Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,364
    excellent!

    Your son is looking adorable.
    US Navy--Hooyah!

    Nikon D700/D300|17-35 f/2.8, 24-70 f/2.8, Sigmalux, 80-200 f/2.8, 16 f/2.8 fisheye,

    Lots of flashes and Honl gear.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    3,109
    Hey Jamison - thanks for the post. I actually just sent back a 35 f2. I was gravely disappointed with the lens. To me it was very soft at f4 or below and unuseable (blurry actually) at f2. It was f4.5 before I could get a sharp shot, and for me, that defeated the whole purpose of a fast lens.

    The 35 L looks beautiful but it's very pricey. Any thought to the new Sigma 30 f1.4?

    BTW - Master Luke looks great!
    Canon A720 IS, 40D w/ BG-E2N, 28 1.8, 50 1.4, Sigma 70 2.8 macro, 17-40 F4 L, 24-105 F4 L IS, 70-200 F4 L IS, 430 EX, Kenko 2X TC & Ext Tubes, AB strobes and more...
    View my photo galleries here: imageevent.com/24peter

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,770
    Hey, nice purchase! Somehow I think that lens will improve your results enough to pay for itself in the first year!

    Very nice shots of your youngest too!
    Gear List:
    Some links I like: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    379
    Quote Originally Posted by jamison55
    There are two lenses that I want to purchase this year to round out my kit. The first is the 70-200L IS. Though I have the non IS version, I need the IS to be able to handhold at slower shutter speeds so that I can use it more in darker venues.

    The second is the 35 f1.4L.
    I agree that your youngest looks cuter than a box of puppies, and less threatening to sanity than in your multiplicity shot... However, about your presentation:

    Going from the whiskey to the baby food without context might lead one to think that you had enjoyed so much of the first that you could eat nothing but the second...

    Also, aren't there organic reasons for blur when looking closely at whiskey?

    Clyde

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Grafton, MA
    Posts
    1,714
    Quote Originally Posted by TheObiJuan
    excellent!

    Your son is looking adorable.
    Thanks Juan. Don't see you around much anymore...


    Quote Originally Posted by 24Peter
    ...I actually just sent back a 35 f2. I was gravely disappointed with the lens. To me it was very soft at f4 or below and unuseable (blurry actually) at f2. It was f4.5 before I could get a sharp shot, and for me, that defeated the whole purpose of a fast lens.

    The 35 L looks beautiful but it's very pricey. Any thought to the new Sigma 30 f1.4?

    BTW - Master Luke looks great!
    Thanks Peter. You know, despite my controlled test results, I have actually been really happy with the real world output that the little 35/2 has given me. (Well, besides the aforementioned bokeh, but that background was a real torture test). I wonder if you got a bad copy, because my real world results have been very usable all the way down to f2.

    Here are some from the 35/2 @ f2:
    http://www.pbase.com/jamisonwexlerphoto/image/51660003
    http://www.pbase.com/jamisonwexlerphoto/image/54066478
    http://www.pbase.com/jamisonwexlerphoto/image/54066479

    f2.8:
    http://www.pbase.com/jamisonwexlerphoto/image/51660005
    http://www.pbase.com/jamisonwexlerphoto/image/51660013
    http://www.pbase.com/jamisonwexlerphoto/image/51660015

    F4:
    http://www.pbase.com/jamisonwexlerphoto/image/52327147
    http://www.pbase.com/jamisonwexlerphoto/image/51660010
    http://www.pbase.com/jamisonwexlerphoto/image/51660007
    http://www.pbase.com/jamisonwexlerphoto/image/51660008
    http://www.pbase.com/jamisonwexlerphoto/image/51660009

    Though they lack the punchy, vivid color rendition, and contrasty sharpness of images from their new big bro, they are far better than one should expect from a $200 lens. I still think that the 35/2 is as good as the 50/1.8 at a better (for me) focal length on a 1.6cf body. In other words it's one of Canon's "bang for your buck" lenses.

    Or maybe you're just a little spoiled from all of that L glass you've been using lately...


    Quote Originally Posted by Vich
    Somehow I think that lens will improve your results enough to pay for itself in the first year!

    Very nice shots of your youngest too!
    Thanks Vich. I got more than $600 in Christmas reprint orders, and am sitting on non-refundable retainers for 18 weddings in my business account, so it's already paid for (and it's a tax write-off ). I definitely think it will improve my results, though. This lens makes me see why so many in my industry shoot solely with primes. I sometimes look at images by wedding photogs that are far more talented than I, and wonder how they capture such sharp, vibrant photos. Much of it is their PS technique, but a lot if it is attributable to top end glass a well.

    I know that Jeff Ascough (http://www.jeffascough.net/main.html) shoots a lot with fast "L" primes, and his work is stunning!


    Quote Originally Posted by Clyde
    Going from the whiskey to the baby food without context might lead one to think that you had enjoyed so much of the first that you could eat nothing but the second...

    Also, aren't there organic reasons for blur when looking closely at whiskey?
    LOL Clyde! How about this: drinking a couple of fingers of one will help you deal with the second! And when you pay that much for a fine single malt scotch, the label deserves nothing short of the L treatment!
    www.jamisonwexler.com

    Canon 5dII|Canon 5D|Canon 40D|Sigma 15 f2.8|Canon 35 f1.4|Canon 50 f2.5|Canon 50 f1.8|Canon 85 f1.2|Canon 17-40 f4|Canon 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS|Canon 24-105 f4 IS|Canon 28-105 f3.5-4.5|Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS|Canon 75-300 f4-5.6 IS|Kenko 1.4x TC|Canon 580ex X3|Canon 380exII |Canon 420ex|Sunpak 383 x4|Sunpak 120j x2|Sunpak 622|Elinchrom Skyports

    Past Gear

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Grafton, MA
    Posts
    1,714
    Quote Originally Posted by 24Peter
    Any thought to the new Sigma 30 f1.4?
    It's funny you mention the Sigma 30. I had just ordered on from Sigma4less the night before. The next morning I found the deal on the 35L and was able to cancel my Sigma order before they shipped it.

    I know a lot of pros that swear by the Sigma 30, and have seen some great images taken by it, but... Besides the excellent Sigma 10-20, I have been put off by the failure of non OEM lenses to perform in the tough lighting situations I often face. I'm trying to catch fleeting moments, so I can't afford to be battling finicky AF. Not saying that the 30/1.4 suffers from that, just that it's been my experience with 3rd parties in the past.

    I also may upgrade to a 1D or 5D body this year (though my plan is to go with the 20D replacement - if it's real), and the 35L covers me there...
    Last edited by jamison55; 01-06-2006 at 04:02 AM.
    www.jamisonwexler.com

    Canon 5dII|Canon 5D|Canon 40D|Sigma 15 f2.8|Canon 35 f1.4|Canon 50 f2.5|Canon 50 f1.8|Canon 85 f1.2|Canon 17-40 f4|Canon 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS|Canon 24-105 f4 IS|Canon 28-105 f3.5-4.5|Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS|Canon 75-300 f4-5.6 IS|Kenko 1.4x TC|Canon 580ex X3|Canon 380exII |Canon 420ex|Sunpak 383 x4|Sunpak 120j x2|Sunpak 622|Elinchrom Skyports

    Past Gear

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,807
    Quote Originally Posted by jamison55
    It's funny you mention the Sigma 30. I had just ordered on from Sigma4less the night before. The next morning I found the deal on the 35L and was able to cancel my Sigma order before they shipped it.

    I know a lot of pros that swear by the Sigma 30, and have seen some great images taken by it, but... Besides the excellent Sigma 10-20, I have been put off by the failure of non OEM lenses to perform in the tough lighting situations I often face. I'm trying to catch fleeting moments, so I can't afford to be battling finicky AF. Not saying that the 30/1.4 suffers from that, just that it's been my experience with 3rd parties in the past.

    I also may upgrade to a 1D or 5D body this year (though my plan is to go with the 20D replacement - if it's real), and the 35L covers me there...
    wow, you really lucked out finding that deal in time!

    it's kinda frustrating not knowing what direction the market will go regarding Full Frame and cropped sensors. i really like the cropped format but no one really knows if full frame will totally replace cropped sensors or if they will be sold side by side or the time frame for any of this. a 35L would work great for me now but be almost useless on full frame...

    "This lens makes me see why so many in my industry shoot solely with primes."

    yeah, the 50 f1.4 really made me see how great it is to work with such large apertures. the f1.4 is a world apart from the f1.8 - the 1.8 never inspired me to use the large apertures much (unreliable AF) but with the upgraded lens i now look for oppertunities to shoot with f1.4. going from avoiding large apertures to keeping an eye for the chance to use it is a big difference that i never thought a lens could make. i can imagine how great it is go from thrifty fifty and 35 f2 to the 35 f1.4 L! i can also see that primes are prefered because f2.8 zooms don't really gather enough light in many situations indoors. the thing that got me about the above quoted statement is, you have an 85 f1.8 right? since you are not jumping straight from mediocre primes like the 35 f2 and thrifty fifty to L primes, i wondering if the 35L is a huge improvement over the 85 in terms of AF, image quality, and overall enjoyment of use (setting aside focal length of course)
    Last edited by ReF; 01-06-2006 at 05:47 AM.
    canon 17-40 L, 70-200 f2.8 L, 400 f5.6 L, 50 f1.4 & f1.8, 1.4x TC, sigma 15 f2.8 fisheye, flash 500 DG Super, kenko extension tubes

    note to self: don't participate in sad, silly threads unless you're looking for sad, silly responses.

    "anti-BS filter" (from andy): http://dcresource.com/forums/showpos...94&postcount=4

  8. #18
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Crapville, Australia
    Posts
    5,148
    Jamie,

    Well done on the 35 L. A good choice for the sort of work you do and I'm sure it will take you to even greater heights.
    Christian Wright; Dip Phot
    EOS 5D Mark III | EOS 600D | EOS-1V HS
    L: 14/2.8 II | 24/1.4 II | 35/1.4 | 50/1.2 | 85/1.2 II | 135/2 | 180/3.5 Macro | 200/2.8 II | 400/2.8 IS | 16-35/2.8 II | 24-105/4 IS | 70-200/2.8 IS II | 100-400/4.5-5.6 IS
    580EX II | EF 12 II | EF 25 II

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    3,109
    Or maybe you're just a little spoiled from all of that L glass you've been using lately...
    No - no "L" glass here. Don't own any. I tested a 135L recently but once again couldn't justify the price ($900) for the kind of stuff I'm shooting. I've come to the (perhaps limited and naive) conclusion that the big adavantage "L" glass has over regular Canon lenses is the ability to shoot in low light situations due to sharper images at larger apetures (not to mention the larger apetures themselves available on most "L" lenses compared to more consumer oriented lenses.) So for a wedding photographer such as yourself, "L" lenses are probably indespensible. On the other hand, for someone like me who is doing more studio work or outdoor shooting, where light is either more controllable or plentiful, some of the advantage of "L" glass disappears. Now I must say, I've only shot with the Canon 70-200 f4L and the 135L, so my experience is very limited and my perception may change. But I also need to feel my photographic income justifies making big ticket purchases like "L" glass and it's just not there yet.
    Canon A720 IS, 40D w/ BG-E2N, 28 1.8, 50 1.4, Sigma 70 2.8 macro, 17-40 F4 L, 24-105 F4 L IS, 70-200 F4 L IS, 430 EX, Kenko 2X TC & Ext Tubes, AB strobes and more...
    View my photo galleries here: imageevent.com/24peter

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Grafton, MA
    Posts
    1,714
    Quote Originally Posted by cwphoto
    Well done on the 35 L. A good choice for the sort of work you do and I'm sure it will take you to even greater heights.
    Thanks Christian. I'll be working this lens hard to achieve those greater heights


    Quote Originally Posted by 24Peter
    I tested a 135L recently but once again couldn't justify the price ($900) for the kind of stuff I'm shooting...But I also need to feel my photographic income justifies making big ticket purchases like "L" glass and it's just not there yet.
    I thought I remembered you recently using a 135L in concert with a 5D on one of those steaming hot shoots you do!

    As for waiting until you have the revenue stream - way to be responsible! The whole reason I started to pursue a photography business was to find a way to get my hobby to pay for itself. I got lucky in that people like my personality and/or my photographs, and I have been blessed enough from my photography to afford some really nice gear. I only buy as I have the revenue to do it though, so that if folks decided tomorrow that they didn't like my personality and/or pics than I can "retire" with a nice kit of gear and no debt!
    www.jamisonwexler.com

    Canon 5dII|Canon 5D|Canon 40D|Sigma 15 f2.8|Canon 35 f1.4|Canon 50 f2.5|Canon 50 f1.8|Canon 85 f1.2|Canon 17-40 f4|Canon 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS|Canon 24-105 f4 IS|Canon 28-105 f3.5-4.5|Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS|Canon 75-300 f4-5.6 IS|Kenko 1.4x TC|Canon 580ex X3|Canon 380exII |Canon 420ex|Sunpak 383 x4|Sunpak 120j x2|Sunpak 622|Elinchrom Skyports

    Past Gear

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •