New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Canon Thread - Page 157

post #2341 of 2659
Quote:
Originally Posted by GSARider View Post

I gave up on Sigma lenses a couple of years ago, got fed up returning inferior glass and I'm sure the shop I bought from also was happy with my decision ...biggrin.gif
The manager said that quite a few folk buying the Sigma lenses didn't or couldn't tell their lenses were crap and usually didn't know the glass was crap.

 

I've been happy with both the Sigma 30/f1.4 and 17-50/f2.8 lenses for my crop body.  Both were purchased new from a reputable dealer and worked fine right out of box.  

post #2342 of 2659

I couldn't be happier with my sigma 50mm 1.4.  My sigma 30mm 1.4 seems to focus fine, but I have to be more careful with it.  Make sure I focus on a more contrasty area and then recompose.  My keeper rate for the Sigma 50 is almost 100% I would say, while it's quite a bit lower on the 30mm 1.4.  Also, super happy with my sigma 70-300 apo macro lens which I got for $100.

 

Here's one I took with the 30 I believe wide open.  This was one of the keepers.  Shot handheld with a light breeze.  This was cropped to maybe 40% of it's original size.  

 

Here is a crop of that image:  So this one I believe is almost a 100% crop....  

the resizing and landscape mode make it look like they're the same size :P  

 

A couple others I took recently:  

 

sorry for the image overload.  it's been a while since I've posted :)

 

 

The one thing I wish about these 2 lenses is a shorter minimum focusing distance.  It's around 1.5 feet.  I've tried the cheap $8 on amazon glass-less macro extension tubes, but they're a pain to use and not very good as far as I can tell. I wonder if the more expensive, auto-focus, Kenko extension tubes are better which can be had for about $100 used.  Makes me wish for an 85mm or 100mm macro lens.  


Edited by hyogen - 11/27/12 at 9:31pm
post #2343 of 2659

 

 

 

These are a couple I took in literally 3 minutes of my neighbor outside our apartment on Thanksgiving.  Taken with the Sigma 50mm.  Lately I've been experimenting more with the manual flash that I have.  The "black foamie thing" works wonders.    C&C always appreciated!


Edited by hyogen - 11/27/12 at 8:25pm
post #2344 of 2659
Played with a Canon 6D today! Super quiet shutter finally. Nice tactile feel of the controls. All dials have a nice soft click to them. Lighter body then 7D. Grip that's slightly thinner at the bottom like the newest Nikons. Feels real nice in hand as it balances well.
post #2345 of 2659
Quote:
Originally Posted by musubi1000 View Post

Played with a Canon 6D today! Super quiet shutter finally. Nice tactile feel of the controls. All dials have a nice soft click to them. Lighter body then 7D. Grip that's slightly thinner at the bottom like the newest Nikons. Feels real nice in hand as it balances well.

 

If the AF system on the 6D is not too terrible, it may be a nice FF camera after the price goes down by a couple hundred bucks, compared to Nikon D600's price:performance ratio.

post #2346 of 2659
The 6D has built in WiFi finally! you can connect to cam set exposure, exp comp, set focus area, remote fire camera, all with live view.
post #2347 of 2659

I tried the Sigma 35/1.4 at the shop this weekend. It is indeed as sharp as online reviews claim. The center is razor-sharp, I had to double-check to see if I was really at 1.4. At short distances (below 3 meters) focus was spot-on in the center and very accurate at the peripherals. At further distances, it's still sharp but harder to get a good lock (seemed front-focused when I examined them), but to be fair this can be challenging with any fast wide angle lenses.

 

Build quality is impressive, unlike Sigma's earlier lenses. It really feels solid like a metal Zeiss. It is also a heavy lens -- I haven't checked the official weight yet, but holding the Sigma in one hand and my 50L in the other, the Sigma is clearly heavier.

 

However, I did not buy it. At least yet.... If I bought it at that moment it would be an impulse buy and I am trying to avoid impulse buys. I'll do more research online and more thinking first... but one major concern is I have two duplicates and adding a third seems unwise: I have the cheap 35/2.0 which I refuse to let go no matter what, because it is small and cheap, it's not going to do me any good by selling it. And I have the Zeiss 24/1.8 on my Sony NEX-7... so that's already two 35mm-equivalents. And I am also very keen on seeing how Canon's new 35/2 IS performs.

post #2348 of 2659
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadCow View Post

Build quality is impressive, unlike Sigma's earlier lenses. It really feels solid like a metal Zeiss. It is also a heavy lens -- I haven't checked the official weight yet, but holding the Sigma in one hand and my 50L in the other, the Sigma is clearly heavier.

 

 

I spent an evening shooting with 50L a couple of days ago, and even that was heavier than I'd like for hours at a time.  Evening also meant a full sized speedlite/diffusor on my 5D III, and more and more, portability and compactness are becoming more attractive to me as time goes by. 

 

I would love to play with the Sigma 35mm, but I think I may be saving my pennies for the Sony RX-1 full frame mirrorless with fixed Zeiss lens.  As I look at more real-life photos from  RX-1, I am liking it more and more..

post #2349 of 2659

I'm not sure how an RX1 would work out for you in place of a 5D3+50L+flash... first of all, the RX1 lacks a viewfinder so you're either gonna use it with flash or viewfinder, but not both. With flash it can become a big and unbalanced camera to work with at arms length, and with viewfinder you're missing the flash. Also, at the price of the RX1, I feel that it is a dead end route since you cannot expand or upgrade over time.

 

Personally, I am less concerned about the weight of my gear and more concerned about size. Sometimes I feel like not pulling out the big DSLR and giant L lens during family outings or gatherings as it feels like I'm drawing attention to myself and acting like a pro (because that's the common public perception, big DLSR == pro). This is why I also have a "sideline" kit consisting of a Sony NEX-7 with 24/1.8 and 50/1.8 lenses -- it's decent enough in good light, and can be impressive at base ISO, but I do wish someone would come out with a good fullframe mirrorless system with interchangeable lenses.

 

There was even one odd moment of madness when I had given thought about selling my entire Canon kit to do a cold turkey switch to the new Leica M with 35mm summicron... but then I read up about the troubles of rangefinder calibration and I'm knocked back into reality. :-D

post #2350 of 2659
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadCow View Post

but I do wish someone would come out with a good fullframe mirrorless system with interchangeable lenses.

 

THAT is the crux of our problem this side of Leica money.  

At this point, I am not very confident Canikon will EVER produce such a thing.  Sony chose to go the RX1 fixed lens route, and since that lens had to extend inside right up to the sensor in order to keep the body small, I doubt Sony will be making an interchangeable FF mirrorless in the RX series.  

That leaves Sony NEX future full frame, which I don't see how they can do it while keeping the E-Mount.  It would be surprising for Sony to come up with another lens mount on NEX line to accomodate full frame sensor.  

Fuji is another who could do it, but their XF lens lineup can't cover the full frame sensor at wider focal lengths.  

 

So the whole full frame mirrorless interchangeable concept seems rather daunting at this point.  There are worse things than to be stuck with 35mm focal length on a full frame camera, so for now RX1 it is.  

post #2351 of 2659
Quote:
I had given thought about selling my entire Canon kit to do a cold turkey switch to the new Leica M with 35mm summicron... but then I read up about the troubles of rangefinder calibration and I'm knocked back into reality.

 

 

For what it is worth, I have shot Leica rangefinders for decades, and only once have had to futz with the rangefinder alignment (not really that difficult with the right tool). And if you send them in for a CLA every few years anyway, they'll do it for you. Ultimately, it's a non-issue. The issue for me is the cost of their digital offerings. I cannot justify it for my "fun" cameras. I'll keep shooting film rangefinders and small format digital (mirrorless and dslr) - but until I can get an M9 for under 2k on the used market, that particular merger is not going to happen. 

post #2352 of 2659

I would agree with liam about rangefinder adjustments.  It's a non issue.

 

I'm really confused by the RX-1, though.  No viewfinder, only contrast detect AF, fixed lens, fairly large size, and over $2,500.  I get that a FF sensor adds a huge amount of cost and some size.  But if I'm spending that much cash, I want a viewfinder, even if it's electronic.  I also want phase detect AF for moving objects.  And, though I can happily live with only a 35mm lens on FF, I want at least the ability to change lenses.   It seems to me that someone would have to be a fairly serious photographer to be willing to spend $2.5K and I'm not sure one would want to make so many compromises.  And, to add insult to injury, the camera isn't that small.  It's not pocketable.  In fact, it's a bit weird how large the lens is given how small an equivalent 35mm Summicron is.

 

I'm going to sell my 5D2 in a couple months and get a 5D3.  With its AF system, that could be the last DSLR I ever own (or, until it breaks).  I never had the same feeling about my 5D2 but it was the tipping point where I felt DSLRs were mature enough that I could take the plunge.  I still don't think mirrorless cameras have gotten to the same point.  I would want at least an APS-C sensor, relatively small package, some sort of viewfinder even if only electronic, and a good collection of native lenses.  Contrast detect AF is OK; the OM-D is a great example of how good it can be but the m4/3 sensor is just too small.  The Sony NEX 6 is almost perfect but the e-mount lenses aren't quite ready yet, I think, in terms of quality and selection.  And it's also odd how large the e-mount lenses are. I'm not an expert in optics but I would have thought the relatively small sensor and short register distance would have allowed for smaller lenses.

 

As to the new 35mm EF lenss, that new Sigma looks pretty darn good.  But I already have the 35L so it's not something I would buy.  I did have the f/2 IS Canon on pre-order but an interesting gun came available for sale so my fun money was diverted.  I'm going to read some of the reviews and place another order based on those.  I do still have my old 35/2 and I don't think I could ever sell it.  It so small and handy and I've had it for years, long enough that no one would give me enough to make the sale worthwhile.  Lately, I've cut down on my travel set to a 17-40/4L, 35/2, and 100L macro.  Replacing the 35/2 with the IS version would be pretty unbeatable in low light situations when shutter speed doesn't matter.


Edited by leftnose - 12/4/12 at 10:44am
post #2353 of 2659
Quote:
 The Sony NEX 6 is almost perfect but the e-mount lenses aren't quite ready yet, I think, in terms of quality and selection.  And it's also odd how large the e-mount lenses are. I'm not an expert in optics but I would have thought the relatively small sensor and short register distance would have allowed for smaller lenses.

 

 

Agreed. Fuji has done a much better job on this front. The E-mount, however, adapts very nicely to my M-mount glass. :) And with focus peaking, and an EVF, the Nex 7 is pretty darn fun (I have no real need for AF - and the NEX 6 looks great on this front too). If only I could find a small fast 24mm that didn't run me a grand or two. 

post #2354 of 2659
Quote:
Originally Posted by liamstrain View Post

 

 

For what it is worth, I have shot Leica rangefinders for decades, and only once have had to futz with the rangefinder alignment (not really that difficult with the right tool). And if you send them in for a CLA every few years anyway, they'll do it for you. Ultimately, it's a non-issue. The issue for me is the cost of their digital offerings. I cannot justify it for my "fun" cameras. I'll keep shooting film rangefinders and small format digital (mirrorless and dslr) - but until I can get an M9 for under 2k on the used market, that particular merger is not going to happen. 

 

I see that as two issues though: (1) people who have done the infinity alignment claim it is easy because they've done it, I haven't and there's no guarantee I will find it as easy (or tedious or bothersome); but the crust of the matter is (2) if it has to be sent for CLA, I hear it's a long 4 to 8++ week trip halfway across the world. I just can't accept that. But if I had enough disposable income I would love to own a Leica MP with a 35 summicron though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by liamstrain View Post

 

 

Agreed. Fuji has done a much better job on this front. The E-mount, however, adapts very nicely to my M-mount glass. :) And with focus peaking, and an EVF, the Nex 7 is pretty darn fun (I have no real need for AF - and the NEX 6 looks great on this front too). If only I could find a small fast 24mm that didn't run me a grand or two. 

 

I think the main problem with the E-mount is that its registration distance is too close for its own good. The digital sensor just isn't ready for it, resulting in color shifts in the corners. The 16MP sensors are significantly less affected by it, while the 24MP NEX-7 suffers from it greatly. I've seen the samples of the Zeiss Biogons and Leica Summicrons, the magenta color cast is horrible and while you can fix it with third party software (Cornerfix), it requires a very specific workflow and can be tedious with a large collection of shots with mixed lenses. Even the new 10-18 ultrawide seems to exhibit this problem on the NEX-7. I think Zeiss was very well aware of it and designed their 24/1.8 Sonnar around the problem -- if you have this lens you'd notice the rear element is actually buried deep inside the lens mount, meaning they actually increased the distance away from the sensor.

 

With that in mind, a full frame version of this mount would be an even bigger problem. I think any fullframe mirrorless will need to have a registration distance equal or greater to the M-mount in order to perform well, IQ-wise, but that would make such a camera significantly less attractive if you can no longer adapt M-mount lenses to it.


Edited by MadCow - 12/4/12 at 6:30pm
post #2355 of 2659

I don't know where you are in MY but I would be very surprised if there weren't a Leica repair center in Singapore.

 

When I say that it's a non-issue, I speak from my experience with three Leica bodies dating from the 50s-70s that were originally owned by my dad before I usurped them.  They've never needed adjustment.  Now, that doesn't mean there's no problem but I wouldn't worry about it too much.

 

Look for a good late model M6.  Not a whole lot different than the MP and a bunch cheaper.

 

EDIT: Actually, the M6 might be preferable to the MP as the M6 has the M4 version rewind knob.  The MP uses the M3/M2 knob that's a complete pain to use, even if it looks nicer.


Edited by leftnose - 12/4/12 at 7:15pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home