General photography thread [img heavy]

What you see is what you get, including photography, displays, and video equipment.

Moderators: Dposcorp, SpotTheCat

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu May 01, 2014 9:07 pm

This is my first time ever picturing something, picturing what it could be, and then actually making it happen to where someone else could see what I was going for.

This is a pretty good day! :D
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO, 100/2, 500/8
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu May 01, 2014 9:12 pm

Image

This was more of an exercise in looking at things weird that I happened into. This is my own reflection while watching Netflix on my Kindle. I used a CZ 50/1.4 in C/Y mount focused at 10'. The actual distance was roughly 8" from the Kindle for both my head and my camera, but at a 45 degree angle to each other. I don't know what happened, but it took 10' to get into focus. I may try some other lenses and see how it turns out.
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO, 100/2, 500/8
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Tue May 13, 2014 4:28 pm

ludi wrote:On a whim I did hike the St. Mary's Glacier (technically a semi-seasonal ice field) trail last Saturday, and by pure chance, I was walking past the lake on my way out just as a lot of shouting arose from across the water. Seems a group of six kids decided to get high the old fashioned way: by climbing up there. The fact that they were all wearing swimsuits suggested I needed a telephoto lens for whatever was happening next, so I popped my bag and suited up the 7D with the Tokina AT-X 80-200mm f/2.8, then bumped the ISO to 1600 so I could shoot at f/9.

What happened next is that they each took a 35-foot jump into 40F water. It's roughly a tenth of a mile across the lake so after the first one went, it took about a half second between seeing the splash and hearing a very loud KER-FWUMP. The other five then followed in succession, although one of the guys clearly had some second thoughts for a couple minutes. Definitely worth the price of admission.

Until I got home and sorted my photos on a large monitor, I didn't realize I had enough resolution to catch an aftermath reaction: Yes, it probably DOES sting.

Wow! That's insane! Is there a known algorithm/formula that takes the avg height of a human, the distance from point x jumping down to point y into a brick wall (water) and surviving it? That seems a bit far of a jump to me, but I am no expert!
thegleek
Darth Gerbil
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 7367
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 11:06 am
Location: Detroit, MI

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Tue May 13, 2014 4:45 pm

thegleek wrote:Wow! That's insane! Is there a known algorithm/formula that takes the avg height of a human, the distance from point x jumping down to point y into a brick wall (water) and surviving it? That seems a bit far of a jump to me, but I am no expert!

The Olympic 10-metre platform competition is 32.8 feet. The cliffs at Acapulco are 115 feet (35m).
Life is hard; but it's harder if you're stupid. Big Al.
Captain Ned
Global Moderator
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 20314
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Tue May 13, 2014 6:15 pm

I went off a 65' cliff once. You want to hit straight and true or you will suffer.
Fuji X-E1 Leica Elmar 135 4 XF60mm 2.4 Macro | Zeiss FE 35mm 2.8
http://carnagepro.com
"Everything ... they eat everything, and fear is their bacon bits."
PenGun
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:48 pm
Location: BC Canada

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Mon May 26, 2014 6:49 pm

Well, I suppose it's about time to bump this thread.

This was taken ~20ft off the road as I drove down US 29. It's a spot I'd seen before, but never been brave enough to just pull over and take some photos.
Image

From a trip to the Outer Banks:
Image

Image

Image

Image

And a few from various hiking trips:
Image

Image

Image

Image

Random thoughts:
The Contax just keeps getting better and better. It's definitely hazy on some shots, and I should probably get that looked at, but it's sharp and the colors are great and I'm extremely effusive.
The Vivitar is getting worse. I think it has some fungus issues, but I'm getting to the point where I don't use it due to bad results (vignetting, flat colors), so I suppose it'll make a nice paper weight.
Waterfalls are quite powerful. My tripod slipped out of my hand, bounced into one and never emerged, which was not the most fun, but the hike was still great.
Lenovo W520
IBM dx340
Nokia Lumia 928
Sony a7 with far too many lenses to list or even count
lonleyppl
Gerbil XP
 
Posts: 349
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Tue May 27, 2014 4:41 pm

Love the beach house and the lighthouse. Very good stuff!

I am currently on vacation on the Big Island. This is our back porch. My in-laws took us all here, and paid for it. They are unbelievable.

Image
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO, 100/2, 500/8
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Tue May 27, 2014 5:13 pm

TheEmrys wrote:Love the beach house and the lighthouse. Very good stuff!

I am currently on vacation on the Big Island. This is our back porch. My in-laws took us all here, and paid for it. They are unbelievable.


That's more like it. Nice colour, and I seldom say that.
Fuji X-E1 Leica Elmar 135 4 XF60mm 2.4 Macro | Zeiss FE 35mm 2.8
http://carnagepro.com
"Everything ... they eat everything, and fear is their bacon bits."
PenGun
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:48 pm
Location: BC Canada

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed May 28, 2014 8:09 pm

Thanks, I was very pleased with the shot. I love the color on the Zeiss lens.
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO, 100/2, 500/8
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed May 28, 2014 10:44 pm

TheEmrys wrote:Thanks, I was very pleased with the shot. I love the color on the Zeiss lens.

I am looking forward to my a7R. The nice glass really does make a big difference to the image. I will be picking up that 55mm for sure, given time. ;)
Fuji X-E1 Leica Elmar 135 4 XF60mm 2.4 Macro | Zeiss FE 35mm 2.8
http://carnagepro.com
"Everything ... they eat everything, and fear is their bacon bits."
PenGun
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:48 pm
Location: BC Canada

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu May 29, 2014 2:20 am

Honeymoon in San Diego area last month allowed for a few wildlife photos. The roses, sand dollar, and hermit crab pics were taken with the Canon 7D and EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM. The others are the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM (Mk1, non-IS).

California Gull, La Jolla Beach
Image

Baby seal, La Jolla Beach
Image

Pelican, La Jolla Beach
Image

Roses, Balboa Park Rose Garden
Image

Hermit Crab, Coronado Beach
Image

Sand Dollar, Coronado Beach
Image

Sand Piper, Coronado Beach
Image
He who laughs last, laughs first next time.
ludi
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5441
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:47 pm
Location: Sunny Colorado front range

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Fri May 30, 2014 1:06 am

Makes me miss living in San Diego. Love the La Jolla area. The bird shots really jump out at me. Very nice detail without being oversharpened.
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO, 100/2, 500/8
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Fri May 30, 2014 6:25 am

It's hard not to knock the 7D's output when shooting in less than stellar light- but give that camera light, and you can't deny it's beauty!

Very nice set Ludi :).
Canon 6D||[24-105/4L IS USM|100/2.8L Macro IS USM|70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|40/2.8 STM|50/1.4 USM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8 Full-Manual Rectilinear Wide-angle|
Canon EOS-M|11-22/4-5.6 IS STM|22/2 STM|EF-M 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS STM|
For sale!|24/2.8 IS USM
|
Airmantharp
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5028
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Fri May 30, 2014 1:42 pm

It is interesting and instructive to see the difference between lenses so well illustrated,

The shot TheEmrys took in Hawaii is head and shoulders above most anything else on the page and it's the 3D, luminous quality that the a7 and most importantly, that Zeiss 55 1.8, produces that puts it there.

I rattle on about lenses and zooms etc, this is why. This is why I wait for long periods for a few $s to afford something decent, why I buy old Leica stuff, the glass is everything. It does not matter what sensor you use, everything goes through the lens.

Now you might get more keepers with good autofocus and a handy zoom but you sacrifice quality.
Fuji X-E1 Leica Elmar 135 4 XF60mm 2.4 Macro | Zeiss FE 35mm 2.8
http://carnagepro.com
"Everything ... they eat everything, and fear is their bacon bits."
PenGun
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:48 pm
Location: BC Canada

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Fri May 30, 2014 5:09 pm

Well I have to take some back. I did not notice my PM telling me the lens was the 24-70mm not the 55mm.

I stand by my point that it's another level of colour and 3D, I did not expect that from any zoom. I guess Zeiss can make a pretty good one. That lens does seem to produce rave reviews.
Fuji X-E1 Leica Elmar 135 4 XF60mm 2.4 Macro | Zeiss FE 35mm 2.8
http://carnagepro.com
"Everything ... they eat everything, and fear is their bacon bits."
PenGun
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:48 pm
Location: BC Canada

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sat May 31, 2014 1:15 am

PenGun wrote:Well I have to take some back. I did not notice my PM telling me the lens was the 24-70mm not the 55mm.

I stand by my point that it's another level of colour and 3D, I did not expect that from any zoom. I guess Zeiss can make a pretty good one. That lens does seem to produce rave reviews.


Yep. It was the ZA 24-70/4. I am loving that lens more and more. Its images have tremendously good color, far exceeding the Minolta 17-35mm, which I will now be selling. I was very surprised that I got as sharp of an image as I did. It was shot at 24mm f/8 ISO100 1/125. The image has some very, very basic PP, but the OOC image itself was pretty nice as well. While the review sites that claimed it was terrible at 24mm, I find that if I am shooting at a decent distance, it sharpens up adequately. I suspect that with my 24mp sensor, its a more forgiving platform than the 36mp a7r. Regardless, I'll be printing that image at 30"x20" and hanging it on the wall. I'll let you know how the corners fair at that size.
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO, 100/2, 500/8
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sat May 31, 2014 6:49 am

The lens is a 'dog' at 24mm just like the Canon zooms are- i.e. they have some pretty rough distortion, and the extreme corners don't sharpen up at test-chart distances regardless of aperture used.

Of course, Sony* has good rendering down (they sure didn't skip on that), and no one shoots flat subjects at test-chart distances with anything other than macro lenses in the real world, so you can imagine that the 'objective' reviews only provide a small glimpse of what the lens is capable of. My lowly 24-105L suffers from all of the same 'problems' to an even greater degree, yet it still excels at landscapes on the wide end at f/8 and narrower using just the camera's built-in corrections or my import presets in Lightroom.

But I won't claim to have TheEmrys' eye- that's the real magic in that shot. That composition and those colors had to be seen through a keen photographic eye in order to be captured, and that he did to a very humbling T :).

(*the FE lenses released so far are Zeiss 'in name only', in that they're Sony designed and manufactured with input and approval from Zeiss- not a bad thing, but they're also not directly comparable with actual ZE glass)
Canon 6D||[24-105/4L IS USM|100/2.8L Macro IS USM|70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|40/2.8 STM|50/1.4 USM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8 Full-Manual Rectilinear Wide-angle|
Canon EOS-M|11-22/4-5.6 IS STM|22/2 STM|EF-M 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS STM|
For sale!|24/2.8 IS USM
|
Airmantharp
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5028
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sat May 31, 2014 6:59 am

Also, in other news, I rented a few lenses for my 6D- a Tammy 24-70/2.8 VC, and the Canon 85/1.2L II. The Tammy I'm wanting to compare to my experience with the 24-105L, as I've found that I need something faster for indoor events that I keep getting tagged to do and I consider it the top of the list (given that I won't be stretching for Canon's top-end zoom anytime soon), and I picked the fast Canon literally just to say that I've shot with it at some point in my lifetime.

A quick street shot wide-open- look at the full-size version to bathe in it's excessive LoCA!

Image
IMG_6096 by John C. Tharp, on Flickr
Canon 6D||[24-105/4L IS USM|100/2.8L Macro IS USM|70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|40/2.8 STM|50/1.4 USM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8 Full-Manual Rectilinear Wide-angle|
Canon EOS-M|11-22/4-5.6 IS STM|22/2 STM|EF-M 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS STM|
For sale!|24/2.8 IS USM
|
Airmantharp
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5028
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sat May 31, 2014 2:02 pm

Airmantharp wrote:
(*the FE lenses released so far are Zeiss 'in name only', in that they're Sony designed and manufactured with input and approval from Zeiss- not a bad thing, but they're also not directly comparable with actual ZE glass)

The 55 1.8 and the 35 2.8 are all Zeiss. The zooms are Sony Zeiss.

It's the difference the lenses make that I find very revealing.

I don't say much because it's not helpful, but a great deal of what I see here, and other places, just reinforces my opinion.
Fuji X-E1 Leica Elmar 135 4 XF60mm 2.4 Macro | Zeiss FE 35mm 2.8
http://carnagepro.com
"Everything ... they eat everything, and fear is their bacon bits."
PenGun
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:48 pm
Location: BC Canada

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sat May 31, 2014 2:07 pm

PenGun wrote:The 55 1.8 and the 35 2.8 are all Zeiss.


I'll agree to disagree :). (they're made in Japan by Sony, etc.)

And they're not terribly spectacular lenses, as one would expect from contemporary Zeiss designs- getting humbled by efforts from Canon and Sigma is a Sony trademark :D.
Canon 6D||[24-105/4L IS USM|100/2.8L Macro IS USM|70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|40/2.8 STM|50/1.4 USM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8 Full-Manual Rectilinear Wide-angle|
Canon EOS-M|11-22/4-5.6 IS STM|22/2 STM|EF-M 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS STM|
For sale!|24/2.8 IS USM
|
Airmantharp
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5028
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sat May 31, 2014 2:53 pm

Airmantharp wrote:
And they're not terribly spectacular lenses, as one would expect from contemporary Zeiss designs- getting humbled by efforts from Canon and Sigma is a Sony trademark :D.


This is this silliest thing you have ever posted. Nothing from Canon matches either lens, and the Sigma primes are close enough to be equivilant, but different in rendering and details (size, aperture, micro-contrast, etc.). Either are tremendous and better than anything else made today with AF. It comes down to whichever suits your shooting. There is no unequivocal best.
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO, 100/2, 500/8
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sat May 31, 2014 3:46 pm

Airmantharp wrote:
PenGun wrote:The 55 1.8 and the 35 2.8 are all Zeiss.


I'll agree to disagree :). (they're made in Japan by Sony, etc.)

And they're not terribly spectacular lenses, as one would expect from contemporary Zeiss designs- getting humbled by efforts from Canon and Sigma is a Sony trademark :D.

Wow. Lost it here. It's true Zeiss does have a factory in Japan, that's where the Touits come from and no one suggests they are anything other than Zeiss.

The 55 1.8 tests as good as the Otus throughout much of it's range. Canon does not have a lens that good.
Fuji X-E1 Leica Elmar 135 4 XF60mm 2.4 Macro | Zeiss FE 35mm 2.8
http://carnagepro.com
"Everything ... they eat everything, and fear is their bacon bits."
PenGun
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:48 pm
Location: BC Canada

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sat May 31, 2014 4:00 pm

OK, Canon vs. Zeiss/Sony at 10 paces. Turn and snap the shutter. I shall not be a second in this matter.
Life is hard; but it's harder if you're stupid. Big Al.
Captain Ned
Global Moderator
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 20314
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sat May 31, 2014 4:30 pm

PenGun wrote: Wow. Lost it here. It's true Zeiss does have a factory in Japan, that's where the Touits come from and no one suggests they are anything other than Zeiss.

The Touits are actually Zeiss.

PenGun wrote:The 55 1.8 tests as good as the Otus throughout much of it's range. Canon does not have a lens that good.


Outside of being fairly well corrected for sharpness, the 55 suffers from all of the same acuity-robbing aberrations other run-of-the-mill double-gauss designs are afflicted with. It's good for being small and sharp, but it's not a well-corrected optic. Sigma's 50 Art shows just what's possible with modern manufacturing techniques.
Canon 6D||[24-105/4L IS USM|100/2.8L Macro IS USM|70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|40/2.8 STM|50/1.4 USM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8 Full-Manual Rectilinear Wide-angle|
Canon EOS-M|11-22/4-5.6 IS STM|22/2 STM|EF-M 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS STM|
For sale!|24/2.8 IS USM
|
Airmantharp
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5028
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sat May 31, 2014 4:31 pm

Captain Ned wrote:OK, Canon vs. Zeiss/Sony at 10 paces. Turn and snap the shutter. I shall not be a second in this matter.


There's no Canon vs. Zeiss- they're complementary. Sony... needs help.
Canon 6D||[24-105/4L IS USM|100/2.8L Macro IS USM|70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|40/2.8 STM|50/1.4 USM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8 Full-Manual Rectilinear Wide-angle|
Canon EOS-M|11-22/4-5.6 IS STM|22/2 STM|EF-M 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS STM|
For sale!|24/2.8 IS USM
|
Airmantharp
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5028
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sat May 31, 2014 9:46 pm

Airmantharp wrote:
PenGun wrote: Wow. Lost it here. It's true Zeiss does have a factory in Japan, that's where the Touits come from and no one suggests they are anything other than Zeiss.

The Touits are actually Zeiss.

PenGun wrote:The 55 1.8 tests as good as the Otus throughout much of it's range. Canon does not have a lens that good.


Outside of being fairly well corrected for sharpness, the 55 suffers from all of the same acuity-robbing aberrations other run-of-the-mill double-gauss designs are afflicted with. It's good for being small and sharp, but it's not a well-corrected optic. Sigma's 50 Art shows just what's possible with modern manufacturing techniques.


Well possibly one could make a case for calling the 55 1.8 a Sony lens:

"The lenses are manufactured under the leadership of Sony. Sony ensures compliance with the specified ZEISS standards of quality. Sales and service are provided by Sony only. The ZEISS Touit lenses for the Sony NEX system and Fujifilm X system were developed exclusively by ZEISS. The lenses are manufactured under the direct control of ZEISS. Sales and service are provided by ZEISS."

One could not make a case that it suffers from anything much. I could roll out all kinds of 'astonishing' etc comments on the lenses lack of any real faults at all. It's a very fine lens, there is not a Canon as good.

Apart from that, it's obvious how nice it is, because the pictures it takes show it well. That is, after all the purpose of nice lenses.
Fuji X-E1 Leica Elmar 135 4 XF60mm 2.4 Macro | Zeiss FE 35mm 2.8
http://carnagepro.com
"Everything ... they eat everything, and fear is their bacon bits."
PenGun
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:48 pm
Location: BC Canada

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sat May 31, 2014 11:21 pm

I agree on all points- it is a very nice lens.

The challenge, though, is that it's not five to ten times as nice as the ancient Nikon and Canon lens designs of the same specification- sharper, yes, and a bit better rendering, but it also suffers from somewhat excessive vignetting and distortion inherent in not terribly well corrected mirrorless/rangefinder designs, and the LoCA at wider apertures is downright pedestrian.

So it's a value proposition- it's downright expensive, slow, and beyond outright acuity it's no better than any other double-gauss planar. If that's what someone's looking for, they're bound to be disappointed- I've read through plenty of those threads already.

But if you're looking for FE glass that befits the A7R, well, there's also no other option- the other lenses in the system aren't even particularly sharp, let alone corrected in any exceptional way. Hell, none of them appear to actually be designed to take full advantage of the A7Rs strengths.

And I only really mention it because I've been following it nearly as closely as others on this forum. I was downright astonished that Sony is letting the bodies go for so little, in comparison to what Nikon and Canon charge for their top-end semi-pros, and could easily consider an A7R in place of Canon's non-existent high-DR high-MP body, especially if I continue to invest in Canon glass. But man, Sony needs help with their glass. What Nikon is able to pull off with the D800E should outright embarrass them.
Canon 6D||[24-105/4L IS USM|100/2.8L Macro IS USM|70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|40/2.8 STM|50/1.4 USM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8 Full-Manual Rectilinear Wide-angle|
Canon EOS-M|11-22/4-5.6 IS STM|22/2 STM|EF-M 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS STM|
For sale!|24/2.8 IS USM
|
Airmantharp
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5028
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sun Jun 01, 2014 1:43 pm

It has to be hard to have all this equipment that is becoming, less than 'the best', and see the competition taking away the game.

I said when the a7R and a7 came out that they were a direct kick to the nuts of Canon and Nikon, This dose appear to be true.
Fuji X-E1 Leica Elmar 135 4 XF60mm 2.4 Macro | Zeiss FE 35mm 2.8
http://carnagepro.com
"Everything ... they eat everything, and fear is their bacon bits."
PenGun
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:48 pm
Location: BC Canada

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sun Jun 01, 2014 4:16 pm

PenGun wrote:I said when the a7R and a7 came out that they were a direct kick to the nuts of Canon and Nikon, This dose appear to be true.


The sensor is, aside from the D800(E) already providing that 'direct kick in the nuts'. It's the lack of native-mount glass that truly shows off the potential of Sony's sensor that is the disappointment, as I've said before. It's sad that the best glass for the A7R is anything but lenses labeled 'Sony'.
Canon 6D||[24-105/4L IS USM|100/2.8L Macro IS USM|70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|40/2.8 STM|50/1.4 USM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8 Full-Manual Rectilinear Wide-angle|
Canon EOS-M|11-22/4-5.6 IS STM|22/2 STM|EF-M 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS STM|
For sale!|24/2.8 IS USM
|
Airmantharp
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5028
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sun Jun 01, 2014 4:30 pm

Airmantharp wrote:
PenGun wrote:I said when the a7R and a7 came out that they were a direct kick to the nuts of Canon and Nikon, This dose appear to be true.


The sensor is, aside from the D800(E) already providing that 'direct kick in the nuts'. It's the lack of native-mount glass that truly shows off the potential of Sony's sensor that is the disappointment, as I've said before. It's sad that the best glass for the A7R is anything but lenses labeled 'Sony'.

I do see what you mean. Sony does not have a big lens line up. Some very fine ones but nothing like the Nikon/Canon line. It's really not the point. Anyone who seriously contemplates the a7R will be using Leica and Zeiss M lenses mostly. That is the point. They are the finest ever made, as a group, and easily trump the in house stuff from Canon and Nikon.
Fuji X-E1 Leica Elmar 135 4 XF60mm 2.4 Macro | Zeiss FE 35mm 2.8
http://carnagepro.com
"Everything ... they eat everything, and fear is their bacon bits."
PenGun
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:48 pm
Location: BC Canada

PreviousNext

Return to Visual Haven

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron