drh681

drh681

Lives in A small blue and white rock
Works as a Goad.
Joined on Jul 2, 2005
About me:

To develop a profitable trade in companion minerals with a small side trade in high energy particles.

Comments

Total: 85, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

brownie314: I would kind of expect the higher volume lenses to have less variation. Just thinking about it from a manufacturing point of view. If you make a higher volume of a product you are more likely to have that assembly process very worked out and have less variation than a low volume assembly process. I could be wrong as I have not worked in high volume electronics manufacturing, only other industrial product manufacturing.

yeah, the higher the volume of product, the less likely your batch sampling will catch any brief run of variation.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 22, 2015 at 18:45 UTC

You have to watch to the end!

Nothing Like Yorkshire.

:)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 13, 2015 at 01:19 UTC as 51st comment
In reply to:

Don Sata: The lens is too big, what's the point of making a fixed focal length compact with that huge lens?

28 mm f 1.7 for 24x36 sensor = ?

Class?

Anybody?

My 28 mm f 1.8 EF weighs in at 310 grams.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 00:00 UTC
In reply to:

nunatak: a lovely design. yet for the money 28mm is not wide enough for my tastes.

28 mm on a 24x36 sensor. mostly wide enough.

Fixed lens. no fumbles.

Can we spell Canonet? :)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 23:56 UTC
In reply to:

Aguilar: They need to sell a "weathered" version, for the real Steampunk cred, and to match with faded hipster clothing.

That's Patina.

And you would use whatever solvent/salt combination you need for a particular color. Bear in mind the color is only molecules deep; so you have a built-in re-work order.

Direct link | Posted on May 30, 2015 at 22:03 UTC
On Canon announces 50mm F1.8 STM lens article (310 comments in total)

If it lacks the obvious aperture shaped out of focus plane highlights of the old 1.8, it's a vast improvement.

It seems in the chart, to have a decent center sharpness wide open. With the typical rapid fall off of a wide aperture lens.

Direct link | Posted on May 11, 2015 at 18:04 UTC as 22nd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

drh681: So it's actually a 700$ lens system?

I don't know about too expensive, but designed for M mount and not focusing with out the adapter is rather unusual.

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2015 at 21:52 UTC

So it's actually a 700$ lens system?

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2015 at 00:06 UTC as 26th comment | 7 replies
On Lensbaby introduces Velvet 56mm f/1.6 article (166 comments in total)
In reply to:

Timmbits: So this is better than a

vintage Minolta f1.4 50mm plus a Lens Mount Adapter

($80 mint condition + $10 (adapter) on online marketplaces)

?

.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2015 at 21:38 UTC
In reply to:

Mssimo: Almost the same price as the lens baby velvet. What one would you pick?

It's not built to the same purpose.

So that is sort of a moot question.

However, did you notice the weight of this lens?

I know which I'd rather tote around all day.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2015 at 21:33 UTC
In reply to:

Ran Plett: I get the same effect shooting with my Canon 50mm 1.4 FD lens that I got for $100.

I shouldn't say I get that, but rather I could get that if I actually wanted it. Which I don't.

At F5.6 my EF 50mm 1.8 is WAY sharper than this at F5.6
Even at F1.8 it is sharper than this one at F5.6

That is by DESIGN.
but if I want a 5 inch focus on the EF 50, I need the extension tube.

The EF 50 mm 1.8 NEVER flares like this at any aperture, that's by DESIGN too.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2015 at 08:18 UTC
In reply to:

straylightrun: Retail price should be $199.95 Max.

I've been plenty helpful in this thread.

But I feel like the some of my school teachers must have felt.

Some of you just cant grasp the concept in this lens design.

It is not designed to be the same as an ordinary 50 mm lens with a big aperture.

If you have been in fact, to the Lensbaby site, you know this lens is perfectly in line with their image making philosophy.

And NOBODY else's.

It is not for the Crisp and Crunchy Crowd of Group F 64 Wannabes.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2015 at 08:11 UTC
In reply to:

VadymA: First, great work by the photograper! Really enjoyed this gallery. From lens performance perspective, the only images I liked are those that were significantly stepped down. Everything between 1.6 and 2.0 Is just way too soft. I was expecting at least something to remain sharp in those samples but disappointingly that is not the case. Usually images like this are criticized unless they are taken with a cheap plastic lens or with a bottom from a beer bottle or something. Just my personal opinion.

If you want sharp at a large aperture, buy a different lens.
Buy a lens that is DESIGNED to be sharp at larger apertures.

The Design Philosophy of this lens is not the same as an ordinary 50-55 mm large aperture lens.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2015 at 08:05 UTC
In reply to:

straylightrun: Retail price should be $199.95 Max.

Go to the Lensbaby Web site and educate your self.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2015 at 04:55 UTC
In reply to:

enenzo: Go get a Minolta MC/MD ROKKOR-X 50mm f1.4. $70 :-)

That and the limited lens elements that were actually designed to flare; rather than the massive elements in multiple groups that are designed specifically to control that tendency to flare at wide apertures.
I can't figure why these guys who say "buy an old fifty" can't wrap their heads around the Idea of a lens designed for the opposite of what their favorite oldie was designed to do.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2015 at 04:52 UTC
In reply to:

enenzo: Go get a Minolta MC/MD ROKKOR-X 50mm f1.4. $70 :-)

If yours is flaring like this it's busted
http://www.rokkorfiles.com/50mm%20vs%2058mm.htm

Direct link | Posted on Apr 14, 2015 at 08:23 UTC
In reply to:

Juck: Very nicely shot samples,,, but a 40 year old FL 55mm 1.2 will do the same thing better, for a lot less $

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51685914

I'm not the babbling type.

You on the other hand, seem to have lost your ability to read.

Different designs entirely. Different results.

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/lens/fl/data/19-85/fl_55_12.html
let's just start with the basics.

The Canon is seven lens elements in five groups; the Lensbaby is four elements in three groups.

The Canon was designed to eliminate as many lens errors as possible for that aperture.

The Lensbaby was designed to accentuate certain "desirable" errors.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 14, 2015 at 08:07 UTC
In reply to:

straylightrun: Retail price should be $199.95 Max.

They're not made in China.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 13, 2015 at 19:44 UTC
In reply to:

JKP: I never liked the older Lensbaby lenses, they looked cheap and optics were not good. This one seems to be much sharper and has better built quality. Still not going to buy it, but they are definitely going to the right direction. The hazy effect is nice.

The Optics were fine.
They were designed to look different from any other lens out in the market.

Each one had a specific purpose. The single glass optic and plastic optic and the double glass optic were all designed to produce a particular look.

They were never meant to replace any standard lens in your bag.

The are all meant as creative tools for people with the imagination to see a possibility in their effects.

They still are.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 13, 2015 at 19:43 UTC
In reply to:

Juck: Very nicely shot samples,,, but a 40 year old FL 55mm 1.2 will do the same thing better, for a lot less $

Not really, this is a different design for a different purpose.

If your old fifty does the same, there is something wrong with the lens.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 13, 2015 at 19:35 UTC
Total: 85, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »