|
Ordered myself a 105mm/2.8 macro from Sigma. Hope this wasn't a mistake, because Sigma and all. Spring blossoms can come!
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 01:34 |
|
|
Better brand than canon or nikon atm.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
Pentax released yet another hilarious lens. Even PentaxReviews can't sound too excited about it. Pentax-DA Ltd 20-40mm f/2.8-4 Pro:
Cons:
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 22:21
|
|
) at 40mm
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Pentax-DA Ltd 20-40mm f/2.8-4 Dear Pentax: Great cameras. However, you don't really get this lens thing, do you? I know things in Japan are different (and I have learned everything one needs to know about Japan from very good books such at this one: http://www.amazon.com/How-Good-bye-Depression-Constrict-Everyday/dp/0595094724), but this is getting a bit silly. Size ain't everything! Samyang lenses, here I come! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Pentax released yet another hilarious lens. Even PentaxReviews can't sound too excited about it. oth that is probably the best looking lens anyone is making today like a vintage takumar, 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 22:36
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:oth that is probably the best looking lens anyone is making today Fair enough. It is kinda pretty.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
That lens looks hideous. Also $1K...
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
I like the range and size but not for a loving grand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
Startyde posted:I like the range and size but not for a loving grand. Congrats Pentax, you re-created the horrible 35-80 that came with the N8008 and made it a stop faster and with less zoom range.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:That lens looks hideous. Also $1K... i'm sorry you hate good looking lenses 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:i'm sorry you hate good looking lenses If it's not radioactive, it's not a real Takumar 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 23:33
|
|
|
Helicity posted:If it's not radioactive, it's not a real Takumar The 35/3.5 was so good it didn't need thorium doping to be amazing 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
So, dumb question - how can I tell if I got a bad copy of a lens? I ordered a nikon 50mm f/1.4D from KEH a while back (I'm way out of the return window) to replace my broken f/1.8D (stupid baby), and everything I shot with it looked really soft compared to both the broken f/1.8 and another f/1.8D I got to use in place of the 1.4 over the holidays. The f/1.4 looked soft compared to two of my other lenses as well (a nikon 80-200 af-s and a tokina 100mm (?) macro). I visually inspected the glass and the diaphragm and everything looks fine to me. I guess my question is, how can I tell that I'm not being crazy and confirm that there is something actually wrong with the lens? Are there any tests I can run?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
Sigma announced a new 50mm 1.4 Art. If its anywhere near as good as their 35 1.4 is supposed to be, this should absolutely crush it out of the park.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
gvibes posted:I guess my question is, how can I tell that I'm not being crazy and confirm that there is something actually wrong with the lens? Are there any tests I can run? A simple test? Put camera on tripod, find some ruled paper or similar thing with a simple pattern, place the patterned thing at an angle to the camera (so the lines would become diagonal in the photo), focus somewhere in the middle of the pattern, take pictures at all the apertures. Afterwards inspect all the pictures 1:1, if there's anywhere along the depth axis the pictures are sufficiently sharp it would point to autofocus being miscalibrated. If it isn't sharp anywhere at any aperture, then the lens may be bad. If it's an AF calibration issue, the newer higher-end bodies have an option for AF micro adjust you can try to use.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Sigma announced a new 50mm 1.4 Art. If its anywhere near as good as their 35 1.4 is supposed to be, this should absolutely crush it out of the park.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Sigma announced a new 50mm 1.4 Art. If its anywhere near as good as their 35 1.4 is supposed to be, this should absolutely crush it out of the park. I sense some price decreases coming on the Zeiss Otus 55/1.4 
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Sigma announced a new 50mm 1.4 Art. If its anywhere near as good as their 35 1.4 is supposed to be, this should absolutely crush it out of the park. Awesome news! I've been waiting for quite a while for this! If it performs anywhere near their 35mm, I won't even wait for Canon's new 50. Edit: The fact that it's a complete re-design rather than just adding USB dock functionality is really promising as well. theloafingone fucked around with this message at 04:19 on Jan 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
This is a weird question. I have a little compact tripod, about 2 feet all folded together (it collapses, standard affair). It came with a little tube sleeve thing made out of fabric that had a sling so you could slip the tripod into the sleve and then sling it on your back. However I lent it to a friend and he returned it sans sleeve, saying he had lost it. It was really useful for carrying around on trips and all that, so I was wondering, anyone know of any good cheap sleves for sale?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
nielsm posted:A simple test? 50mm f/1.4D (at f/1.8) on the left, 50mm f/1.8D (at f/1.8) on the right  
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 04:28
|
|
|
gvibes posted:Thanks, I just printed out some random test pattern I found online, and it looks like my lens is broke. Dammit. Yeah when I had a 50 1.4 it was "just as good" at 1.8 and "wildly better" at f/2 compared to the 50 1.8. Something's hosed up there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 04:44
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Sigma announced a new 50mm 1.4 Art. If its anywhere near as good as their 35 1.4 is supposed to be, this should absolutely crush it out of the park. Goddamn, finally. I've been using a nifty fifty for 2 years because there hasn't been an obvious upgrade choice until now. Just got a Sigma 35, and it's incredible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Sigma announced a new 50mm 1.4 Art. If its anywhere near as good as their 35 1.4 is supposed to be, this should absolutely crush it out of the park.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 05:15
|
|
|
Geez it took this long for someone to finally make a dope 50.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 09:14
|
|
|
terriyaki posted:Geez it took this long for someone to finally make a dope 50. Uhmm the Canon 50mm 1.2 is dope as heck If you've got like... a thousand euro to spend on a prime.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 11:48
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Nice. I wish they would have widened it, tho, like f1.2.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 14:12
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Uhmm the Canon 50mm 1.2 is dope as heck Yeah but that lens has the whole focus shift issue or whatever. I guess I shouldn't jump the gun and call this new 50 dope quite yet. It could have focus shift issues too. And technically there was also the EF 1.0 L but it's no longer being produced and goes for $4-5K used.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 14:13
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Yeah because what we need is for primes to get heavier. That other company called Handevision is making wiiiiiide open lenses for the various mirrorless systems. Maybe they'll venture into DSLRs and release something large aperture 50mm. They currently have a 40mm/0.85.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 14:29
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Do you even lift, bro? I doubt it'd get that much annoyingly heavier. If anything I'd want 1.8 and stabilization over 1.4 or 1.2
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 14:47
|
|
|
Canon could definitely do with updating the 50 1.8 II, I haven't touched mine since the 40 2.8 came out, the colour reproduction seems much better on the 40. I don't know how that even makes sense but damnit that's how it is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Canon could definitely do with updating the 50 1.8 II, I haven't touched mine since the 40 2.8 came out, the colour reproduction seems much better on the 40. I don't know how that even makes sense but damnit that's how it is. 40/2.8 is a sweet little lens. I used it all day on xmas, and I agree the color reproduction is fantastic. It also "pops" like crazy, which I was not expecting for a lens that is not that fast.  
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
You can even use the 40mm 2.8 for birding 
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
Is anyone excited about Tamron's new 150-600? $1069 seems too good to be true unless I'm missing something. I love my Tamron 70-300 and wouldn't mind throwing a few more bucks their way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
Maker Of Shoes posted:Is anyone excited about Tamron's new 150-600? $1069 seems too good to be true unless I'm missing something. I love my Tamron 70-300 and wouldn't mind throwing a few more bucks their way. That is one hell of a range and it's rare to see glass be good when the range is that wide. That said, being able to close down to f/40 is neat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
Can't wait to read reviews on it because the numbers sure look good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 02:50
|
|
|
DJExile posted:That is one hell of a range and it's rare to see glass be good when the range is that wide. That said, being able to close down to f/40 is neat. Not to be a pendant, but that's actually less range than the 70-300. (4.0x VS 4.2x zoom) Also I dunno where I heard this, but I remember hearing that making a good tele is somewhat easier than making a good wide angle lens. Guess we'd have to wait for the reviews / test-chart spergs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
Some shots with the lens here: http://www.dcfever.com/lens/viewsamples.php?set=951&picture=10213 Site is slower than hell but it has full size jpegs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 05:09
|
|
|
$15 got me: -The camera in LIKE NEW condition -Two like new flash cubes in box -Instruction manual -Carrying case in amazing condition -And WORKING loving FILM still in packaging http://minus.com/i/bmeHYD8NKElm7
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 05:44
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Some shots with the lens here: Need a test shot to see that it retains f/5.6 @ 400mm and also for benchmarking against the current 100-400mm and 400mmL prime. Seems to vignette a good bit at 600 but that is to be expected. Really a great deal for the full frame guys since they shouldn't give a poo poo about high-iso anymore and the 300mm on 70-300mm zooms just isn't that long on FF. And for the crop guys, welp, enjoy your new sniper rifle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 01:34 |
|
|
Seamonster posted:And for the crop guys, welp, enjoy your new sniper rifle. Pew pew. Time to start saving couch change. Edit: tbf though I'm not sure if the Nikon one will have an internal AF motor. Might be time to put my tired 3100 to bed. 
Maker Of Shoes fucked around with this message at 18:40 on Jan 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 18:19
|
|