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 Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:27 pm

Click to enlarge.
Image
Image . Image . Image

Image Image

Image Image Image

Image
i7-4770K, H70, Gryphon Z87, 16 GiB, R9-290, SSD, 2 HD, Blu-ray, SB ZX, TJ08-E, SS-660XP², 3007WFP+2001FP, RK-9000BR, MX518
JustAnEngineer
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 15336
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sun Feb 09, 2014 1:45 am

From our last 'dusting', with the EOS-M and EF-M 22/2:

Image
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
Maximum Gerbil
 
Posts: 4967
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sun Feb 09, 2014 4:58 pm

Went up to Rocky Mountain National Park. Had a great time in the cold, wind, and snow. Oh yeah, and altitude. I had only brought my 35-105mm (from 1985), as I thought it would be clear skies and some nice landscapes. But, I ran into some elk instead. Now, please remember, these are all at 105mm, with most of them being 1:1 crops. However, that being said, I am very pleased with the sharpness and color of this lens.

Started out with some truly brutal wind and snow.

Image

Image

Image

Then it cleared up! I was pretty happy about that.

Image

Image

Image
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sun Feb 09, 2014 4:59 pm

Airmantharp wrote:From our last 'dusting', with the EOS-M and EF-M 22/2:


Little bit saturated for my taste. Certainly a capable little camera.
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sun Feb 09, 2014 7:08 pm

Definitely great shots with limited light and magnification- always a challenge!

TheEmrys wrote:
Airmantharp wrote:From our last 'dusting', with the EOS-M and EF-M 22/2:


Little bit saturated for my taste. Certainly a capable little camera.


The camera and wide lenses are surprisingly sharp, and the sensor produces RAW files that are far more pliable than what I got out of my 60D. The real challenge with the daytime shots in the neighborhood was the bright snow obscuring detail. The over-saturation is an attempt to correct that- trying to bring out detail in the ground without adding too much noise to the rest of the shot. It's one of those cases where I wish I'd had the 11-22 instead with the CPL :).
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
Maximum Gerbil
 
Posts: 4967
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sun Feb 09, 2014 7:28 pm

Airmantharp wrote:Definitely great shots with limited light and magnification- always a challenge!

TheEmrys wrote:
Airmantharp wrote:From our last 'dusting', with the EOS-M and EF-M 22/2:


Little bit saturated for my taste. Certainly a capable little camera.


The camera and wide lenses are surprisingly sharp, and the sensor produces RAW files that are far more pliable than what I got out of my 60D. The real challenge with the daytime shots in the neighborhood was the bright snow obscuring detail. The over-saturation is an attempt to correct that- trying to bring out detail in the ground without adding too much noise to the rest of the shot. It's one of those cases where I wish I'd had the 11-22 instead with the CPL :).


I think if you darken and desaturate the reds and yellows a bit, you would probably get pretty close. The bricks in th two story house are just too orange and not natural. The fence of the left could be correct, depending on how new it is though. Not sure about the foreground evergreens.

I must admit, when I saw it, before I looked at who had posted it, my thought was "that could be from a subdivision around me." I guess even generic suburbia has a regionally distinct look.

--SS
SecretSquirrel
Gerbil Jedi
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1686
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Colony, TX (Dallas suburb)

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Mon Feb 10, 2014 8:53 pm

It took about five seconds to dial the saturation down to a more reasonable level; -10 in LR5 did the trick. Burying whites, boosting shadows, and burying blacks along with a default medium contrast tone curve pushed the saturation up a bit too much.

And yeah, this is North Texas- I'm a bit east of you, but these 'burbs all mostly look the same :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
Maximum Gerbil
 
Posts: 4967
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:27 pm

Airmantharp wrote:It took about five seconds to dial the saturation down to a more reasonable level; -10 in LR5 did the trick. Burying whites, boosting shadows, and burying blacks along with a default medium contrast tone curve pushed the saturation up a bit too much.


Want to post up the results?
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Mon Feb 10, 2014 10:56 pm

TheEmrys wrote:
Airmantharp wrote:It took about five seconds to dial the saturation down to a more reasonable level; -10 in LR5 did the trick. Burying whites, boosting shadows, and burying blacks along with a default medium contrast tone curve pushed the saturation up a bit too much.


Want to post up the results?



Sure, when I get home :).
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
Maximum Gerbil
 
Posts: 4967
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Tue Feb 11, 2014 1:50 am

This is with saturation adjusted by -15 in LR5:

Image
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
Maximum Gerbil
 
Posts: 4967
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Tue Feb 11, 2014 2:20 am

Here's the original, with all corrections zeroed, WB set to Auto and camera profile set to Camera Landscape.

Image
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
Maximum Gerbil
 
Posts: 4967
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Tue Feb 11, 2014 2:26 am

TheEmrys wrote:Image


Like this shot the most; this capture gives the dramatic impression of the elk 'traveling' through the winter weather instead of just lazing about, beautiful creatures that they are :).

Also, I'd love to try my hand at other shooter's RAWs in LR5, if you guys wouldn't mind- let me know!
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
Maximum Gerbil
 
Posts: 4967
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Tue Feb 11, 2014 2:49 pm

My elk are gone in a couple of seconds. Why are those just standing around?
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 Tue Feb 11, 2014 3:52 pm

Airmantharp: PM sent with Dropbox link for a couple for you.

PenGun wrote:My elk are gone in a couple of seconds. Why are those just standing around?


There are a couple of reasons:
There was a strong cross-wind, so I was not smelled.
I was pretty well covered in snow, and wearing camouflage, so I wasn't seen.
Being in a national park near Estes Park, CO, many of the elk are used to humans.
There was literally no one around to mess it up, and there was some very good grazing there.

I also used to bowhunt quite seriously, so I used many of my old tricks. I did not ever look at them directly (unless it was through a viewfinder) nor did I ever move much. I am sure there were better angles I could have had, but with wildlife I can't ever be picky. I am actually pretty amazed I got some shots of with a FF camera at 105mm. And, a couple of shots there I used my camera's digital zoom. It is essentially a crop that then up-converts it. I thought it was a bit of a gimmick, but I am pretty pleased with the results.
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Tue Feb 11, 2014 6:26 pm

TheEmrys wrote:Airmantharp: PM sent with Dropbox link for a couple for you.

PenGun wrote:My elk are gone in a couple of seconds. Why are those just standing around?


There are a couple of reasons:
There was a strong cross-wind, so I was not smelled.
I was pretty well covered in snow, and wearing camouflage, so I wasn't seen.
Being in a national park near Estes Park, CO, many of the elk are used to humans.
There was literally no one around to mess it up, and there was some very good grazing there.

I also used to bowhunt quite seriously, so I used many of my old tricks. I did not ever look at them directly (unless it was through a viewfinder) nor did I ever move much. I am sure there were better angles I could have had, but with wildlife I can't ever be picky. I am actually pretty amazed I got some shots of with a FF camera at 105mm. And, a couple of shots there I used my camera's digital zoom. It is essentially a crop that then up-converts it. I thought it was a bit of a gimmick, but I am pretty pleased with the results.


You do what you have to. I don't doubt your skills but those Elk are looking right at you. ;)

My best animal tease was to call a buck deer out of the bush and have him actually touch my hand before he shied away. I was very Yoda that day. ;)
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 Feb 12, 2014 2:15 am

TheEmrys wrote:Airmantharp: PM sent with Dropbox link for a couple for you.


Results:

Image

Image

The A99 file looks great, and LR5 had a profile for the camera built in; it didn't for the A65V, but that one still cleaned up pretty good too!
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
Maximum Gerbil
 
Posts: 4967
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed Feb 12, 2014 9:25 pm

Well, I went to change my focusing screen today and the clip holding it in broke. I ordered the part to fix it, but I think I'm going to go look at cameras this weekend.
At this point, I think I may go for the A7. I'm really looking forward to focus peaking in the viewfinder, and the fact that FF is actually okay at high ISOs. The adaptability of the mount (it'll take my m42 and K-mount lenses) and size of the camera is also really nice.
I'm also sorta considering the 6D and D600, but they don't seem to offer (m)any advantages over the A7, and won't have much to help with MF.
I looked at some m4/3, and the size advantage is nice, but the performance usually leaves a bit to be desired.
The X-E1 looks like a pretty good option, especially at current price point, but the AF leaves a bit to be desired, as do the ergonomics and low light performance.

Also, since I'm not really locked into any system, it's not a bad time to change.
Lenovo W520
IBM dx340
Nokia Lumia 928
Sony a7 with far too many lenses to list or even count
lonleyppl
Gerbil XP
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed Feb 12, 2014 9:35 pm

The A7 is a pretty good compromise for a lot of things; you lose outright AF speed to the DSLRs but gain lens compatibility, and it's not like the A7 has dog slow AF- it's hybrid AF is supposedly better than Sony's other mirrorless bodies already on the market.

It will at least allow you to have both a relatively compact but very high IQ camera while also being able to use older glass to get that 'look' that is so rarely well replicated in modern lens lineups :).
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
Maximum Gerbil
 
Posts: 4967
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed Feb 12, 2014 10:03 pm

lonleyppl wrote:Well, I went to change my focusing screen today and the clip holding it in broke. I ordered the part to fix it, but I think I'm going to go look at cameras this weekend.


Major bummer. My condolences. I hate un-needed/wanted replacements. We just had to buy a new oven. grrr.

lonleyppl wrote:At this point, I think I may go for the A7. I'm really looking forward to focus peaking in the viewfinder, and the fact that FF is actually okay at high ISOs. The adaptability of the mount (it'll take my m42 and K-mount lenses) and size of the camera is also really nice.
I'm also sorta considering the 6D and D600, but they don't seem to offer (m)any advantages over the A7, and won't have much to help with MF.
I looked at some m4/3, and the size advantage is nice, but the performance usually leaves a bit to be desired.
The X-E1 looks like a pretty good option, especially at current price point, but the AF leaves a bit to be desired, as do the ergonomics and low light performance.

Also, since I'm not really locked into any system, it's not a bad time to change.


It isn't a bad time to change at all. A couple of things to consider:

I don't know if I would be so quick to write off mft. Its an extremely capable system with some amazing glass. But, you know your shooting habits.

The a7's don't have image stabilization, something I love in my Sony. Its a real winner to have a $150 50/1.4 that is stabilized at every aperture, as well as very sharp 35-105, both of which are now nearly 30 years old. Food for thought.

There is a dearth of native mount lenses, and the ones that are made, while some are (literally) top-notch, the zooms have been under-whelming. The Zeiss zoom is okay, but it isn't in the same league as the Zeiss 24-70/2.8, even if it is an f/4 lens with OSS. However, the 35/2.8 and 55/1.8 are truly amazing lenses, and not priced poorly for the performance at all. If you like primes, you'll love them.

Also, and this is huge, if you buy at B&H, Amazon, Adorama, or the Sony Store, you get $200 off each lens when you buy the a7. I have been very tempted by this, because it means instead of shelling out $1500 for the 35 and 55, it drops it to a more manageable $1100. Not bad for a lens that is OTUS-level of performance (with a touch of CA that PP can take care of) plus a very well regarded 35mm (Steve Huff shot with them both for a week, and declared that the 35 was "something special." I have no idea what he means, but he loved it and I do respect his opinion). You can also use it for the zooms, if you want. Also, they just announced the 70-200/4 OSS, if you need the length.

I would also be tempted to look at an LEA-4 adapter so you can shoot all of the old Minolta glass. But that'd be another $400. There goes the savings from the lenses.

However, I would give a look to the just announced a6000. Its got the fastest AF of any body, DSLR or mirrorless. If that isn't a factor, also consider its essentially a NEX-7 with many of the a7's features. And you would have the same ability to adapt lenses with the awesome focus peaking (I love it with the DMF - DMF will AF and a half-press, like always, but then you automatically can use the phase-detect to illuminate critical focus - its awesome).
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Feb 13, 2014 12:55 am

I was hoping to go with the kit zoom and relatively inexpensive m42 and K-Mount to E-mount adapters, in addition to the a7 body.

In the mft world, I was looking at the Olympus OM-D line. I was kind of leaning towards the EM-1 over the EM-5 for focus peaking, slightly better image quality, a more ergonomic body, and improved AF. The problem is, if I go that route, I'd probably get the EM-1 and the 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro lens, which will cost more than the a7 + its kit lens. The IS in the EM-1 should allow me to shoot in similar lighting to the a7 as it is quite good and will work with any lens, but at normal ISOs the a7 has higher image quality without compromising FOV or DOF.

I know either one will be a huge upgrade from my T1i, but it's a big decision so I feel a bit indecisive.
Lenovo W520
IBM dx340
Nokia Lumia 928
Sony a7 with far too many lenses to list or even count
lonleyppl
Gerbil XP
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Feb 13, 2014 1:51 am

The standard zooms for the A7 do look like a negative- they're no 24-70/2.8L II, in the way that the FE35 and FE55 seem to punch above their weight. How adverse are you to using the hollow AF adapter and the newer Tammy 2.8 in A mount?
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
Maximum Gerbil
 
Posts: 4967
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Feb 13, 2014 2:59 am

I wish I could do that $200 deal with an a7R and a 55mm, that would kill, but I still am too poor.

It's easier for me than most people. I can trade it all for IQ as my camera lives on a tripod, no IS needed, I shoot almost exclusively landscape, where autofocus often gets in the way, and the nature of what I do makes primes sufficient for almost any shot.

I have it easy compared to most of you. ;)
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 Feb 13, 2014 10:38 am

I would really look between the a7 and the OMD-1. If you can try each out, definitely do so. What sort of shooting do you do?
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Feb 13, 2014 11:36 am

Airmantharp wrote:How adverse are you to using the hollow AF adapter and the newer Tammy 2.8 in A mount?

Which Tamron do you mean? The 17-50mm f/2.8 looks to be made only for crop bodies, and I didn't see any others.

PenGun wrote:I wish I could do that $200 deal with an a7R and a 55mm, that would kill, but I still am too poor.

Me too. I'm really trying to keep the cost below $2000. Though, I do already have a pretty nice 55mm prime.

TheEmrys wrote:I would really look between the a7 and the OMD-1. If you can try each out, definitely do so. What sort of shooting do you do?

My flickr page shows off most of my landscape and macro-ish shots. There are also a lot of walkaround touristy shots, from grounds and whenever I travel. I've been trying to shoot in social situations (at events, just hanging out with friends, etc.) but most of that happens at night and my T1i can't keep up.

Right now I'm sort of leaning towards the OMD, just because the lens I'd get in that case is significantly better than if I got the a7 and its kit lens.

[Edit: added a 0 in $2000]
Lenovo W520
IBM dx340
Nokia Lumia 928
Sony a7 with far too many lenses to list or even count
lonleyppl
Gerbil XP
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Feb 13, 2014 11:40 am

It would be the Tampon 28-75/2.8. I would look at the Minolta 35-105 original. Awesome lens for $100 or less. Super sharp and excellent bokeh.
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Feb 13, 2014 11:41 am

It would be the Tamron 28-75/2.8. Its a good lens, but if you are expecting corners to be sharp, look to hit f/11. I would look at the Minolta 35-105f/3.5-4.5 original. Awesome lens for $100 or less. Super sharp and excellent bokeh.
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Feb 13, 2014 3:29 pm

TheEmrys wrote:It would be the Tampon 28-75/2.8. I would look at the Minolta 35-105 original. Awesome lens for $100 or less. Super sharp and excellent bokeh.


Actually, it'd be the 24-70/2.8. Very sharp lens with modern AF and modern coatings along with weather sealing, second only to Canon's 24-70/2.8L II.
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
Maximum Gerbil
 
Posts: 4967
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:24 pm

Airmantharp wrote:
TheEmrys wrote:It would be the Tampon 28-75/2.8. I would look at the Minolta 35-105 original. Awesome lens for $100 or less. Super sharp and excellent bokeh.


Actually, it'd be the 24-70/2.8. Very sharp lens with modern AF and modern coatings along with weather sealing, second only to Canon's 24-70/2.8L II.


The big thing there is price. Amazon and B&H both have it for $1300. Add on the cost of an adapter that'll do AF and you're practically at my budget.

TheEmrys wrote:It would be the Tamron 28-75/2.8. Its a good lens, but if you are expecting corners to be sharp, look to hit f/11. I would look at the Minolta 35-105f/3.5-4.5 original. Awesome lens for $100 or less. Super sharp and excellent bokeh.

Depending on which I get, I may go that route. Spending $400 on the adapter makes that a bit hard to stomach, but we'll see.
Lenovo W520
IBM dx340
Nokia Lumia 928
Sony a7 with far too many lenses to list or even count
lonleyppl
Gerbil XP
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Feb 13, 2014 5:39 pm

Note that if you want to focus on moving subjects in low light, your answer is most likely not mirrorless.

I can understand the frustration of using the T1i in those situations- I had the same issues with mine, and the 60D I replaced it with- but that's one issue I don't have with my 6D.
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
Maximum Gerbil
 
Posts: 4967
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Feb 13, 2014 8:07 pm

The a6000 may change that. The AF-C looks awesome. In the video with the parrot, it keeps up completely.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/live-coverage-sony-a6000-officially-announced/
Sony a7
Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 SSM, 24-70/4 SSM
Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, 100-300 APO
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado

PreviousNext

Return to Visual Haven

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests