Can't remember whether I've mentioned it before, but that new Nikon 14-24mm is pretty good, you know? I've not mentioned how great it is for a while, because it could be construed as promotion, but I have to say: it's a fantastic lens.
Here's how fantastic it is: I've just finished (at 10pm) processing and fettling 80 images from today's shoot – a retirement village (no glamour spared). I traveled light: 5D + 14-24G, Canon 24L, Zeiss 28/2.8, Olympus 35 Tilt/Shift (now in Mamiya 645 mount, on the Mirex), Zeiss 35-70, Zeiss 50/1.4, Canon 70-200/4 IS. And a torch (no lighting).
During the day's shoot I swapped arbitrarily between the 14-24G, CZ28, CZ50 and CZ35-70 and I honestly cannot tell the difference between the files at 100%, apart from the obvious focal length and distortion clues. In every shot, the sensor is just . . . happy! Completely resolved corners, negligible aberration: the Nikon looks every bit as good as the serious Zeiss performers it spent the day mixing with. Bliss.
You sound pretty 'Blissfull' with your current setup. Are you still in a 'wait and see' mode as to whether you will switch to Nikon or Sony. I know I am in limbo as I await the Sony A900 & Canon 5DII.
But you just made a pretty arguement to stay with Canon whether you meant to or not. Especially since your kit above is pretty complete now.
If I went to Nikon or Sony I would probably miss the 70-200 4L and CZ 35-70 the most. But if Sony adapters became available for the manual Zeiss, Leica and Zuiko alternatives the transition would be less painful.
Great! but as peterkov mentioned, "show me the money" (picture, that it) , and where do I find the adapter for my 5D, and is the AF sill work with the adapter?
hubsand wrote:
I traveled light: 5D + 14-24G, Canon 24L, Zeiss 28/2.8, Olympus 35 Tilt/Shift (now in Mamiya 645 mount, on the Mirex), Zeiss 35-70, Zeiss 50/1.4, Canon 70-200/4 IS. And a torch (no lighting).
.
Mark,
purely out of interest, if the above list of lenses is you travelling light...just what is your full lens set up at the moment?
marcwilson wrote:
Mark,
purely out of interest, if the above list of lenses is you travelling light...just what is your full lens set up at the moment?
In flux. Actually, in the bath this morning (Ah! the joys of OCD!) I finally decided that unless Sony fumbles the ball really badly – or unless the 5D II lifts the 1Ds III sensor – I'm leaning heavily towards a Canon-Sony switch.
Currently, the 'Canon' full frame lineup consists of the 14-24G covering the wide end (with 180° support from the Zeiss 16mm fisheye), then the (apparently uncommonly superb sample of the) Canon 24L, Zeiss 28/2.8, Canon 24-105L (walkaround), Zeiss 35-70, Zeiss 50/1.4, Canon 50 Macro, Canon 85L II, Canon 70-200/4 IS, Canon 300/4 IS.
For movements, I've got the Mirex Tilt/Shift adaptor with the Mamiya 24mm fisheye, modified Olympus 35PC, Mamiya 55/2.8, Mamiya 80mm Macro. I'm toying with swapping the 80 Macro for an 80/1.9 + 120 Macro, but it's not really necessary: the 80mm is just as sharp, works great on a short tube for 1:1 and has a little extra DOF. Tilt movements with a Macro lens is a must for me. This whole set can, of course be used, – with AF confirmation – on the Sony flagship, so no worries about the lack of native shift lenses.
dereksurfs wrote:
You sound pretty 'Blissfull' with your current setup. Are you still in a 'wait and see' mode as to whether you will switch to Nikon or Sony. I know I am in limbo as I await the Sony A900 & Canon 5DII.
But you just made a pretty arguement to stay with Canon whether you meant to or not. Especially since your kit above is pretty complete now.
If I went to Nikon or Sony I would probably miss the 70-200 4L and CZ 35-70 the most. But if Sony adapters became available for the manual Zeiss, Leica and Zuiko alternatives the transition would be less painful.
Hard to accept, but nothing's perfect: stick with Canon and lose IS on fast glass, or go Sony and miss Canon's peerless gems: the 70-200/4 IS and the 85L II. The 35-70 can, at a pinch, come on over to the dark side with some modest mount surgery.
Then again, the lure of the Sony 135/1.8 and STF is strong. Very much depends on what Sony announces in the UWA zoom and fast/wide prime departments . . . not to mention the calibre and price of the Sony Flagship. If there's nothing to compare with the 14-24G, it may also be hacked for Sony compatibility . . . .
hubsand wrote:
For movements, I've got the Mirex Tilt/Shift adaptor with the Mamiya 24mm fisheye, modified Olympus 35PC, Mamiya 55/2.8, Mamiya 80mm Macro. I'm toying with swapping the 80 Macro for an 80/1.9 + 120 Macro, but it's not really necessary: the 80mm is just as sharp, works great on a short tube for 1:1 and has a little extra DOF. Tilt movements with a Macro lens is a must for me. This whole set can, of course be used, – with AF confirmation – on the Sony flagship, so no worries about the lack of native shift lenses.
Could you please elborate on this a bit? The reason I ask is that I am also considering the the new Sony. But I don't quite understand what you mean with regards to alternatives. I know there has been some discussion of the Alpha mount here. But it still seems a bit fuzzy to me as to how alternative lenses such as the ones you listed might be potentially used.
The current Nikon mount for example just won't accept alternatives such as the CZ 35-70/3.4. It sounds like you are saying that the Alpha mount has better adapter potenital? Is that correct?
I love that 14–24, too. And the 24 TS/3.5 arrived today. I mention this because I now have the smallest kit I ever have had in 25+ years of photography: a few primes (ZF 50/2 and 100/2, and the Nikkor TS) and three zooms, with the 1.4 extender.
Mark, have you tried a D3 yet? I know that you could not easily adapt some of your lenses, but the 14–24 and the ZF 100/2 macro are persuasive arguments all by themselves, and the other zooms (24–70 and 70–200 VR) are truly excellent. All gear waterproof, too...
