Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: rjallen
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 12 next>>
Jun 19, 2016 07:28:37   #
Hi, thanks, the B17 was finishing its display and heading out over channel, right place right time.
SnappyHappy wrote:
Nice work! How did you capture #2?
Go to
Jun 19, 2016 05:51:23   #
Happy Birthday to B17 Flying Fortress, great old lady and utter respect to those who flew her during the war.


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)
Go to
Jun 4, 2016 06:08:54   #
I totally agree, but like you say MP sell cameras.
Psergel wrote:
I also hope not. I'd much rather "they" (camera manufacturers) work on noise and dynamic range than ever increasing pixel count.
I'd rather have a 20MP camera that I can use at 6400 than a 75MP camera that starts to show noise at 800.
Unfortunately I think "megapixels" is the only spec that counts in marketing.
Go to
Jun 4, 2016 05:11:51   #
75mp max usable ISO 800......
Go to
May 31, 2016 14:50:17   #
Thank you for your in depth analysis, which was very informative.
I have pulled the trigger and bought the Canon 24-70mm f/4 it was a very tight call! I have two Tamron (150-600 & 70-300) lenses already so I do not consider myself an own brand snob, but my "go too" lenses are now Canons 16-35mm f/4, 24-70mm f/4 and 70-200 f/2.8 II, so hopefully with the build quality alone these should serve me well for quite some time.
Thanks again for your thoughts and opinion which was very well received.
amfoto1 wrote:
Both lenses have image stabilization. Both lenses use ultrasonic focus drive that should be reasonably quiet, accurate and fast... although the Tamron USD will not be quite as fast as the Canon USM.

Tamron lenses... especially their "SP" pro quality... are very good and I think usually have a 6 year warranty, if there are any quality control "issues".

Both lenses purportedly suffer from the same thing... they aren't quite as sharp at the middle focal lengths.

But, in this case I'd likely get the Canon instead... because it's smaller, lighter and offers very, very good image quality.

It also offers exceptional close focusing capabilities, 0.70X magnification is close to what a true macro lens can do and two to three times the magnification possible with most lenses of this type. It needs to be noted, though, that at the highest possible magnification the front of the lens is very close to a subject and likely to cast a shadow over it. Still, it could be a very handy feature for a wedding photographer, for example, who needs to take some close-up shots of rings, bouquets, centerpieces and cake details at an event. A zoom with this capability might make it unnecessary to buy and carry a true macro lens, too. (For comparison, the Tamron's best is 0.20X, which is similar to the Canon 24-70/2.8L II).

When you look at image quality performance, keep in mind that the 24-70/2.8L II, to which both the lenses are often compared, is called the "sharpest mid-range zoom ever" by a lot of reviewers. The 24-70/4L appears to have even better corrected distortion at the wide end, making it perhaps one of the very best of all lenses of this type in that respect.

The f/4 aperture of the Canon 24-70mm allows it to be smaller and lighter.... but of course you're giving up a stop of light. On the other hand, this (and the Tamron) are among the few lenses of this type that have image stabilization, which can partly make up for the slower aperture in some situations. The Canon 24-70mm uses a hybrid form of IS that's rated for 3 to 4 stops of assistance. It's hybrid in that it automatically detects panning and switches itself to correcting movement only on the non-panning axis, to better allow pan-blur effects.

An f/4 aperture also may not be an issue, depending upon what other lenses you have in your kit. If you have one or two or more relatively fast primes in some of these focal lengths (28/1.8, 35/2, 50/1.4, etc.), you might not need an f2.8 mid-range zoom. Larger apertures aren't just about low-light shooting.... but also about the ability to render shallow depth of field effects. However, that's not a significant factor at short focal lengths around 24mm and more dramatic at telephoto focal lengths longer than 70mm.

It's also kinda nice that the Canon sells for about 2/3 the price of the Tamron ($900 versus $1200.... and nearly half the price of the Canon 24-70/2.8L II).

You should compare the specific lenses at The-Digital-Picture.com, to see for yourself. There you can put sample test shots side-by-side.... as well as distortion, MTF, general specifications, flare and more.

Note: The relatively new Tokina AT-X 24-70/2.8 might be worth a look, too. It is $850, slightly less expensive than the Canon, said to be quite sharp and extremely well built... heavier even than the Canon 24-70/2.8 II! However, the Tokina doesn't have ultrasonic focus drive so should be expected to be a noticeably slower than either the Tamron or either Canon. It has the usual Tokina "focus clutch" mechanism, where you slide the focusing ring forward or backward to shift it in and out of auto focus.... it doesn't allow for manual override of AF without first turning off the AF (in fact, in AF setting turning the focus ring doesn't do anything... unlike Tamron USD and Canon USM where you can manually tweak the lens any time, whether set to AF or not).
Both lenses have image stabilization. Both lenses ... (show quote)
Go to
May 31, 2016 11:37:28   #
Hi, I had the 24-105mm and was never totally happy with IQ, I believe that 24-70mm on either Tamron or Canon is better.quote=Bill Emmett]I own this lens and shoot on both the 6D, and 7D Mark II. It is a great lens, and performs really well, both focus speed, and quality. You may find the edges are a little frayed on the photos, but this is easy to edit out using Lightroom. There is no need to edit photos from the 7D MII, as it is a cropped sensor. Since the Tamron is a f2.8 lens it is a bit heavier, and larger.

B[/quote]
Go to
May 31, 2016 11:36:43   #
Hi, I had the 24-105mm and was never totally happy with IQ, I believe that 24-70mm on either Tamron or Canon is better.
Go to
May 30, 2016 13:52:09   #
Thanks all for your responses. I will probably go for the faster 2.8 Tamron, but get it from local dealer.
Go to
May 30, 2016 05:21:00   #
Thanks for the advice, I did read that the AF was slower than Canon 24-70mm f/4 but not "that" slow.... also a £150 rebate currently on Canon so beginning to be swayed towards the own brand.
Go to
May 29, 2016 16:41:10   #
Hi all. I am looking at purchasing a 24-70mm 5D Mk3 full frame. Cost options have whittled my options down to Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC, and Canon 24-70 f/4 IS. I like the look of Tamron especially with 2.8 aperture, however Tamron Quality control concerns me and I don't want to go through the process of sending a lens back or replacing if it doesn't meet expectations. However the Canon 24-70 also has issues especially between 50-70mm; if anyone has hands on experience of these lens I would appreciate some advice/feedback.
Thanks in advance.
Go to
May 17, 2016 10:21:11   #
Hi, I lived in Dar Es Salaam for 8 months between Sep 2012 Apr 2013. Dar is relatively safe but remember that you are in Africa, the whole culture is different. I used to take a camera around with me but unless actually shooting kept it in a low key bag, not to attract attention. The Msasani peninsula is the safest place to stay, Where there is a decent Double Tree Hotel with a few decent restaurants and bars also on end of peninsula is a very nice hotel called The Sea Cliff. Down town dar Es Salaam is a nightmare to drive, travelling 10km can take 2+ hours, keep your windows shut, and doors locked, beggars will try to sell you rubbish and any opportunity to steal from inside vehicles will be taken. Unfortunately the Airport is at opposite end of Dar, so to get anywhere you have to drive through the centre of the city.
I went up to Arush (by Air) where I visited the Ngorongora wildlife park, great place to visit and shoot!
I used my old 7D with 400mm f/5.6, 24-105 and 17-40 lenses.
If you need any more specific information just ask.
I am looking at going back to Tanzania to work in a few months so can't be that bad!
Richard
Go to
Mar 5, 2016 17:33:27   #
PixelStan77 wrote:
Happy Birthday. Great sequence. Let's drink to the 80th!

:thumbup:


:thumbup: :thumbup:
Go to
Mar 5, 2016 15:47:23   #
80 Years since the Supermarine Spitfire first flew, at Southampton Aerodrome, Happy Birthday old girl.

Spitfire

(Download)

On approach

(Download)

Spitfire at RIAT

(Download)

Spitfire PR

(Download)
Go to
Feb 11, 2016 12:03:43   #
Hi, I have canon 5D Mk3 and 7D which I use with Tamron 150-600mm, each has its merits, I love the crop factor and frame rate that 7D gives, but 5D Mk3 definitely has the edge on IQ and lower light ability. As previously stated, its horses for courses. I am sure you will have fun with both.
joer wrote:
Its a tough call because their pixel density is equal. On one hand the crop sensor will provide greater resolving power but the FF will give you a better image quality wise (ie., less noise, more DR etc.).

If the full frame had substantially more MP the call would be easier to make.
Go to
Feb 3, 2016 17:08:34   #
11th Century Abbey, which fell into ruin after Henry VIII's dissolution of monasteries in 16th Century. Still an impressive building.

Tintern Abbey

(Download)

Abbey

(Download)

Abbey from River Wye

(Download)
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 12 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.