*OFFICIAL* general photography conversation thread - Page 170

MaximusJ · 08-17-2012, 02:52 PM

I saw some horror stories with Tamron. Three lenses of the same model all from the same batches that produced three different qualities for a same picture. I think it was on the Pictureline website that I saw that article.

I saw waaaay too much of those stories on Sigma/Tamron/Tokina lenses compared to very few people vouching for them. The 120-300/2.8 and for the 150mm macro Sigma are pretty much the only ones I saw people actually saying they're better bang for the dollar; compared to Nikkor. I dont know much about Samyang; other then they're made in Korea.

As for Zeiss, well, its Zeiss. Its kinda-aside.

I always picked Nikkor lenses because if you shop right, you recover pretty much 85-90% of your money when you decide to sell. And if you shop right in the used market, you can even end up making money on them.

panicos81 · 08-17-2012, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaximusJ

I saw some horror stories with Tamron. Three lenses of the same model all from the same batches that produced three different qualities for a same picture. I think it was on the Pictureline website that I saw that article.

I saw waaaay too much of those stories on Sigma/Tamron/Tokina lenses compared to very few people vouching for them. The 120-300/2.8 and for the 150mm macro Sigma are pretty much the only ones I saw people actually saying they're better bang for the dollar; compared to Nikkor. I dont know much about Samyang; other then they're made in Korea.

As for Zeiss, well, its Zeiss. Its kinda-aside.

I always picked Nikkor lenses because if you shop right, you recover pretty much 85-90% of your money when you decide to sell. And if you shop right in the used market, you can even end up making money on them.

my tokina 11-16mm was excellent.. i wish i had kept it and use it on the Fuji with an adapter. a friend has the Tamron 18-55 (or something) f2.8 and he is quite happy with it..

MaximusJ · 08-17-2012, 04:22 PM

Yes they produce some good lenses the point of this article was just that there is no quality control at a point that the quality of those lenses vary.

You get uber sharp ones (Saw some good review on their 11-16mm ultrawide), but its a hit and miss basically.

I should try to find that article again, they were doing some pretty extensive tests.

But again, its internet. Nothing beats the good old self-test.

M_Six · 08-17-2012, 04:32 PM

I won't buy Sigma for just that reason. Way too many people say you need to keep swapping out until you get a sharp copy. Screw that. I've read the same about most Tammies, but the 24-70 seems to have a pretty solid backing.

I can personally vouch for the Rokinons. I own 3 (8mm f2.8 FE, 35 f1.4, and 85 f1.4) and they're all sharp as a tack. The 85 f1.4 is the weakest of the bunch, but only as far as metering. It's still quite sharp if you get the focus right.

gary88 · 08-17-2012, 08:10 PM

Sharpness test with the 300. First is an export sharpened RAW at f/2.8. Next two are unsharpened screenshots from lightroom, first at f/2.8 and second at f/8. Both shot on a tripod @ ISO100 and 10 sec timer. Focus on the bottom of the inside corona ring.

UdubBadger · 08-17-2012, 08:52 PM

Looks good

bosstones · 08-17-2012, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M_Six

I won't buy Sigma for just that reason. Way too many people say you need to keep swapping out until you get a sharp copy. Screw that. I've read the same about most Tammies, but the 24-70 seems to have a pretty solid backing.

One of the first lenses I bought when I got my first dSLR was a Sigma 28-70. Ended up selling it because I decided to step into something different but the guy I sold it to bought it because I still had the warranty card. The copy I had had some softness to it. He planned to send it back to Sigma to try to resolve it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gary88

Sharpness test with the 300. First is an export sharpened RAW at f/2.8. Next two are unsharpened screenshots from lightroom, first at f/2.8 and second at f/8. Both shot on a tripod @ ISO100 and 10 sec timer. Focus on the bottom of the inside corona ring.

Why must you tempt us with this?!

Weebl · 08-17-2012, 11:44 PM

Well that handled the CA splendidly Gary. On the first one did you mess with anything other than sharpening? Specifically color/contrast?

gary88 · 08-18-2012, 12:07 AM

Yeah the first has a slight WB/contrast adjustment, the other two are untouched.

Chewy734 · 08-19-2012, 05:10 PM

The stories behind the most stunning Olympics photos - Rough Cuts

gary88 · 08-19-2012, 07:45 PM

Stats after shooting ALMS yesterday:

Shots taken: 755
Shots deleted: 267
Shots exported: 94

Uploading now.

rodi · 08-19-2012, 10:00 PM

gary, the f/2.8 shot looks much better than the f/8 shot. try shooting at f/4 or f/5.6 instead of f/8?

gary88 · 08-20-2012, 12:07 PM

Yeah I noticed that too, maybe f/2.8 just blurred out everything that's coming slightly back into focus at f/8.

Pics from Saturday here:

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=733829

dcstep · 08-20-2012, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chewy734

The stories behind the most stunning Olympics photos - Rough Cuts

Thanks for the link.

Carrying two bodies around with a 500mm is tough enough. They've got several more pounds on top of that and even more bulk. Looks like hard work.

15-photogs for one agency, for one event!!!

Dave

Chewy734 · 08-22-2012, 02:04 PM

The Canon 1DX Makes One Hell of a 5K Movie Camera

dcstep · 08-22-2012, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chewy734

The Canon 1DX Makes One Hell of a 5K Movie Camera

Interesting. The pan really sucked, but most of the others were reasonable. Still, without a super high resolution viewer, it doesn't make much sense.

Dave

Chewy734 · 08-22-2012, 03:07 PM

yeah, I agree with you. Plus that shutter count would really get up there quickly.

dcstep · 08-24-2012, 02:39 PM

http://www.photographybay.com/2012/0...JJBgD3JQFv62xu

Chewy734 · 08-24-2012, 02:46 PM

Canon rumors has it listed as a the lowest rumor rating, so I won't believe it until I see it. Can you imagine how much something like that would cost if the 5D3 is $3500? My guess is ~$5k.

dcstep · 08-24-2012, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chewy734

Canon rumors has it listed as a the lowest rumor rating, so I won't believe it until I see it. Can you imagine how much something like that would cost if the 5D3 is $3500? My guess is ~$5k.

It might not cost any more than the 5D3. The 7D already has higher pixel density than the D800. Just improve on that one generation and cut the sensors out as full-frame instead of crop-sensor and you're in business.

Dave

UdubBadger · 08-24-2012, 03:20 PM

Might as well be a medium format at that price and MPx rating. I'd be bold enough to say it would be $8500

dcstep · 08-24-2012, 03:24 PM

BTW, if you make a camera that performs really well at ISOs 50 to 200 (aiming at studio pros, like Hasselblad and Mamiya Leaf do), then 46MP is probably not that hard to do. We'll all complain that it sucks at ISO 1600, but the studio pro might snap it up and only shoot it in ideal light.

Then you'll be selling a $3,500 complete camera into a market where body backs cost mulitples of that.

Dave

08-17-2012, 02:52 PM	#3719
MaximusJ Colonel Drives: 325i 2006 Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Quebec, Canada Posts: 2,097 iTrader: (19) Garage List '06 E90 [3.72]	I saw some horror stories with Tamron. Three lenses of the same model all from the same batches that produced three different qualities for a same picture. I think it was on the Pictureline website that I saw that article. I saw waaaay too much of those stories on Sigma/Tamron/Tokina lenses compared to very few people vouching for them. The 120-300/2.8 and for the 150mm macro Sigma are pretty much the only ones I saw people actually saying they're better bang for the dollar; compared to Nikkor. I dont know much about Samyang; other then they're made in Korea. As for Zeiss, well, its Zeiss. Its kinda-aside. I always picked Nikkor lenses because if you shop right, you recover pretty much 85-90% of your money when you decide to sell. And if you shop right in the used market, you can even end up making money on them. __________________ NinjaBlack '06 E90 BMW Performance & Active Autowerke inside My Picture gallery Last edited by MaximusJ; 08-17-2012 at 03:00 PM.

08-17-2012, 04:22 PM	#3721
MaximusJ Colonel Drives: 325i 2006 Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Quebec, Canada Posts: 2,097 iTrader: (19) Garage List '06 E90 [3.72]	Yes they produce some good lenses the point of this article was just that there is no quality control at a point that the quality of those lenses vary. You get uber sharp ones (Saw some good review on their 11-16mm ultrawide), but its a hit and miss basically. I should try to find that article again, they were doing some pretty extensive tests. But again, its internet. Nothing beats the good old self-test. __________________ NinjaBlack '06 E90 BMW Performance & Active Autowerke inside My Picture gallery

08-17-2012, 04:32 PM	#3722
M_Six Free Thinker Drives: 2005 X5 3.0 & 2006 Z4 3.0si Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Charleston, IL Posts: 3,985 iTrader: (0) Garage List 2005 X5 3.0 [0.00] 2006 Z4 3.0si [0.00]	I won't buy Sigma for just that reason. Way too many people say you need to keep swapping out until you get a sharp copy. Screw that. I've read the same about most Tammies, but the 24-70 seems to have a pretty solid backing. I can personally vouch for the Rokinons. I own 3 (8mm f2.8 FE, 35 f1.4, and 85 f1.4) and they're all sharp as a tack. The 85 f1.4 is the weakest of the bunch, but only as far as metering. It's still quite sharp if you get the focus right. __________________ Mark - Randomography "The $0.99 menu was put on this Earth for a good damn reason." -Weebl

08-17-2012, 08:10 PM	#3723
gary88 Ikea enthusiast Drives: '07 E92 335i Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 7,724 iTrader: (3) Garage List 2007 E92 335i [3.83]	Sharpness test with the 300. First is an export sharpened RAW at f/2.8. Next two are unsharpened screenshots from lightroom, first at f/2.8 and second at f/8. Both shot on a tripod @ ISO100 and 10 sec timer. Focus on the bottom of the inside corona ring. __________________ garyhebdingjr.com \| flickr

08-17-2012, 11:44 PM	#3726
Weebl Weebl wobbles but eats Pie Drives: 2008 335i, 2000 740i Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: SF Bay Area Posts: 1,242 iTrader: (0)	Well that handled the CA splendidly Gary. On the first one did you mess with anything other than sharpening? Specifically color/contrast? __________________ Kevin Kevingoto.smugmug.com 2000 740i-Annalisa and 2008 335i-Weebl. Weebl may wobble but has DTC mods HPFP,4 new injectors,1 transfer pump assembly,front wheel bearings A few E9X Nerd points

08-17-2012, 08:52 PM	#3724
UdubBadger Banned Drives: '04 330i ZHP Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Chicago Burbs Posts: 24,714 iTrader: (22) Garage List 2004 BMW 330i ZHP [4.75] 2011 135i [3.73] 2008 328xi [4.38]	Looks good

08-18-2012, 12:07 AM	#3727
gary88 Ikea enthusiast Drives: '07 E92 335i Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 7,724 iTrader: (3) Garage List 2007 E92 335i [3.83]	Yeah the first has a slight WB/contrast adjustment, the other two are untouched. __________________ garyhebdingjr.com \| flickr

08-19-2012, 05:10 PM	#3728
Chewy734 Major General Drives: 2006 BMW 330i ZPP, ZSP Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Cleveland, OH Posts: 6,602 iTrader: (15)	The stories behind the most stunning Olympics photos - Rough Cuts __________________ Currently for sale: N/A

08-19-2012, 07:45 PM	#3729
gary88 Ikea enthusiast Drives: '07 E92 335i Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 7,724 iTrader: (3) Garage List 2007 E92 335i [3.83]	Stats after shooting ALMS yesterday: Shots taken: 755 Shots deleted: 267 Shots exported: 94 Uploading now. __________________ garyhebdingjr.com \| flickr

08-19-2012, 10:00 PM	#3730
rodi . . . Drives: your FACE! Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Atlanta proper Posts: 2,391 iTrader: (-1)	gary, the f/2.8 shot looks much better than the f/8 shot. try shooting at f/4 or f/5.6 instead of f/8? __________________ 2009 135i \| space grey \| sport \| navi \| hifi \| heated dinan stage 2 software \| bmw performance exhaust kw v2 \| hotchkis front sway \| vmr v710

08-20-2012, 12:07 PM	#3731
gary88 Ikea enthusiast Drives: '07 E92 335i Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 7,724 iTrader: (3) Garage List 2007 E92 335i [3.83]	Yeah I noticed that too, maybe f/2.8 just blurred out everything that's coming slightly back into focus at f/8. Pics from Saturday here: http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=733829 __________________ garyhebdingjr.com \| flickr

08-22-2012, 02:04 PM	#3733
Chewy734 Major General Drives: 2006 BMW 330i ZPP, ZSP Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Cleveland, OH Posts: 6,602 iTrader: (15)	The Canon 1DX Makes One Hell of a 5K Movie Camera __________________ Currently for sale: N/A

08-22-2012, 03:07 PM	#3735
Chewy734 Major General Drives: 2006 BMW 330i ZPP, ZSP Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Cleveland, OH Posts: 6,602 iTrader: (15)	yeah, I agree with you. Plus that shutter count would really get up there quickly. __________________ Currently for sale: N/A

08-24-2012, 02:39 PM	#3736
dcstep Brigadier General Drives: '09 Cpe Silverstone FR 6MT Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Colorado Posts: 3,930 iTrader: (0) Garage List 2009 M3 [4.00]	46MP Canon 3D on the way? http://www.photographybay.com/2012/0...JJBgD3JQFv62xu __________________ Flickr Photos Ucm, Inc.

08-24-2012, 02:46 PM	#3737
Chewy734 Major General Drives: 2006 BMW 330i ZPP, ZSP Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Cleveland, OH Posts: 6,602 iTrader: (15)	Canon rumors has it listed as a the lowest rumor rating, so I won't believe it until I see it. Can you imagine how much something like that would cost if the 5D3 is $3500? My guess is ~$5k. __________________ Currently for sale: N/A

08-24-2012, 03:20 PM	#3739
UdubBadger Banned Drives: '04 330i ZHP Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Chicago Burbs Posts: 24,714 iTrader: (22) Garage List 2004 BMW 330i ZHP [4.75] 2011 135i [3.73] 2008 328xi [4.38]	Might as well be a medium format at that price and MPx rating. I'd be bold enough to say it would be $8500

08-24-2012, 03:24 PM	#3740
dcstep Brigadier General Drives: '09 Cpe Silverstone FR 6MT Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Colorado Posts: 3,930 iTrader: (0) Garage List 2009 M3 [4.00]	BTW, if you make a camera that performs really well at ISOs 50 to 200 (aiming at studio pros, like Hasselblad and Mamiya Leaf do), then 46MP is probably not that hard to do. We'll all complain that it sucks at ISO 1600, but the studio pro might snap it up and only shoot it in ideal light. Then you'll be selling a $3,500 complete camera into a market where body backs cost mulitples of that. Dave __________________ Flickr Photos Ucm, Inc.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search