thx1138

Lives in Australia Sydney, Australia
Works as a Senior Researcher - Canon Australia
Joined on Jul 17, 2004
About me:

Canon 1D X, 5D III, 17-40 f/4L, 45 f/2.8 TS-E, Sigma 50 f/1.4 Sigma 85 f/1.4, 135 f/2L, Canon 100 f/2.8L IS macro, 70-200 f/2.8L IS mk II, 300 f/2.8L IS, 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS, 500 f/4L IS mk II, 1.4x TC III, 2x TC III, 600 EX, Sigma 24 f/1.8 EX, Canon 24-7 f/2.8 mk II, Sigma 150 f/2.8 Macro EX HSM DG

Comments

Total: 1337, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »

Wow that new Sigma 14 f/1.8 is amazing, I'm ordering one as I type. Can't wait to capture the sun and stars in that much detail.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2017 at 05:27 UTC as 13th comment
In reply to:

thx1138: But the DR is only 3-4 stops and it only shoots 1fpm, might as well burn it and buy a Sony.

Zeiss Ikon, und luxury! When I were young, I was so poor I had to take photos with tracing paper and a crayon fashioned out of mud.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2017 at 03:07 UTC

But the DR is only 3-4 stops and it only shoots 1fpm, might as well burn it and buy a Sony.

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2017 at 22:32 UTC as 31st comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

photomedium: Sigma 1300 vs canon 1750 doesn't seem all that much less, all things considered.

Lens is only tested on the lowly 5D3 and even then it's not that great. The Canon holds up amazingly on the 5DsR and would destroy the SIgma in the corners and edges. The MTF's of the Sigma are very ordinary and the lens should have been labelled a Contemporary, certainly not worthy of the Art moniker. This is to the Art series as the Canon 24-105L II is to the L series, the b@st@rd stepchild. I suspect the Tamron G2 will be a better lens and is even cheaper. And Tamron usually has more accurate AF.

I'll take tack sharp and no OS over decent and OS any day no matter the price difference.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2017 at 08:05 UTC
In reply to:

Thorgrem: Prices in the Netherlands are;

Stabilized;
Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8E VR ED 2235
Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art 1399

not stabilized
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM 1949
Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G ED 1649

Seems to me that the Sigma is a bargain but the quality of the Nikon is better. I also don't like that the Sigma needs to update so now and than and that it's is a question if it will work all the time on new Canon/Nikon camera software.
Canon has nothing stabilized to offer and there non stabilized lens is more expensive than that of Nikon.

So no mention of the even cheaper Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC G2 as it's real competition.

No one that owns the Canon really is fussed about the lack of IS, it's 5 years old and is a stellar lens, easily able to handle the 50MP 5Ds sensor. I'd say if you stick to a 24MP sensor the Sigma would be perfectly fine, but I'd rather pay for the IQ of the Canon or Nikon for the big MP sensors

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2017 at 07:59 UTC
In reply to:

rbach44: Why does everyone make such a big deal about DPAF or on-sensor AF points? The D5 has neither of them and, according to reviews at least, seems to be one of the finest AF tracking cameras ever. Same thing with the Canon 1 series, Why worry about the underlying tech if it performs well?

I can’t help but feel like AF specs are the new focus since the MP race is pretty much over…

Why do people that have never used DPAF or other on sensor PDAF systems pontificates about why you would want it. Just try the damn thing for yourself and them you'll see why it's so damn useful and not just for video. Canon's DPAF in LV is about as fast as it's normal PDAF, you can even shoot continuous lay at 5fps with DPAF on 1DXII and it tracks very nicely.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2017 at 02:12 UTC
In reply to:

technotic: No popup flash == no sale. Close Naikon, close.

Yes it's a convenient feature but really you think this is a deal breaker? Canon's never offered pop-up flash on a full frame and we buy a tiny 270EX flash unit that is way way better than any pop-up flash and only weighs 100g. If the camera is more ruggedly sealed lack of pop-up doesn't worry me.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2017 at 02:08 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: Looks smaller = lighter. Maybe 0,7kg?

BTW, would you like to have D850 with 50iso native or with better 12800iso?

Clearly both, but most of all I want the DR to improve at least 1EV from ISO 400 to ISO 12800. As someone that also does wildlife and surfing you are often at ISO 400-1600 and by then the DR advantages are gone.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2017 at 02:05 UTC
In reply to:

NickyB66: Understandable, if it keeps people, aircraft safe then I don't see a problem.

Check the stats, TSA has never ever prevented a terrorist attack. All smoke and mirrors. How many exploding cameras you heard of.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2017 at 11:52 UTC

Photographers who fly frequently in the US may want to finally come to their senses and choose a much nicer place to visit.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2017 at 11:50 UTC as 46th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

TonyPM: Will it have a normal cmos full frame sensor or will they go BSI? 42mpx, maybe more.? Doesn't really matter as long as it is as good as the older model but better.

It will be superior in DR and high ISO noise, resolution unknown but rumored to be 45-46MP, so not the A7RII sensor. It may be their own design like the D500 sensor, but of course fabbed by Sony and using Sony tech. I hope it's an EXMOR design.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2017 at 22:33 UTC
On article Ten things we're hoping for from the Nikon D850 (479 comments in total)

1) greater emphasis on QC
2) On sensor PDAF
3) 42-50MP
4) 8fps FX, 10fps DX (20MP), 12fps 1.3x DX (12MP)
5) D5 AF
6) 4K from 6K capture
7) ISO 50-51200 Native, ISO 25-102400 expanded. No one cares about ISO gazillion
8) Full touch screen capability for menus, and LV
9) Hybrid OVF + EVF
10) 1/320 X-sync
11) Dual card (XQD or CFast 2)
12) 6s RAW buffer at full res (48 shots)

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 07:49 UTC as 152nd comment
In reply to:

A Owens: Only 1:2? And the size! Undoubtedly a fine lens but still.

It's a close focusing portrait lens IMO, I'd never buy a 1:2 lens as a "macro" lens, but if I was into portrait this would be nice. For FF, my favourite macro FL range is 135-180mm, working distance is king.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 02:05 UTC

So under $1K 77D camera gets a sensors that blows this away at low ISO. As a Canon users I'm simply gobsmacked and disgusted they would foist this garbage on us in 2017 when they all but assured us they have moved to on-chip ADC for all sensors. I'm so glad I needed the AF capabilities of the 5D4 and wasn't waiting expecting big things from 6DII. Add to that no 4K and no joystick despite 45 AF points, I'd buy a D500 or E-M1 II over this let alone it's FF competition. Wow A7III and D760 will kick the living stuffing out of this in most areas.

Good one Canon nice double shot gun blast to your own head.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 05:16 UTC as 350th comment | 1 reply
On article Astrophotography with the Sigma 14mm F1.8 Art lens (79 comments in total)
In reply to:

LDunn1: Excellent to see a comprehensive review of this lens espeecially with its strong slant towards nightscape use. Many thanks for taking the time & trouble to do this for the community.

The section on Vignetting and lens flare I've had to read multiple times, & I still 'don't get it' though. specifically these comments:-

"On site, it was apparent how much brighter the image at F2.8 appeared on the LCD screen compared to the one shot at F1.8" &

"the image at F2.8 is 27% brighter than the one at F1.8 due to the effect of vignetting"

I don't understand this at all. an image taken at f1.8 should be brighter than one at f2.8, for the same iso & shutter speed/duration. The sample photos don't seem to support these statements to my eyes either, with the f1.8 shots being brighter. Maybe I am missing something.

However, apart from the above it was great, I particularly appreciated the focus on coma, as this is often a weakness with this sort of lens & night sky work.

Many thanks!

Also some fast lenses are actually a little slower than stated. It may be closer to f/1.9 than f/1.8 based on how they rounded the aperture, then combine that with heavy vignetting.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 09:42 UTC
On article Astrophotography with the Sigma 14mm F1.8 Art lens (79 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kabalyero: My Samyang 14mm f/2.8 is now crying in envy...but on a more serious note...thank you for the well rounded review. Looking forward for the aurora sequences! Cheers bro!

Have a look at the Samyang Pro 14 f/2.4 , looks excellent for astro work and doesn't have the incredible distortion of the f/2.8.

Personally given the poor light gathering of a 14mm lens due to tiny entrance pupil I'd rather use a 24 f/1.4 or 35 f/1.4 and a tracker; these lenses capture ~ 5x and 10x more light at the same exposure. Use higher ISO but stack multiple shots for clean final output.

Not saying I would like a fast UWA as well, but I think taking into account price, weight and performance the Samyang 14 f/2.4 would be my choice. Realkly hate the size of these latest art lenses. This is where mirroless can be a huge advantage as seen with the Sony 12-24 being a half the size and weight of the Sigma 12-24. Trouble is Sony's latets firmware is called the star eater and many people won't use Sony for their astro work anymore.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 05:53 UTC

Well I for one find this very fun and creative work. Not usually into this sort of stuff, but they made me smile and cudos for a fresh take on man made patterns.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2017 at 00:30 UTC as 48th comment

The big news here is that Adobe actually have admitted a problem. Normally they deal with a problem like Trump does, deny deny deny and ignore ignore ignore. Too bad they won't fix some issues that have been pointed out with PS going back 5 years or more, they'd rather delete accounts of those highlighting those issues on the Adobe forums if they make too many complaints

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 22:18 UTC as 75th comment | 6 replies
On article Review: Nikon D7500, speed and capability (537 comments in total)

Given the D500 on special is often only a few hundred more than the D7500, unless you are really tight for money and if you were you wouldn't even be buying this camera, I'd get the D500 anyday. If offers many improvements that are worth the extra coin. If the AF were the same I would consider the D7500 more seriously as that's the best feature of the D500 IMO. D7500 is good, but D500 is another class for servo work.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 06:40 UTC as 81st comment | 1 reply
On article Review: Nikon D7500, speed and capability (537 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sarah Terra: That chart is misleading, in the real world the D7200 has far far better battery life than the D500 or D7500

So do many other camera have much better battery life than stated. It's not just Nikon.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 06:37 UTC
Total: 1337, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »