526
11/6/12 at 7:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by liamstrain View Post

Yah - I don't use my dSLRS for anything low light though - Its all studio or location with tripods and lights. So IS for me is a non-issue. Distortion and sharpness are really my only criteria. 

If I want to shoot low light, I'm going to be holding a rangefinder. 
Leica Monochrome? I've seen its images at ISO 10,000 and they look like Tri-X @ 800
Reply
post #2313 of 2526
11/7/12 at 1:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by musubi1000 View Post

Leica Monochrome? I've seen its images at ISO 10,000 and they look like Tri-X @ 800

 

Leica M4-2 with TriX pushed. The ability to handhold a rangefinder (no mirror slap + balance/form factor) means I can reliably hold really clean down to 1/4. Easier to focus in low light too. 

 

I'm not dropping the kind of dosh Leica wants for their digital RFs. Not for cameras that don't get me client work. 

Reply
post #2314 of 2526
11/7/12 at 7:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by liamstrain View Post

 

Leica M4-2 

 

Nice.  My go to Leica is my original series Wetzlar M4:

 

Reply
post #2315 of 2526
11/7/12 at 8:21pm

I do like the original M4. Classy camera. 

Reply
post #2316 of 2526
11/7/12 at 8:49pm

I play around with my Canon AE-1 Program a handful of times a year. I like the feel of 35mm cameras and manipulating the image with filters and the wide variety of lenses. At the moment I have a handful of 80-200mm lenses, a 23mm wide angle, and some 50mm stock lenses like came with the camera upon initial release. Not sure what my macro lens is, but it is a telescoping lens, however it has a chip to the right center of the outside glass, so I always use it for macro photography and never anything distant.

Reply
post #2317 of 2526
11/8/12 at 11:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by liamstrain View Post

 

Leica M4-2 with TriX pushed. The ability to handhold a rangefinder (no mirror slap + balance/form factor) means I can reliably hold really clean down to 1/4. Easier to focus in low light too. 

 

I'm not dropping the kind of dosh Leica wants for their digital RFs. Not for cameras that don't get me client work. 

Very cool kickin it ol school. D76 1:1? Anyway as far as low light goes the Monochrome completely surpasses film and many other high end digital cams as far as shadow detail and noise levels at high ISO

Reply
post #2318 of 2526
11/8/12 at 12:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by musubi1000 View Post

Very cool kickin it ol school. D76 1:1? Anyway as far as low light goes the Monochrome completely surpasses film and many other high end digital cams as far as shadow detail and noise levels at high ISO

 

HC110 100:1 if I'm pushing, semi-stand development. Otherwise I like HC110 in dillution B and H. Works great for Efke 25 as well. 

 

The Monochrom does look good, though I don't think it really outperforms the Nikon high end offerings (and frankly, the flexibility of shooting color on the M9 trumps any low light benefit). I just cannot justify the price for my "fun" cameras. 


Edited by liamstrain - 11/8/12 at 12:06pm
Reply
post #2319 of 2526
11/8/12 at 12:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by liamstrain View Post

 

HC110 100:1 if I'm pushing, semi-stand development. Otherwise I like HC110 in dillution B and H. Works great for Efke 25 as well. 

 

The Monochrom does look good, though I don't think it really outperforms the Nikon high end offerings (and frankly, the flexibility of shooting color on the M9 trumps any low light benefit). I just cannot justify the price for my "fun" cameras. Wio

 

Wow, you're really making me feel like I need to take some B&W out of the freezer, break out the daylight changing bag, and spin some tank reels!  My go to film was always FP4+ that I developed in Ilfotec HC at 1:15.  But, if I had the light, I loved using Agfapan APX 25 which I developed in Rodinal.  Of course, APX 25 doesn't exist anymore and I think Rodinal's chemistry has changed so that combo's gone with the wind.

Reply
post #2320 of 2526
11/8/12 at 12:57pm
Quote:
Agfapan APX 25 which I developed in Rodinal

 

 

Yeah, that was a classic combination. I miss it. Shot my last rolls of APX25 two years ago. I like the Efke, but it's just not the same. 

Reply
post #2321 of 2526
11/8/12 at 8:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by leftnose View Post

I hate to admit it but I'm one of those who will pre-order the 35, even at that price.  I'm just waiting for Amazon to list it (Prime, FTW!).

 

The 24-70, OTOH, is crazy at $1500.  I'll hang on to my 24-105, thank you very much.

 

EDIT: Also, center pinch lens caps!  That must have added a bunch to the R&D blink.gif

 

I'll wait for 35L Mk II before I consider replacing my 35L, if ever.

HowEvar!  The new Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM does look quite interesting..

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/11/07/Sigma-35mm-f1-4-DG-HSM-899-dollars-street-price

Reply
post #2322 of 2526
11/8/12 at 10:19pm

New 35mm doesnt do much for me, its was obviously developed with video in mind.  

 

 

I'm the only one who thinks the 85L is over rated for the money?  I've shot it.  It was a while ago, but it wasnt as crisp at 1.2 as it should have been, and the AF was sorta slow IIRC.

Reply
post #2323 of 2526
11/9/12 at 12:37am
I've seen lens variation from sample to sample of the same exact L series model, year of manufacture, from Japan. Some was attributed to AF variation but even after I corrected focus I saw the variation with my own eyes.

Edit: the 85 1.2 is a dope lens. It's big, clumsy, slow, but can obliterate the background with such a smooth blur it's addictive. It is expensive but show me an equal for less. Oh and how crisp should a lens be at 1.2?
Edited by musubi1000 - 11/9/12 at 12:44am
Reply
post #2324 of 2526
11/9/12 at 12:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by liamstrain View Post


HC110 100:1 if I'm pushing, semi-stand development. Otherwise I like HC110 in dillution B and H. Works great for Efke 25 as well. 

The Monochrom does look good, though I don't think it really outperforms the Nikon high end offerings (and frankly, the flexibility of shooting color on the M9 trumps any low light benefit). I just cannot justify the price for my "fun" cameras. 
HC-110 100:1 for push. Compensation development effectively. Large format I hope.
Nikons 800 has the best low light sensitivity I've seen to date. 3200 ISO with hardly a trace of color noise and all the details 36 mps deliver. The 5D mk III is really nice though.
Reply
post #2325 of 2526
11/9/12 at 1:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by musubi1000 View Post

Edit: the 85 1.2 is a dope lens. It's big, clumsy, slow, but can obliterate the background with such a smooth blur it's addictive. It is expensive but show me an equal for less. Oh and how crisp should a lens be at 1.2?

 

Sigma 85/1.4 can be had for half the price, and reviews have shown that it is pretty close to the L and has faster AF too. If you get one that focuses reliably though....

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

Head-Fi's Best Sellers