dubzee

Hi folks, I just bought a set of Zeiss Contax lenses and am looking to unload my old EF glass. I'm located in Toronto, ON, local pickup or ship. I baby my glass and everything is in what eBay sellers would call 9+++ or 10 shape. HMU for more info. These are good deals I believe especially with UV filters :-) ALL OPTICS PERFECT. Anything wrong is only extremely minimal wear on the barrels. Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 w/UV filter - 95% like new - $275 CAD - wonderful normal FOV lens and shines with Dual ISO, it's so crisp and pleasing! -- SOLD Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 w/UV filter - Mint - $300 CAD - barely used it but it's a killer lens around f/2.8 for portraits and razor thin DOF! Aka Bower or Samsung. Tokina 16-28 f/2.8 Ultrawide angle zoom - 95% like new with 3.5 year warranty left - $650 CAD - needs no introduction. It takes the Canon and Nikon UWA zooms out back to put them out of their misery. BEST IN CLASS FOR THE COST :-) barely used too. -- SOLD Happy shooting and let me know if you're interested. -Ben

Great work!

Test #2 with two lenses and a different post workflow.

That's it exactly, playing devil's advocate. Keep on keepin' on, good discussions are hard to come by online.

I have to disagree that there's a resolution advantage to downscaling from 16:9 to 2.35:1. If it was an analog optical process - sure - but there are fixed quanta and downscaling could introduce aliasing because of it through dithering. Also remember the getting closer thing is abrogated by the fact that the 0.7x wide angle adapter gets me 14% closer. Really what we're doing is comparing apples and oranges. I never said this was a replacement, but just an experiment I was doing to see how it turns out, with some thought-provoking discourse in the process.

Ya that is a great vid! It'll be interesting to try my camera once they release the new debayer algorithms as part of the MLV extractors. As it stands it's kind of pixellated. And hey... 2k GBP vs $300 CDN ain't bad for "better than expected".

Not sure I understand... It's approximately 25% less pixels, not 14%.

Do you mean the vignetting specifically?

I just looked at those, looks awesome! Cheap too. My BUY finger is getting itchy. Thanks for watching, once again.

Remember, just in terms of the resolution is what I was saying. And based on the discussions, turning 16:9 into 2.35:1 even with a real anamorphic isn't a resolution advantage. 4:3 to 2.35:1 perhaps :) Cheers!

Avez-vous du vidéo comme example?

Not sure, best bet is to create an account - http://www.magiclantern.fm/

I'm just post-processing some of the footage I took. Unfortunately I had "Vignetting" control turned on in Magic Lantern so the colours are a bit weird, but it looks decent. Will post soon :)

They're working on ML V1.2.3 for 5D Mark 3 where you'll be able to preview both.