All Forum Comments
Comment by Frogfish posted on Digiscoping at 28/01/2012 - 18:44
I'm looking into this as well .... this forum has tons of great information : link
Comment by Frogfish posted on Digiscoping at 28/01/2012 - 18:16
George Lazarette wrote:
The old motto: "Seek, and ye shall find" holds true in lens testing as in so much else. If the purpose of your testing is to find faults, then you will surely find them (for there is no such thing as perfection), but concentrating on the negative means that you are in danger of overlooking the positive. And in my view, it's the positives that make a good lens, not a lack of negatives.
In the case of the 77mm (and the other FA Ltds), you will certainly find purple fringing. You will also find that the AF is not quite as fast as more modern lenses. The MF is better of course.
But if instead of looking for what is bad, you concentrate on what is good, you will find that the 77mm, used in normal conditions, gives the most wonderful soft, creamy, skin tones. As a portrait lens (its raison d'etre) there is absolutely nothing better (though the FA 85mm and the new 55mm are no doubt in much the same league).
I never bother with formal tests. It's what the results look like that interests me. In terms of what is measurable, the FA Ltds are very sharp, reasonably fast, and generally free of distortion. But it's what you can't measure, but CAN see, that makes them so very special.
Yes, the 77mm has a couple of flaws. But good photographers who look at results rather than lens tests tend to agree that it is a very fine lens indeed.
G
I can't disagree with you George. I eventually bought the 77 a month ago and can now hardly take it off my camera - I know now in what situations I have to be very careful and to avoid it's weaknesses and play to it's strengths.Frogfish wrote:
In what way does it 'out-perform' the 70 John ? Not according the the same PZ you referenced. In fact PZ actually give the 70 Ltd a higher optical quality rating (4 stars to 3.5 for the 77).
From PZ (both on the K10D as the 77 has not been tested on the K5) : -
77 : link
70 : link
Not in border resolution where there is a huge difference (the 70 pulverises the 77 until f5.6) and even in centre resolution the difference is only very small. Maybe in Pixie dust and build quality (though PZ rates them even there too) and I think both can actually be used on FF as well if I'm not mistaken ?
Of course MTF figures don't tell the whole story but I'd like to hear your reasoning - maybe from your own testing ?
The PF was pretty bad in my testing in shop of the 77 Ltd too (and one of the reasons I walked out without it the day before yesterday), occurring in virtually all shots I took - even though they were very high contrast and almost guaranteed to produce fringing.
Frogfish,
I humbly suggest that your approach to lens testing, whilst admirably rigorous, may sometimes lead you draw the wrong conclusions (assuming I have understood you correctly).In what way does it 'out-perform' the 70 John ? Not according the the same PZ you referenced. In fact PZ actually give the 70 Ltd a higher optical quality rating (4 stars to 3.5 for the 77).
From PZ (both on the K10D as the 77 has not been tested on the K5) : -
77 : link
70 : link
Not in border resolution where there is a huge difference (the 70 pulverises the 77 until f5.6) and even in centre resolution the difference is only very small. Maybe in Pixie dust and build quality (though PZ rates them even there too) and I think both can actually be used on FF as well if I'm not mistaken ?
Of course MTF figures don't tell the whole story but I'd like to hear your reasoning - maybe from your own testing ?
The PF was pretty bad in my testing in shop of the 77 Ltd too (and one of the reasons I walked out without it the day before yesterday), occurring in virtually all shots I took - even though they were very high contrast and almost guaranteed to produce fringing.
Frogfish,
The old motto: "Seek, and ye shall find" holds true in lens testing as in so much else. If the purpose of your testing is to find faults, then you will surely find them (for there is no such thing as perfection), but concentrating on the negative means that you are in danger of overlooking the positive. And in my view, it's the positives that make a good lens, not a lack of negatives.
In the case of the 77mm (and the other FA Ltds), you will certainly find purple fringing. You will also find that the AF is not quite as fast as more modern lenses. The MF is better of course.
But if instead of looking for what is bad, you concentrate on what is good, you will find that the 77mm, used in normal conditions, gives the most wonderful soft, creamy, skin tones. As a portrait lens (its raison d'etre) there is absolutely nothing better (though the FA 85mm and the new 55mm are no doubt in much the same league).
I never bother with formal tests. It's what the results look like that interests me. In terms of what is measurable, the FA Ltds are very sharp, reasonably fast, and generally free of distortion. But it's what you can't measure, but CAN see, that makes them so very special.
Yes, the 77mm has a couple of flaws. But good photographers who look at results rather than lens tests tend to agree that it is a very fine lens indeed.
G
Comment by Frogfish posted on K5 destination or migration? at 28/01/2012 - 16:46
Gorgeous shot Simon. Look forward to seeing the rest of the series.
Comment by Frogfish posted on Most amazing sunrise I've seen in Snowdonia so far at 28/01/2012 - 16:40
These are good portrait shots, especially the last one, however as you say this lens isn't in the same class as a 70-200 but it's probably the best in it's class for what it is, and for what it costs.
Comment by Frogfish posted on having a go with the 55-300 at 28/01/2012 - 16:38
Well firstly thank you to everyone for this debate and the really nice comments. They are truly appreciated.
I do agree with most though that technically they are nothing more than competent and certainly not exceptional, I was indeed posting these for the subject matter which I thought might interest people since they are indeed very rare.
When any of us go on a shoot we often plan to do something specific and then hope to hell that the weather / circumstances / subject co-operates. I have been to Shanghai Zoo maybe 10 times in the past two years because entry is cheap, £5, there are lots of fields, canals and wooded areas without exhibits (good for wildlife and birds) and there are certain subjects I hope will one day give me a shot or two that I would print and hang at home. As photographers we take a lot of shots, most we throw away, some have passing interest and once in a while we take a shot that will always be of interest, if not to anyone else, to ourselves or a particular group of people.
On the day in question I got one of those shots (#7) though of course with zoo shots (and many others) there is always an element of luck involved, of being in the right place at the right time. I walk pass this pen every time I visit the zoo, hoping that there might be some activity (there rarely is !) and so I was ready for something to happen if it did (DA*300 on a monopod on one K5 and a Sigma 50-150 on the other - both with settings at the ready).
As soon as I arrived I saw that the tiger had been in the water, I missed that , and soon after started walking towards the second tiger. I was excited and ready, in the position where I know from previous visits that I get an unimpeded view, for some interaction. I was lucky, the 'greeting' was lovely and gave me a shot I'll treasure !
Sorry AG, I know you're right but I'm afraid I no longer put up shots on-line without a heavy dose of Copyright (especially if the subject matter is 'timeless') that inevitably detracts from them. After all these forums are just for fun but having your photos stolen isn't (since many of my shots are of Shanghai, it's people, and otherwise somewhat 'scarce' subject matter - the World Expo for example) and I do plan to put my portfolio on-line and recuperate some of my expenditure to enable me to continue to buy high quality lenses and cameras so I have to take precautions.
I do agree with most though that technically they are nothing more than competent and certainly not exceptional, I was indeed posting these for the subject matter which I thought might interest people since they are indeed very rare.
When any of us go on a shoot we often plan to do something specific and then hope to hell that the weather / circumstances / subject co-operates. I have been to Shanghai Zoo maybe 10 times in the past two years because entry is cheap, £5, there are lots of fields, canals and wooded areas without exhibits (good for wildlife and birds) and there are certain subjects I hope will one day give me a shot or two that I would print and hang at home. As photographers we take a lot of shots, most we throw away, some have passing interest and once in a while we take a shot that will always be of interest, if not to anyone else, to ourselves or a particular group of people.
On the day in question I got one of those shots (#7) though of course with zoo shots (and many others) there is always an element of luck involved, of being in the right place at the right time. I walk pass this pen every time I visit the zoo, hoping that there might be some activity (there rarely is !) and so I was ready for something to happen if it did (DA*300 on a monopod on one K5 and a Sigma 50-150 on the other - both with settings at the ready).
As soon as I arrived I saw that the tiger had been in the water, I missed that , and soon after started walking towards the second tiger. I was excited and ready, in the position where I know from previous visits that I get an unimpeded view, for some interaction. I was lucky, the 'greeting' was lovely and gave me a shot I'll treasure !
Sorry AG, I know you're right but I'm afraid I no longer put up shots on-line without a heavy dose of Copyright (especially if the subject matter is 'timeless') that inevitably detracts from them. After all these forums are just for fun but having your photos stolen isn't (since many of my shots are of Shanghai, it's people, and otherwise somewhat 'scarce' subject matter - the World Expo for example) and I do plan to put my portfolio on-line and recuperate some of my expenditure to enable me to continue to buy high quality lenses and cameras so I have to take precautions.
Comment by Frogfish posted on White Tigers - The Full Set at 28/01/2012 - 16:32
Thank you Bob - I too love #7 and will have that printed large !
Cheers Don. I am indeed. I didn't realise just how lucky until I did a little research on them when I got home (I hadn't seen the white Winter coat on any tigers prior to this shoot and wanted to know more about this breed, the incredibly endangered and extinct in the wild - but recovering with reintroduction planned - South China Tiger. link
Thanks K10D - they are marvellous animals aren't they.
Thank you for commenting guys n gals !
Cheers Don. I am indeed. I didn't realise just how lucky until I did a little research on them when I got home (I hadn't seen the white Winter coat on any tigers prior to this shoot and wanted to know more about this breed, the incredibly endangered and extinct in the wild - but recovering with reintroduction planned - South China Tiger. link
Thanks K10D - they are marvellous animals aren't they.
Thank you for commenting guys n gals !
Comment by Frogfish posted on White Tigers - The Full Set at 28/01/2012 - 10:18
These are really cool Roger ... might even have a go at this myself if I can find some non irradiated water around here
Comment by Frogfish posted on Pondlife Macros at 28/01/2012 - 05:27
Northgrain wrote:
What amazing animals - the markings are just incredible.
I second all the above comments, plus I particularly like the way you've caught her (or him) licking the standing tiger. Great moment to catch.
Thanks Tim. They really are gorgeous animals aren't they.What amazing animals - the markings are just incredible.
I second all the above comments, plus I particularly like the way you've caught her (or him) licking the standing tiger. Great moment to catch.
Comment by Frogfish posted on Tiger Tiger Burning Bright .... at 28/01/2012 - 05:25
This is the full set of the 'Tiger Tiger Burning Bright' shot (below again) ....
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-tJqZwMk/0/XL/White-Tigers-7web-XL.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-mn3wfL2/0/XL/White-Tigers-6web-XL.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-TR87bq5/0/XL/White-Tigers-5web-XL.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-dTKTd3C/0/XL/White-Tigers-4web-XL.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-DSdzPrC/0/XL/White-Tigers-3web-XL.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-bmfGZRG/0/XL/White-Tigers-1web-XL.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-Cq9Wn63/0/XL/White-Tigersweb-XL.jpg[/IMG]
Guest Appearance !
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-dNB3Bhf/0/XL/Lionessweb-XL.jpg[/IMG]
As always - sorry about the Copyright but you know the story. Thanks for looking !
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-tJqZwMk/0/XL/White-Tigers-7web-XL.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-mn3wfL2/0/XL/White-Tigers-6web-XL.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-TR87bq5/0/XL/White-Tigers-5web-XL.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-dTKTd3C/0/XL/White-Tigers-4web-XL.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-DSdzPrC/0/XL/White-Tigers-3web-XL.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-bmfGZRG/0/XL/White-Tigers-1web-XL.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-Cq9Wn63/0/XL/White-Tigersweb-XL.jpg[/IMG]
Guest Appearance !
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Animals/Tiger-Tiger/i-dNB3Bhf/0/XL/Lionessweb-XL.jpg[/IMG]
As always - sorry about the Copyright but you know the story. Thanks for looking !
Comment by Frogfish posted on White Tigers - The Full Set at 27/01/2012 - 21:36
I think digiscoping is fine, but you'll get better results with a second hand telephoto lens.
used sigma 400 with the kr would beat the image quality of even the best scopes for about the same money.