Some further shots:
THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff.
THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff.
Nov 09, 2017 05:12 | #121 Some further shots: Image hosted by forum (885045) © eaglespremiers [SHARE LINK] THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff. Image hosted by forum (885046) © eaglespremiers [SHARE LINK] THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 09, 2017 05:13 | #122 Some more shots: Image hosted by forum (885047) © eaglespremiers [SHARE LINK] THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff. Image hosted by forum (885048) © eaglespremiers [SHARE LINK] THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 09, 2017 05:14 | #123 And some more: Image hosted by forum (885049) © eaglespremiers [SHARE LINK] THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff. Image hosted by forum (885050) © eaglespremiers [SHARE LINK] THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
mclaren777 Goldmember 1,482 posts Likes: 86 Joined May 2012 Location: Olympia, WA More info | Nov 09, 2017 10:16 | #124 Thank you for the pictures. A simple comparison of sensor technology: Nikon vs. Canon
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Monkeymoss Goldmember 1,341 posts Likes: 1994 Joined Apr 2012 Location: Bristol, England More info | Thanks to you and your wife for the pics Jon
LOG IN TO REPLY |
DaviSto ... sorry. I got carried away! More info | Nov 09, 2017 17:41 | #126 Monkey moss wrote in post #18492964 Thanks to you and your wife for the pics The images look good from what I can see.Have you noticed any of the rather nasty looking CA that has been shown on some other on line test photos? The nasty high CA shots that I have seen have all clearly been shot in a highly contrived way in extreme lighting conditions with the obvious intention of inducing CA. They're just 'troll shots' ... made without any attempt to reflect performance in this lens's likely normal range of usage. David.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
mclaren777 Goldmember 1,482 posts Likes: 86 Joined May 2012 Location: Olympia, WA More info | Nov 09, 2017 22:36 | #127 I went on a 4-hour drive for this lens today. Image hosted by forum (885197) © mclaren777 [SHARE LINK] THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff. Image hosted by forum (885198) © mclaren777 [SHARE LINK] THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff. A simple comparison of sensor technology: Nikon vs. Canon
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Monkeymoss Goldmember 1,341 posts Likes: 1994 Joined Apr 2012 Location: Bristol, England More info | Nov 10, 2017 02:41 | #128 DaviSto wrote in post #18492969 The nasty high CA shots that I have seen have all clearly been shot in a highly contrived way in extreme lighting conditions with the obvious intention of inducing CA. They're just 'troll shots' ... made without any attempt to reflect performance in this lens's likely normal range of usage. Of course it may yet turn out to exhibit high CA in the conditions in which it will be used but I haven't seen any evidence of it. Yeah I hear you. As long as the 1.4 is a reasonable step forward from the 1.2 and 1.8 lenses, then I expect to be on board for this new hunk of glass! Jon
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Monkeymoss Goldmember 1,341 posts Likes: 1994 Joined Apr 2012 Location: Bristol, England More info | Nov 10, 2017 02:43 | #129 mclaren777 wrote in post #18493131 I went on a 4-hour drive for this lens today. Wow, good commitment. What do you think so far? Jon
LOG IN TO REPLY |
mclaren777 Goldmember 1,482 posts Likes: 86 Joined May 2012 Location: Olympia, WA More info | Nov 10, 2017 16:52 | #130 I like to use 85mm lenses for ring pictures at weddings and an 36mm extension tube works great on this lens. Image hosted by forum (885264) © mclaren777 [SHARE LINK] THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff. A simple comparison of sensor technology: Nikon vs. Canon
LOG IN TO REPLY |
I really hate asking stupid questions, but for the life of me, I can't figure out wha CA represents. Steve Novakovich
LOG IN TO REPLY |
fplstudio Senior Member More info Post edited over 5 years ago by fplstudio. (2 edits in all) | Nov 10, 2017 19:26 | #132 sjnovakovich wrote in post #18493685 I really hate asking stupid questions, but for the life of me, I can't figure out wha CA represents. Chromatic Aberrations 10+ years with Canon, now new fresh air with Sony Full Frame
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 11, 2017 07:22 | #133 Here we are again; a new "modern" lens for Canon is released, so we have countless people saying it doesn't have "pop" to it or a 3D look of old lenses. - Kevin Kevin DiOssi Photography
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Thanks! I was considering the lens but not now. Steve Novakovich
LOG IN TO REPLY |
DaviSto ... sorry. I got carried away! More info Post edited over 5 years ago by DaviSto. (2 edits in all) | Nov 11, 2017 10:39 | #135 sjnovakovich wrote in post #18493911 Thanks! I was considering the lens but not now. If that's because of the "massive" chromatic aberration, you're making your decision for the wrong reason. In normal use, I very occasionally see mild CA with the f/1.2 but it's quite rare and it's never been unmanageable. I have never lost a shot due to it. Different people have different tolerance levels for CA, though, and what doesn't bother me might seriously irritate someone else. I'm inclined to look at an image as a whole ... not in pieces. David.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is ahmed0essam 1407 guests, 160 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||