[Matsu]

I doesn't make much sense to shoot against the strengths of a particular format. See the work of Alex Majoli

Deep depth of focus, or near pan focus in certain conditions can be a very good thing. I wonder what he's shooting now? He used to shoot Leica M's. 135 format is interesting in that it can be different things more easily. It was the small, "just good enough" format for a long time, until people really pushed the optics. Now of course it's been pushed way beyond that, and the lenses and bodies have grown. In the studio, it's became popular as a way of achieving medium format like results digitally - something that would be daunting for even well funded shooters to replicate with actual medium format digital. In the field, newsmen and sports shooters working on tight lines have drifted to larger kits with wide ratio zooms that let them carry two or three cameras mounted and basically work alone to shoot, select and upload very high quality images, and even video, very quickly, but the contraptions required are again quite beastly, and, I think a result of having to work in a hurry and produce output for multiple media streams that are each of them paying less and demanding more.

In some ways, 135 suffers from the jack of all trades possibilities brought on by digital. Every new camera has to be fast, environmentally sealed, high resolution and ready to mount everything from 600mm f/4s atop a LandRover to an PC85 2.8E in the studio, and small 35 or 50 on the street. It's not the small option anymore, it's the general purpose format, but I think it could use a little specialization in both bodies and lenses. Just because you can put every lens on every camera doesn't mean you should. Lets see some f/2.8-4 primes and truly small FX bodies for instance.

135, however, with the right selection of f/2.8 - f/4 lenses and better integrated bodies... it could still be a compact option in the spirit of its film-era ancestry.

[Matsu]

Hey gang, the other day I scored a Pelican 1650 case at a good price. Might even come in time for christmas. Let me know if you have questions about these guys.

[PB PM]

Nice, I got a 1520 back in November, with the dividers. Other than not being overly pleased with the limited types of dividers I'm happy with it.

[Matsu]

It showed up yesterday. The thing is pretty big. If I pack it right I should be able to get my tripod, a couple of pack flat stands, umbrellas, a compact lighting system and my cameras into it. :wow:

Mine has only partial foam, but for the price it was worth it. Still less than a case with no foam. I was thinking to get the divider set, however I read from a few people that the newer pelican dividers are a bit flimsy. Trekpak has a very interesting option, and portabrace is supposed to have a very high quality, but expensive, option, though it too is somewhat limited in terms of number of included dividers. How do you find the divider set' overall strength/durability?

[PB PM]

The size issue is why I went with the 1520 case, it's a lot more compact and lighter than the 1600 series. Not to mention a lot less expensive. I got a new 1520, with dividers included, for $209 (before taxes). You can still cram a lot of gear in there, but nothing as big as a tripod or light stand. Then again I got the 1520 just for cameras, lenses and standard accessories. I can get one or two cameras (8xx sized), the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8/ aka 300mm F2.8 sized lens, and numerous primes or a few other zooms in it without too much trouble. It sure gets heavy when loaded up, but the handle is great and makes transport as pleasant as could be expected under the circumstances.

Strength wise the dividers are fine, and are at least as strong as the typical camera bag dividers, if not better. They seem to be a little on the stiff side, so maybe Pelican got the message about them being too weak? The velcrow that holds them in place is very strong, but I get the feeling that if you moved them around often enough it could rip off. In any case there are a decent number of dividers, at least in the 1520 set. Trouble is that over half of them are small and would be more useful for someone who had a lot of primes rather than several pro zooms and a few primes like I do.

[Matsu]

I'm thinking of buying the trekpak partitions, not the whole system to create two compartments, then putting a travel sized insert bag in one compartment, and the stands and tripod along the length in the other.

[PB PM]

I've heard good things about that system as well. If the case with dividers had not been on sale for less than the case alone I likely would have gone that route as well.

[Matsu]

Canadian pricing on Pelican cases is absurd. It's generally too high and kind of all over the place, and you can't get a straight answer from Pelican on their CAN$ MSRP, I know I tried and they basically told me that I had to deal with one of their retail partners. So, yeah, it takes some shopping around and occasionally you score a great deal - which you did!

In the US right now, Walmart seems to be closing them out, so for the Yanks on this board, now might be a good time to have a look.

[PB PM]

Agreed on the price on the Pelicans. Even different colours of the same case cost different amounts, it's downright silly. I bought mine from Henry's, and the Orange 1520 with dividers was the price I mentioned, the black was $20 more, and the gray and yellow cars were $50 (black was also on sale). The empty cases and cases with foam were at MSRP listed on Pelicans site, but that was before the dollar took a noise dive.

[Matsu]

I really like the idea behind the Trekpak, but standard Velcro is a bit easier to add horizontal structures to (aka, shelves), I think that's going to be my choice, and I'll use up the considerable remains of partial foam leftover with the case to make a few extra cushions and lens cups. I just landed a long term gig that'll see me travel a huge piece of Ontario (Canada). Right now I have to find a four wheel drive vehicle of some kind, doing this in my hatchback might be asking for trouble. The case makes for a useful way to put the whole studio in one box and get out there and not worry about temp changes, humidity, etc....

[PB PM]

Here is what the 1520 looks like loaded up.

[Matsu]

Very neat and tidy. I've seen people pack quite a bit into the 1500 series cases. I'm looking to pack the big case into roughly four sections, maybe with a smaller internal case for cameras and lenses only. I found a small divider bag that fits the bill.

[Ryan]

Based on returning some Christmas gifts I don't want, I've got about $750 to play with. Thinking about some upgrades to my current kit but I'm unsure which direction to go:

Currently shooting with a Canon 350D, 50mm f/1.4 and 28mm f/1.8. I'm definitely not a serious photographer, so one option is downgrade to something more compact. I only really shoot while traveling, mostly urban/street photography. I generally shoot with only the 28mm, I don't think I've used the 50mm in a long time.

One option I'm thinking about is the SL1 plus 24mm STM lens, for about $600 all in. For another $150 I could get the kit that comes with the 40mm STM but since I already have a 50mm I don't use, it's probably not worth the extra cost. The SL1 plus 24mm STM would give me a very compact kit with good low-light performance, which is something I value.

I also value the build quality of an SLR. My current 350D is nearly 10 years old, tens of thousands of frames shot, and it still works well, though I don't know how much longer it'll hold up. This is one of the factors that pushes me to stay with an SLR rather than going for a compact.

That said, I could probably be convinced to go for the smaller camera. For that , I come to you guys. In the $400-700 range, what should I look at for a smaller camera with strong build quality and low-light performance? Obviously I'd like something with a focal length in the same area as 40-50mm 35mm equivalent since that's what I enjoy shooting.

I'm certainly not unhappy with my 350D, I'm just concerned about its longevity given its age. I'm also very happy with my lens kit but the size of the pancakes is appealing. Not feeling a ton of need to upgrade my lenses or add to my ranges, though I wouldn't mind something a bit wider (had a ton of fun with the 10-22mm EF-S a while back).

Any ideas?

[Eugene]

I don't think I would do 350D->SL1 under any circumstances and would more than likely be considering the jump to compact mirrorless offerings, whether it's Micro Four-Thirds or Sony or...

[PB PM]

Ryan a 650D or 700D is the modern equivalent of what you have now, and if you are happy with that body type, stick with it. You'd have no problems with lenses and the controls are basically the same. Sounds like the best solution to me.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by PB PM Ryan a 650D or 700D is the modern equivalent of what you have now, and if you are happy with that body type, stick with it. You'd have no problems with lenses and the controls are basically the same. Sounds like the best solution to me.

You're right, that's probably the best way to go. Though given that my 350D does still work, I'm rethinking buying a new body. Maybe just the 24mm STM for now (would really love an SLR package that compact) and then I can upgrade the body once it finally bites the dust. Though better high ISO performance would also be wonderful...

[PB PM]

Yes, sometimes a new camera can bring new life to what you already have. While the current generation Canon sensors are showing their age, they are leaps and bounds better than the 350D.

[Matsu]

I have no idea about the Canon offerings other than I've always found the 5d series rather comfortable in the hand.

There are pluses and minuses to both DSLR and mirrorless.

Doesn't the SL1 have some hybrid focus tricks or something? It is small, probably nice with one of Canon's EF-S pancakes. Not as small as a new m4/3, but compact enough I'd wager. The lenses you do own are a nice pair for it, giving a normal and short portrait set. Add one ultrawide for fun and maybe don't replace anything until your current DSLR breaks and/or you see what Canon does in 2015. Then again, something like a Rebel T5 or a 70D might be a better bet if size isn't a concern.

At this point, anything you buy should offer better image quality as well as an improved AF system, including a number of mirrorless models, though you will be starting over with lenses and a body if you go that route.

I'd wait a bit in your situation. The 350D hasn't failed yet...

[PB PM]

I have a certain Sigma Art lens coming in the mail soon. Will report on it once it arrives.

[Matsu]

Prime or zoom? I'm guessing 35mm?

[PB PM]

50mm F1.4 Art. It is on sale for $899 Cdn ($774 USD as of posting), only for the Nikon F mount (Canon EF and Sony A mounts $939) at The Camera Store for the "boxing week" sale. Best deal around for the lens, anywhere.

I'm hoping that the rumored Sigma 24mm F1.4 comes along in the next year, so I can have a nice set of primes. To me a nice set would be, either the rumored Sigma 24mm f1.4, keep the Nikon 24mm F2.8, or rumored Nikon 24mm F1.8G, Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art and Nikon 105mm f2.8 VR Macro.

[Matsu]

Might be the second best autofocus 50mm money can buy right now; the other one only mounts to Sony e-mount? I like Nikon's f/1.8 range, except for the 50G, which I have - it's good but not great. I have read that for some reason it doesn't like the D800 all that much, and that may be a reason why. Sometimes these things happen: weird interactions with some lens body combinations. The 85mm f/1.4G seems to be another example of this, in this case it seems to want to focus shift. Other people like their 50G lenses a lot, so who knows, for $200 it's worth keeping, but it's no 50A, so we're going to want your review as soon as you get a few clicks behind it.

Speaking of bodies which seem to focus everything almost supernaturally well, the D750 is getting very very good reviews in that regard. Maybe the best all around continuous autofocus camera money can buy right now. It's got this weird internal reflection issue on some cameras, but unlike the "left AF" issue, this is relatively easy to test in store. Bring a fast lens, put it in live view and find a strong light source just outside the upper camera frame, vary tilt until you see flare, either it will be consistent or have a distracting shadow band through it. If it look weird, hand it back to the clerk and ask for another. I'm seriously considering a D750, and despite my recent attraction to m4/3, I'm trying to convince myself a D750 plus 35mm f/1.8 will work well as a street shooting rig.

[PB PM]

I noticed a huge performance difference with the 50mm F1.8G on the D800 as well. Wide open it just looks softer than warm butter. On the D700 its very sharp, but no amount AF fine tune makes is usable till fp F2.5 on the D800. If DxO Marks give any indication of usability the lens simply lacks the resolving power to provide sharp images on cameras with more than 16MP. Along with fact that colours and contrast seem flat compared to the Nano coated lenses I'm accustomed to using now, kind of puts me off using the lens. I think the poor contast only adds to the apparent lack of sharpness. I'm hoping the 50mm arts well regarded colours and contrast will help in that area.

Most tests I've seen give an significant edge to the Sigma over the Sony FE 1.8 lens, so I suspect it the art is the best AF 50mm lens, if sharpness is the most important aspect of the lens. Bokeh his said to be poor, but that's sormthing I'll have to see for myself.

[Matsu]

Yeah, just having a little fun. The Zeiss actually seems significantly good though, and notwithstanding you can only get it for Sony FE, it's still pretty impressive, especially for the size. The Sigma's huge, let us know how you find it in actual use. A 24-70 is just as big and people don't often complain about that - though it's all zoomy.

[PB PM]

Re the Sony "Zeiss" 50mm, it does seem like a good performer, and IMO the only lens worth getting for the Sony FE mount at this point. Just another reason to keep Sony at arms length, for now anyway.

The Sigma, based on the measurements on the Sigma website is a little smaller and about 100g lighter than the 24-70mm F2.8G. I suspect, based on weight and size that it will feel closer to the AF-S Micro 105mm F2.8G VR I already own. I have some idea of what to expect, at least in terms of external build and feel, since I handled a Sigma 24-105mm F4 Art, which is said to be built to the same standard. As a Nikon shooter that lens bugged me, because the focus and zoom rings turned the wrong way (same direction as Canon), which messed with my music memory. I have the same issue with the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8, but I don't touch the zoom on that lens very much.

Speaking of the Sigma 24-105mm F4 Art, I heard that product has been halted, and there are even rumors it might be discontinued and updated to fix a design flaw. Like the Nikon 24-120mm F4G VR it has very mixed reviews from pros and users alike. There seems to be a lot of quality control issues with Nikon, and apparently Sigma's, F4 lenses. I suspect we hear more about these lenses because they are made/sold in larger numbers than the higher end pro gear, which means a greater chance of sample variation and production problems.

I heard so many bad things about the AF-S 16-35mm F4G VR in terms of sample variation that I was concerned when I bought one, but got over it quickly once I used it. I suspect that some people simply expect too much from these F4 semi-pro lenses. For the price most of them are extremely good, when compared to lenses that cost half the price.

[PB PM]

First thoughts on the Sigma 50mm F1.4 Art

The size and weight is very close to the AF-S Macro 105mm F2.8G VR, as suspected. It's very comfortable in hand, on a D700/D8x0 sized body. Build quality is right up there with pro Nikkor and Canon L lenses, short of the dust/moisture resistant seals, which the Sigma lacks.

Auto Focus is quick in good light, but like the Nikon 24-70mm F2.8G does hop back and forth a little before locking in when the light starts to fall off. Speed wise, almost as quick as the Nikon 24-70mm F2.8G, but as noted before that is with reservations. The lens needed AF fine tuning right out of the box, right now I have it set to +20 (max), but will have to do some more testing to get it calibrated properly. Might need to get the Sigma dock at some point to get it adjusted properly. I am hoping to really put it through it's places tonight when my little niece comes over.


Nikon 50mm F1.8G, Sigma 50mm F1.4 Art and Nikon 24-70mm F2.8G

[Matsu]

Yeah, the 1.8g has an interesting behaviour on the D800. The 85 and 28 are gorgeous - I've used both, but didn't really have the scratch to get a 28 of my own, I borrow one from time to time though. I've tried a 50mm 1.8d that was as sharp as broken glass, and about as smooth too. I'd pick one up, but in truth all the primes are pretty much stupid sharp by f/4 anyway.

[PB PM]

Just an add-on regarding the AF fine tune, to put it in perspective. The Nikon 50mm F1.8G needs +15 to get sharp files too. I suspect the AF system on the D800 needs adjusting overall. I've found that yearly tuning of the cameras and lenses to be very helpful, just haven't got around to it.

That is surely one area where having a mirrorless system would be nice! Of course lenses could still get alignment problems over time, so going mirrorless wouldn't solve all the problems.

[Matsu]

Interesting CES news. Nikon's new 300mm f/4E PF might just be a bit of game changer. It's smaller and lighter than a 24-70 while seeming to offer very good image sharpness and clean optics. Just like Canon's new generation of DO lenses they seem to have resolved the major disadvantages of fresnel optics - the nasty onion-ring bokeh - though there's still some ring shaped flare around point light sources. Tests should tell the whole story - I'm just a little suspicious that for once Nikon's sample images are more carefully chosen, perhaps to hide weaknesses? The images look good though.

It's an "E" lenses, the second AF-E lens now. Apart from metering precision (especially in video) I think this simplifies design a bit and lets designers more easily put differently sized groups where they want, which may be important in speeding up AF function in some designs and maybe useful if some future AF systems queue AF adjustment differently - like the difference between PDAF and CDAF - which may be relevant if certain functions are moving to the sensor itself in the future. Mirrorless FX, or DX, or maybe just SLRs that come down to a relatively competitive sizes ?

Maybe not so weird. The D750 and now the D5500 are notably thinner than previous models, even with the addition of flippy screens - it feels like some genuine work has begun to return to film SLR proportions - a good thing, in my view.

[PB PM]

The size and weight the new 300mm F4 look impressive. The price is also lower than I expected, I figured it would be the same as the 80-400mm VRII. BTW, it is the third AF-S "E" lens, 800mm F5.6E and 400mm F2.8E came before it. The biggest additions are the VR and Nano coatings, otherwise it will be a wash. If size and weight are important go for it, otherwise get the older model and save $600-700. Sure the new model will be sharper, slightly, but I suspect the bokeh of the older AF-S IF-ED lens will still hold out as being superior. Some samples with bokeh looks a little less flattering than the previous version. It also doesn't have an included tripod collar, which the older model does. Even though many people complained about the included collar of the older model, I never had any issues with it. Does the new model really need a collar? Less so I suspect, but anyone who wants to use the lens on a gimbal head will need it. The new lens also focuses a little closer, which might cause heavier focus breathing than the older model.

Nikon's marketing is really pushing the "Sports" VR setting, but that appears to simply be a new name for "Active" VR, since it apparently does the same thing.