Jump to content

Tom

Life Member
  • Content Count

    1,818
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Tom last won the day on 24 January 2013

Tom had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

19 of my posts have been liked

About Tom

  • Rank
    Master Member
  • Birthday 1 January

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Germany
  1. #3 is my fav! How many stacks do you normally talk about in this kind of shots, Michael? I seem to run out of memory with Photoshop when I have more the 30
  2. Ah, found it! Not all profiles are "fadeable". But apply e.g. some of the "art" profiles and the slider automagically pops up at the top of the Profil Browser.
  3. Btw. There is something ByThom that I don't understand: "profiles versus presets. The creative profiles in the latest version don't move sliders, they use LUTs to make their adjustments, can be faded (they're basically a hidden adjustment layer of sorts)," What does he mean with "can be faded"? I don't see any slider to fade a profile.
  4. Yeah, esp. as you already have a preview of the effect in the thumbnails.
  5. Hehe, nice story, Michael. From years of lens-testing I know that you even have vibrations on concrete floors in a house - if I happen to walk around during (a longer) exposure. So today I sit still whenever I do test-shots. Ever thought about hanging/suspending your gear from the ceiling like from an inverse tripod? You might not like working with the camera upside-down though...
  6. Hmm, haven't seen this yet. Thanks for the heads-up!
  7. How many images did you stack for this, Michael?
  8. I've yet to see any Color-LCD-Display that satisfies me in bright daylight. So I'm bound to remain a through-the-viewfinder type of guy - unless shooting-positions dictate otherwise... That said, I love the 0.2 sec shutter-delay with EFC on my D850 to avoid any mirror/shutter-slap with a 40+MP sensor! So I agree with you, Michael: "If I had to guess, I’ll bet that the forthcoming Nikon mirrorless will NOT add up to what I have right now in the Nikon D850. "
  9. You can see my review of the Sigma 35/1.4 "Art" here, Daniel. The FX-corner performance was a real eye-opener. But in the DX-corner the performance wide open was lacking a bit although still a better than from the Nikon AF-S 35/1.4G. AF was no prob and mounting did not show any unusual side-effects. But how long this performance and AF will hold up in everyday use (and abuse) compared to a Nikon lens only time will tell...
  10. If you put my results-page from my reviews of the 28/1.8G and the 35/1.8G side-by-side you'll see that the 28mm produces more resolution in the FX-corner at the price of some loCA in the near-field test with Siemens-stars. At the infinity shots the 35/1.8G pulls ahead. But the real let-down of the 28/1.8G was the focus shift. It was so strong that I had to compensate for it in my Siemens-star test-shots when I stopped down. I had to optimize focus when stopping down. This was the only lens I ever had to do this. So I'd prefer the new 35/1.8G over the 28/1.8G if you can live with the longer focal length.
  11. Not fully through with all tests, but I summarized my findings so far here. The last mm of the FX-corners are pretty bad but center and DX-corner performance is convincing and better than the 28/1.8G and at the DX-corner even a bit better than the 35/1.4G. There's also some field-curvature, but not the regular type: It bows in at the DX-circle and comes back the FX-corner: I actually could use the same image for the crops from the center and from the FX-corner in my Siemens-star test-shots
  12. Sorry, Larry! But I'll stick to testing on a D800. That's already anough work in my spare time as it is...
  13. Btw.: I've now completed an finished my review with all the usual (and some unusual) stuff here. I think this lens' performance is hard to beat, but I'm as curious as any other photog as to what Sigma will cook up with their already announced (but seemingly not yet full spec-ed) 50/1.4. As to your observation, Dimitri: I concur that center performance at f4 is amazing but I wouldn't start to criticize its performance up to f8. Other normal lenses still play catch-up at f8.
  14. Yeah, I used my AF-S 50mm f1.4G too seldom in the past, too. Interestingly Nikon put the focal length of their gold-ringed "normal"-lens at 58mm perhaps thinking that the longer focal length could make it more attractive. At least the blur circle of anything in the background increased accordingly
  15. Thanks for your praise, Dimitri! What is your current view on what you have or would like to get as a "normal" lens? Following is another shot showing off the blurring of this lens in the background that was not shown in my review: Geranium at f1.4 70626 by Thomas, on Flickr At that distance (of the fence behind the Geranium) the blurring of oof subjects is fat and very satisfying. In the transition zone from in-focus to oof there are some details shining through that make that zone a bit nervous.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By visiting this website you are agreeing to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy & Guidelines.