Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Flame! Canon-Zeiss glass comparison
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 7:48 pm    Post subject: Flame! Canon-Zeiss glass comparison Reply with quote

No, no flame Laughing
But yes comparison (short and rushed however):
http://photocinenews.com/2010/10/22/nat-geo-shooter-ben-horton-compares-canon-glass-to-zeiss-glass/


PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 8:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've got no axe to grind here, (I'm Pentax and Leica Smile) but I I'd like to point out that in the two full-size shots that Mr Horton missed fosusing on the model's eyes, thus denying us chance to see how good either lens really is. Laughing


PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, he looks like a bit lousy photographer I have to say Laughing


PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rolling Eyes Razz Laughing


PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ha! I knew I collected these suckers for a reason Laughing


PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When I read these "TV-shop testimonials" I always wonder whether it is the case of

A) a photographer who writes review/makes video/publicly announces something like this with intent of getting sponsorship from the manufacturer's marketing department

or

B) a photographer who writes review/makes video/publicly announces something like this because he already is sponsored by the manufacturer's marketing department.

Unless there is money involved, there is no reason to become a marketing puppy. None of your clients give a rat's ass what equipment you use for the photos.

Vilhelm


PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 8:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I do have a question about this sentence though:

Quote:
I tried mounting a medium format lens on my camera that can pass more detail. Even though it worked, the easiest way to take advantage of these lenses is to permanently change the lens mount on the body of the camera rendering my Canon lenses useless.


Mounting a FF lens on a crop body seem to result in suboptimal resolution due to higher pixel density on crop sensor, wouldn't the same be true by mounting a medium format lens on a FF sensor?


PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 8:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

that guy is like a beginner in photography ..

and also he's totally new to manual lenses Smile

tf


PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 8:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aleksanderpolo wrote:

Mounting a FF lens on a crop body seem to result in suboptimal resolution due to higher pixel density on crop sensor, wouldn't the same be true by mounting a medium format lens on a FF sensor?


Medium format lenses are poor performers compared to small format lenses.
This is sure.
But it does not have to do with the size of the small format sensor penalizing the lens. Simply, medium format lenses are not built as resolving as small format lenses, because it's not worth the cost and the effort. I read a page about why medium format lenses don't have to be high resolvance, but I don't have the link.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 8:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aleksanderpolo wrote:
I do have a question about this sentence though:

Quote:
I tried mounting a medium format lens on my camera that can pass more detail. Even though it worked, the easiest way to take advantage of these lenses is to permanently change the lens mount on the body of the camera rendering my Canon lenses useless.


Mounting a FF lens on a crop body seem to result in suboptimal resolution due to higher pixel density on crop sensor, wouldn't the same be true by mounting a medium format lens on a FF sensor?

+1


PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 9:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I clicked on the link at Orios post.

The first I saw was a comparison between a Zeiss 3.5/18 and a Canon 2.8/16-35L. When I see such comparisons I have no interest to read.

Wink


PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 9:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

He got distracted. It's very difficult to get a good shot,when Horton Hears a Who. Laughing


PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

green bokeh and ham?


PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 11:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

greg wrote:
green bokeh and ham?


Exactly. Very Happy


PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 12:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another one who discovered the wheel.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 1:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A bit like reading the daily mail i guess.