Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 47
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554

    Red face Opinions ... get one of your own

    Quote Originally Posted by laydros View Post
    Don, I've been looking at that CZ 16-80. I could certainly see myself getting by with the 17-50 and a 70-300 to really get by, missing 20mm isn't terrible. Plus I will have this new lens to fill that gap.... and the CZ 16-80 is WAY more expensive. But you make a good point, plus it would defer the need to get an UWA even further than the 17-50. But how big is the aperture difference. What apertures does the Tamron 17-50 need to be used, and what apertures would the CZ need? And while I'm asking... what apertures are the 50mm 1.7 or 1.4 and the 24 or 28 2.8 primes usable at. I'm reading a lot of lens reviews and it seems like most seem to say that whatever lens is being reviewed isn't really sharp wide open, and they always suggest stepping down.
    The two TAMRON's f/2.8 aperture across the entire focal range is impressive. It's hard to fight that kind of performance, indoors, and why I am in the unenviable spot of trying to justify the CZ 16-80 f/3.5-4.5.

    The biggest attraction to the SONY lens is that it is a bit "sharper" and "contrasty" than the TAMRON lenses. Also, you do NOT need to change the lens off to either get the longer or wider range. It meets up nicely with the 70-XXX lenses and is less to carry and fumble around with. That aspect has some value, Jason. How much ... well, that depends on you and your shooting.

    Like I mentioned earlier, it would be the one in my bag if I had not already owned the 17-50mm f/2.8. I actually debated about buying it, when I examined it in the SONY Style store, but caught myself and wound up getting the 28-75 f/2.8 to "brother up" with the wider lens.

    If you cannot decide ... just flip a coin ... it really is that insignificant a choice. I just believe one quality lens could be a better answer. Convenient and with the full range.

    Hope this helps.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Wild, Wonderful, Wyoming
    Posts
    1,043

    Before we completely blame the lens...

    Quote Originally Posted by laydros View Post
    I've gotten this odd effect twice. This first one is with this new Baby Beercan, but the other was with the kit lens.

    In the first the lights show up again around my Dad's elbow, and in the second one the lights from the window are showing up again in the chairs.

    Is this ghosting, or something else? What can I do to prevent this?
    What you have here is flare, and it is reflections, but I'm not completely ready to blame the lens because it doesn't have special coatings. Were you using a filter on your lens when you took these?
    A good photograph is knowing where to stand.
    Ansel Adams

    Rule books are paper, they will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and metal.
    Ernest K. Gann-Fate is the Hunter.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, NC, USA
    Posts
    788
    Quote Originally Posted by TenD View Post
    What you have here is flare, and it is reflections, but I'm not completely ready to blame the lens because it doesn't have special coatings. Were you using a filter on your lens when you took these?
    I have a Tiffen haze filter on the lens for the picture of my dad, and a Sunpak UV filter on the lens with the window reflection.
    Jason Hamilton
    Selective Frame

    EOS 5D - Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM, EF 35 f/2, EF 50mm f/1.8 Mk II, EF 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 USM, EF 85mm f/1.8 USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro, Helios 44-2 58mm f/2 (with EOS adapter), 430EX, Canon S90
    Nikon FE - Nikkor 35mm f/2 AI'd, Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AI, Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AI, F to EF adapter, 2xVivitar 285, other lighting stuff
    Mamiya C220 - 80mm f/2.8

    Gear List flickr

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Wild, Wonderful, Wyoming
    Posts
    1,043
    I had a pretty strong feeling you were: Ditch 'em!

    Filters are notorious for causing that kind of flare. If you are going to put a filter on your lens have a reason to(IMO). If you feel your reason is to "protect" your lens, then put a decent filter on there such as a Hoya MRC or B+W Multicoated, both of which will cost considerably more than your lens did.

    I have a stable of Canon L lenses the cheapest of which cost $750, and not a one of them carries a "protective" filter. I can't see putting another piece of glass in front of a lens that was designed to have good optics. Any filter will degrade image quality, however small(I have heard the best ones transmit 99% of the light, but funny thing, the lens transmits 100% of the light it was designed to), and cheap-os will absolutely kill image quality.
    A good photograph is knowing where to stand.
    Ansel Adams

    Rule books are paper, they will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and metal.
    Ernest K. Gann-Fate is the Hunter.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, NC, USA
    Posts
    788
    Yeah, I've wondered about putting a $13 piece of glass in front of a lens. It doesn't make sense logically that a cheapo filter would be good for optics. Since I started shooting I've seen people say its stupid and I've seen people say it doesn't change the IQ at all.
    Jason Hamilton
    Selective Frame

    EOS 5D - Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM, EF 35 f/2, EF 50mm f/1.8 Mk II, EF 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 USM, EF 85mm f/1.8 USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro, Helios 44-2 58mm f/2 (with EOS adapter), 430EX, Canon S90
    Nikon FE - Nikkor 35mm f/2 AI'd, Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AI, Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AI, F to EF adapter, 2xVivitar 285, other lighting stuff
    Mamiya C220 - 80mm f/2.8

    Gear List flickr

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Wild, Wonderful, Wyoming
    Posts
    1,043
    Quote Originally Posted by laydros View Post
    Yeah, I've wondered about putting a $13 piece of glass in front of a lens. It doesn't make sense logically that a cheapo filter would be good for optics. Since I started shooting I've seen people say its stupid and I've seen people say it doesn't change the IQ at all.
    There are two, very loyal to their opinion, camps on this. You can guess which camp I am in. And although I believe "protective" filters are mostly just an upsale item, and do degrade IQ, many others staunchly believe in them, so I'll concede there are those who will always use them, if you feel you have to use them, put a decent filter on, or you'll have results similar to the ones you posted today.

    I have seen this type of thing time and time again: "My new 100-400 is cloudy at 400mm"....Take off the filter...."Sharp as a tack now". "There are ghost lights in all of my Christmas tree photos"....Take off your filter...."Oh, the ghost lights are gone now". It goes on and on in just about any forum you want to choose.
    A good photograph is knowing where to stand.
    Ansel Adams

    Rule books are paper, they will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and metal.
    Ernest K. Gann-Fate is the Hunter.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,204
    My two expensive lenses have UV filters (67 and 77mm) on them. The 67mm is a promaster muulti-coated (I'm guessing Hoya HMC or something similiar), but the 77mm is a Hoya Pro-1D UV filter for the best protection and clarity.
    flickr

    Canon 7D - 5D | 550EX - 430EX II - (2) PW FlexTT5 | 24-105 f4L | 70-200 f2.8L IS | 100 f2.8L IS | 50 f1.8 II

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554

    Cool Light ... through glass ... 1:1 ... no

    'TenD', not to be a bone-picker, but if a lens COULD transmit all the light from the front of the first optical element to the backside of the last element, it would have f/0 capability. As you know ... that's just not the case, even on your best day! It would be nice though and we wouldn't be having all these "I can't see crap with my lens!" discussions. Without some kind of amplification, the light simply suffers dispersion through the glass and gets cut down.

    Anyway, the best mountable commercial lens I have seen was an 50mm f/0.95 Aspherical which allowed just a little more than half the source light to the film. This was a $5000-9000 optic. We all need one!

    Name:  50mm-f0.95-ASPH.jpg
Views: 146
Size:  141.5 KB
    Last edited by DonSchap; 12-21-2008 at 06:59 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Wild, Wonderful, Wyoming
    Posts
    1,043
    Quote Originally Posted by TenD View Post
    (I have heard the best ones transmit 99% of the light, but funny thing, the lens transmits 100% of the light it was designed to)
    Hence the reason it was and still is worded like this.
    A good photograph is knowing where to stand.
    Ansel Adams

    Rule books are paper, they will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and metal.
    Ernest K. Gann-Fate is the Hunter.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554
    Fair enough ... just so everyone is on the same page. It is just too easy to mix things up.

    Can you imagine this thing? A low light marvel.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

Posting Permissions

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