*Official Photography Thread* (56k warning)

[Ralphie]

Thanks for the tips guys!

Yea the prices are amazing right now, but I just can't justify losing all my lens and the video option.

Speaking of lens-

I have been pining for a 24-70L since the day I first saw it. I think its probably one of, it not the best walk arounds you could have. 2.8 through and through and L quality of course.

But it's like 2k +/-

So I have been looking at this bad boy for a week or so now-

Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 - click pic for amazon link

On my crop body its like 27-80 and 2.8 throughout....

Reviews are solid.

I think i'd scoop up the one with VC just for the extra stop or two.

I know Tommi is a Tamron/Sigma fan....

Im starting to think the bang for buck is in these 3rd party brands.

I of course know that Tamron/Sigma make quality stuff...

That lens is like $400 new and will probably give me better quality then im used to right now with the exception of my 50mm 1.8.


So just wondering if any of you guys have come across this lens or have any opinions?

[PakaloloHonda]

Sorry for the monster pic lol .. but I find the Siggy below to be a better lens.
I like the speed of sig's and the image quality in some cases, is better than OEM.
You want bang for the buck? This lens will freak you out .. Love it to death. Solid build!

And as for VC, which is Nikon's term (Canon uses *image stabilization* IS)
but I wouldn't spend the xtra money myself ..

[Ralphie]

^ That lens has IS, or OS.

And I did think VC was Nikon's, but Tamron lists it on their lens specs...so maybe it's also a Tamron thing?


In any case, I compared those two lens (sig and tam 17-50) and they are pretty much neck and neck.

For one, the sig is like $200 more. Also I noticed that min aperature is f22 for sig and f32 for tammy. You may not always need such a small ap, but it is nice to have.

Weight is almost even.

I couldn't find image comparisons, but reviews seem to say they are both sharp throughout the spectrum, just a little bit soft at 2.8 on tammy.

Overall most reviews said Sig was better.

Idk ill have to keep reading.

[Ralphie]

Well in the meantime I was bored at work and browsing POTN-

and ended up buying one of these :


Yashica ML 50mm f1.9



I also picked up a cheap Holga lens adapted for EOS to play with. 60mm, f8.


I seriously love odd ball lens.

Im especially excited about that Yashica. Supposed to be a very good lens for really cheap. I paid $25.

The color rendition seems amazing.

I mean I do have the nifty fifty from Canon, but nothing beats that old school bokeh/color cast.

I'll post back!

[ExplodingCake]

[steelbluesleepR]

what mount is that yashica lens for? it looks like minolta or a pre-EF canon lens. Those lenses will not focus to infinity without another element in the adapter.

[Ralphie]

what mount is that yashica lens for? it looks like minolta or a pre-EF canon lens. Those lenses will not focus to infinity without another element in the adapter.

It's contax/yashica mount.

Ya the adapter that mounts it to the camera allows it to achieve infinity focus.

I have a Minolta and Olympus adapted to my EOS and they both focus to infinity.

Just need the adapter.

[steelbluesleepR]

It's contax/yashica mount.

Ya the adapter that mounts it to the camera allows it to achieve infinity focus.

I have a Minolta and Olympus adapted to my EOS and they both focus to infinity.

Just need the adapter.

oh cool, I didn't know about that mount. I have a good handful of M42 mount lenses, and some of them give me some gorgeous images.

these two were taken a couple of weeks ago at a for-fun/practice shoot. during this shoot, we went into a nick-knack shop to warm up and I found this 35mm f/2.8 m42 mount for $10! I used it for the remainder of the shoot and fell in love with the look:

shoot with friends by Jcareyphoto, on Flickr
flowers by Jcareyphoto, on Flickr

[Ralphie]

Oh shit lol.

I just realized you're on POTN.

That first shot I recognized, and went back and found it was in the MF lens thread.

Its above mine. My handle on there is Rolf D. Wolfe hahahahha.

Yea man, I <3 these old lens. If not for just the fact that they produce really good images for dirt cheap. And they feel legit, not like the plastic shit they make today.

Best example is this Yashica 50mm. A lot of reviews slam the nifty fifty for feeling like a toy from mcdonalds....

don't get me wrong, I like my nifty fifty....but they're right...its so cheap feeling compared to the older metal mount lens.

I also have a Tamron 85-210 that is an Olympus mount....it's good, color is nice...but without IS, I just need a tripod or a really fast shutter so I don't use it too too often.

Here is an example of my best hand held

Birds by rjr.photography, on Flickr


I also have a Minolta 28mm 2.8....it's not bad, heres an example-

IMG_7794 by rjr.photography, on Flickr

[steelbluesleepR]

I typically only use my manual lenses for video, where their much longer focus throws are extremely nice.

[Ralphie]

I haven't even touched video yet.

I plan on shooting some video at some point, and the manual lens are better suited from all I read.

[J-specCb4]

CRS_4467a[/url]CRS_4467a[/url]mar-28-2014 apr-8-2014 by [url=https://flic.kr/p/mk4urx]

[Ralphie]

Damn Chris. So damn sharp.

I like the inside plane shots and the cloud one.

So much depth.

[J-specCb4]

thanks man. thats with the canon 85 1.2L II pretty solid piece of glass.

[Ralphie]

Ya, it's still stops me in my tracks when I see ff L images.

Always so much color and depth.