Your Garage Up to 80 Percent Off Textbooks Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it Benjamin Leftwich Fire TV Stick Happy Belly Snacks Totes Summer-Event-Garden Amazon Cash Back Offer PilotWave7B PilotWave7B PilotWave7B  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis DollyParton Shop Now
Profile for Christopher T. Yohn > Reviews

Browse

Christopher T. Y...'s Profile

Customer Reviews: 2
Top Reviewer Ranking: 34,554,282
Helpful Votes: 54


Community Features
Review Discussion Boards
Top Reviewers

Guidelines: Learn more about the ins and outs of Your Profile.

Reviews Written by
Christopher T. Yohn RSS Feed (Cleveland, OH)
(REAL NAME)   

Show:  
Page: 1
pixel
Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 L USM Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras - Fixed
Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 L USM Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras - Fixed
Price: $1,349.00
65 used & new from $674.50

34 of 35 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Fantastic lens, but a steep learning curve., May 3, 2010
This lens receives a ton of negative reviews, mostly dealing with focus problems such as back focus or focus shift. However, this lens has been locked on my 5D for over a year and I have NEVER experienced any of these problems. I haven't shot a brick wall or a test chart with this thing; nonetheless, I'm very picky with my real world shots and have just been blown away by the results.

Every lens is designed for specific purposes and the 50mm f/1.2 is certainly no exception. Consequently, the negative aspects of this lens should be expected if you are familiar with ultra-fast 50mm's:
1. Significant chromatic aberration wide open. Easily fixed in post-processing.
2. Lots of vignetting wide open. No surprise here. It's beautiful for some shots, is fixable in PP for other shots.
3. Hard to focus wide open. The numerous reports of back focusing probably has to do with the limited skills of most users (myself included) or slight variations in lens/body combinations. I've never experienced this problem. The special Canon focusing screens (optimized for fast lenses) certainly help in this regard.
4. If you shoot mainly above 2.8, the much less expensive 50mm f/1.4 will likely give you great results as well. Even below 2.8, the 50mm f/1.4 is quite good.

Now, the pros:
1. If you live below f/2.8 and especially f/2.0, this lens is astounding. That's why I use prime lenses.
2. If you can nail the focus, this lens is sharp at f/1.2. I can see individual eyelashes when I nail the focus.
3. The lens is even more sharp starting f/1.4 and above.
4. Sharpness isn't everything. This lens produces out of focus areas that look like paintings. Much, much better bokeh than the 50mm f/1.4.
5. Colors are out of this world. Just a lot of work with... Post-processing becomes much easier, your results are of a higher quality.

If you are a skilled photographer who needs this lens, just go ahead and get it. The limitations are greatly exaggerated and don't inhibit the creative process much at all.


Crop Circles - Quest for Truth
Crop Circles - Quest for Truth
DVD ~ Karen Alexander
16 used & new from $0.98

20 of 30 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars entertaining, yet biased, March 6, 2006
Teams of human circlemakers have been creating very complex crop circle designs for decades. This fact is well-documented, with many easy-to-find accounts in various publications in print and here on the internet. I was disappointed that Gazecki almost entirely ignored that perspective on the debate. Instead, this documentary places a heavy focus on unexplained/paranormal perspectives. Humans are quite capable of quickly creating very complex designs. While this certainly doesn't disprove paranormal explanations, this fact should have received more attention in this film.

Secondly, I would have liked to see more credibility behind the scientific evidence that is presented. The film describes teams of scientists who have investigated crop circles, yet focuses entirely on the research of an independent scientist with no apparent institutional affiliation. Furthermore, peer-reviewed publications are the standard mechanism for presenting novel scientific findings. Were these results taken from a peer-reviewed publication? If not, why should anyone consider these conclusions to be scientific? Again, this doesn't disprove anything, but this is an important consideration that is left unaddressed. Scientific research must meet basic standards, not defined by research that some groups may consider "scientific".

As far as entertainment value, this film is top notch. In my heart, I "want to believe" and am quickly swept away by the possibilities.. lots of interesting ideas are presented by a number of passionate, eccentric folks. But my stubborn, skeptical nature still persists, and for good reason.
Comment Comments (2) | Permalink | Most recent comment: Aug 25, 2012 2:51 PM PDT


Page: 1