lovcom wrote:
The L color rendition, and contrast of the 24-70 is obviously the best guys. Tamron is obviously not even close to the Canon as many have claimed.
The Canon is always noticably sharper too, from wide open to before F8.
Why are there those that say the Tam and Can are the same?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
On my monitor there is a clear difference.
Hmmmm.....
Edited by lovcom on Mar 23, 2005 at 01:55 PM GMT
You kill me Lovcom.
Read the whole thread before you make your standard, L lense anthem.
God sakes you irritate me and so many others.
Must resist ever responding to your post anymore.
Ecspecially since they all read the same damned thing.
Dont worry about replying either. I have heard your logic before.
Just do us all one favor please. Learn to be constuctive and learn to type something other than the L lens anthems your so good at. There are other subjects and other lenses that interest people.
I am pretty sure that focusing error is not the reason behind the difference as my EF50 f1.4 does focus accurately and multiple shots were taken in my test to eliminate the possibility of random focusing errors.
My 50mm 1.8 is one of the sharpest Canon lens I have ever seen. I would recommend testing your 50mm against another 50mm 1.4. Just to see how it performs side by side. I can not belive that 50mm 1.4 could be that bad.
Peyman Kaiedi wrote..... I can not belive that 50mm 1.4 could be that bad.
These are small crops so the difference is kind of magnified. You have to enlarge the original pictures to 1.2 meter wide and view them within 2 feet in order to see the difference so I wouldn’t say the 50 1.4 is bad in practical sense. It's just that the Tamron is good at 50mm
I too have done similar kind of tests and no matter what I have tested it against, the 50 mm 1.8 Mark II has performed better than 28-70, 24-70, 35-70, 28-105 and 28-135. This is quite obvious in 100% crops.
Please have a look at Fred's findings which are quite similar to mine:
CurtPick wrote:
You kill me Lovcom.
Read the whole thread before you make your standard, L lense anthem.
God sakes you irritate me and so many others.
Must resist ever responding to your post anymore.
Ecspecially since they all read the same damned thing.
Dont worry about replying either. I have heard your logic before.
Just do us all one favor please. Learn to be constuctive and learn to type something other than the L lens anthems your so good at. There are other subjects and other lenses that interest people.
Thanks
Chill out CurtPick,
If you want to pays youse pennys for the Tamsky or your Sigsky, all the power to you, and you should feel good about it. No shame in that. Don't get mad at me if you don't like my opinion. It seems you're frustrated by gosh I dunno...midlife crisis? What kills you old boy is the fact that the Canon is kicking your 3rd party lense's ass most of the time and it's really eating it you. You try to make it look as though the Canon has some sort of color cast or something, but internally you and we all know that you're just eaten alive by your own lense choices. I would suggest you just be happy with your lenses and take pictures and remember that we're all Americans here and we love freedom of speech, and various opinions. If you want to trash my lense I'm cool with that....no worries there. Hey Curt, I'll do it for you...L GLASS SUCKS!!! There.
Have a great day there in Iowa CurtPick!
PS I might desparage your lenses but your mama and your wife are just fine with me. It's just a lens CurtPick...just a lens!
the canon 28-70 photos look WEIRD. Like they blown up or bigger than rest with different brightness setting. I know you processed all the same, but it doesn't look it. The 17-40 is L too yet it look like the rest. There is not that kind of contrast difference with the 28-70. That's not micro-contrast, that's like the lens magically created more light. Doesn't look right.
I must have been a few inches closer to the wall with the Canon 28-70 which may give it a slightly unfair advantage.. I shot that one today, the others I shot several months ago.
They were all shot in Av mode with natural light I did no level corrections in PS. just used whatever the camera decided for an exposure.
pookipichu wrote:
the canon 28-70 photos look WEIRD. Like they blown up or bigger than rest with different brightness setting. I know you processed all the same, but it doesn't look it. The 17-40 is L too yet it look like the rest. There is not that kind of contrast difference with the 28-70. That's not micro-contrast, that's like the lens magically created more light. Doesn't look right.
lovcom wrote:
Have a great day there in Iowa CurtPick!
PS I might desparage your lenses but your mama and your wife are just fine with me. It's just a lens CurtPick...just a lens!
You do not want to start getting personal.
And one thing you will not do is offend either my Mother or My Wife.
Thats where the line is drawn.
I won't get pissed with you because your ranting only shows your a adolesent with mental problems. Now go piss yourself and post something like ,, "oh lookie I have L lenses and I know everything there is to know about photography and if you dont like L lenses your a bad bad man, and I will tell my mommy on you "
Now just go away you jerk. The only one listening and reading to your post is yourself.
Edited by CurtPick on Mar 24, 2005 at 05:54 AM GMT
If you want to pays youse pennys for the Tamsky or your Sigsky, all the power to you, and you should feel good about it. No shame in that. Don't get mad at me if you don't like my opinion. It seems you're frustrated by gosh I dunno...midlife crisis? What kills you old boy is the fact that the Canon is kicking your 3rd party lense's ass most of the time and it's really eating it you. You try to make it look as though the Canon has some sort of color cast or something, but internally you and we all know that you're just eaten alive by your own lense choices. I would suggest you just be happy with your lenses and take pictures and remember that we're all Americans here and we love freedom of speech, and various opinions. If you want to trash my lense I'm cool with that....no worries there. Hey Curt, I'll do it for you...L GLASS SUCKS!!! There.
Have a great day there in Iowa CurtPick!
PS I might desparage your lenses but your mama and your wife are just fine with me. It's just a lens CurtPick...just a lens!...Show more →
Boy another glarring example of how you can be so nice. weren't you warned for stuff like this around 1.5 months ago.
pookipichu wrote:
the canon 28-70 photos look WEIRD. Like they blown up or bigger than rest with different brightness setting..... Doesn't look right.
I believe the exceptional color vibrancy and contrast in the 28-70 picture is more attributable to the lighting condition than the performance of the lens but the sharpness of the lens is indeed very good.
I was under the impression they were all taken at one sitting.. So this explains alot..
if it was sun setting on a warm evening that could explain the color shift in the L
Don't forget that the average American is only vaguely aware that there are non-Americans and thinks that international news is what's happening in the other US states
