Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Video

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Apr 4, 2012, 12:48 AM   #1
matteusclement
macrumors 65816
 
matteusclement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: victoria
Zeiss Lenses - Worth it?

As another thread here showed, I am going for the 5dII or III.
As I am getting it used, it saves me a few bucks.

The 50mm zeiss lens is 799+tax.
Compared to my Canon 50mm 1.8 or Sigma 30mm 1.4.... is the Zeiss lens worth buying for shooting video?
__________________
try this:
take an empty pop can, place it on the floor, smash it flat, now try to pull it back to how it was.
see how it looks like crap? that's called compression
matteusclement is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 4, 2012, 02:42 AM   #2
floh
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
I want to make two very different statements:

1. As with every market, the price curve becomes really steep once you go in the direction of qualitatively top-class offerings. You can eat at a restaurant for 10 bucks and it will be satiating. You can eat at a nicer place for 100 bucks and it will be really, really good. But you can also easily spend 1000 dollars on a single meal in the world's top restaurants. Would I taste the difference from 100 dollars? Probably not. There is a very slight improvement that trained people will notice, but it is very questionable if it justifies the huge price difference. Do you get the metaphor?

2. I have worked with Zeiss lenses and they are very good (not as good as Leica in my experience, but still very good). You will get sharper details, especially in the outer parts of your image. Your bokeh will look more delicious if you have lights in the background etc. You also have to take into account that you buy a lens for a lifetime, but you can (and will) upgrade the camera body more frequently. In 5 years time, you will probably not be shooting on the 5DII anymore, but you will still use the lens that you buy now. Don't be cheap on the lenses!

Both of that being said: The Canon 50mm 1.8 or Sigma 30mm 1.4 are nice glass. If you shoot mostly video, you will be fine with those. Your subject of interest will not be at the very edge of your frame and you don't need the additional sharpness there. You are shooting 25 frames per second, so people will not look as closely as they might for a still photo. You are shooting at 1080p, at which resolution you will not notice the difference in sharpness too rigidly.

If you are doing a lot of still photography, I would recommend you to get a top line lens, since it does make a difference and it is an investment. If you are really only going for video, rather invest in great light and sound equipment first.
floh is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 4, 2012, 04:37 AM   #3
cgbier
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
For Photo, yes. Video? Not really. You might get a lot of moire as those are too sharp.
cgbier is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 4, 2012, 06:40 AM   #4
fa8362
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Plenty of people would say the 5D isn't worth it, so you have to make up your own mind.
fa8362 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 4, 2012, 09:29 AM   #5
pigbat
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
If you want to give Zeiss a try and not break the bank, look for some old contax lenses. You can usually find the 50mm 1,7 for around $200. It's a great lens for the money.
pigbat is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 4, 2012, 10:20 AM   #6
matteusclement
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
matteusclement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: victoria
Quote:
Originally Posted by pigbat View Post
If you want to give Zeiss a try and not break the bank, look for some old contax lenses. You can usually find the 50mm 1,7 for around $200. It's a great lens for the money.
i don't quite follow....
__________________
try this:
take an empty pop can, place it on the floor, smash it flat, now try to pull it back to how it was.
see how it looks like crap? that's called compression
matteusclement is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 4, 2012, 03:54 PM   #7
pigbat
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by matteusclement View Post
i don't quite follow....
The old Contax 35mm cameras used manual zeiss lenses. There is a $15 adapter you can but that allows these lenses to mount to a Canon body.

http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Adapt.../ref=pd_cp_p_0

The lenses can usually be found on Ebay or one of the popular buy/sell forums online. I picked up a 50mm 1.7 for under $200. Below is a short 1 minute test we did with the lens. It isn't technically perfect but we just wanted to run the lens through a low light test. It was lit with a 40w incandescent from above.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sam0...ature=youtu.be

Check online for contax zeiss c/y mount lenses. Great glass at a great price. If you don't like it, you can unload it for no loss.
pigbat is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 22, 2012, 07:36 PM   #8
matteusclement
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
matteusclement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: victoria
Assuming at some point I upgrade to a Black Magic Cinema or RED, would the zeiss be worth it then?
__________________
try this:
take an empty pop can, place it on the floor, smash it flat, now try to pull it back to how it was.
see how it looks like crap? that's called compression
matteusclement is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 22, 2012, 08:07 PM   #9
pigbat
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Deleted

Last edited by pigbat; Oct 25, 2012 at 08:05 AM.
pigbat is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 22, 2012, 09:45 PM   #10
Policar
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Zeiss' ZE and ZF lenses are enormously overpriced for their performance, but they do offer brand recognition and build quality that could be valuable for the professional who wants to appeal to clients on that basis and wants a reliable product.

That said, big metal MF lenses, while worse for stills, are preferable for video. It's hard to pull focus with rings that slip easily past infinity--how will you keep your marks consistent? Zeiss, Samyang, and vintage lenses are all great in this regard. Except they're terrible for stills.

Check out the resolution charts at the digital picture:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R....aspx?Lens=271

Zeiss does okay in any given category, but the 50mm f1.4 is such a silly lens because it's the same basic modified double gauss design we've seen since Nikon's 50mm f1.4 AIS and it performs roughly the same as any other, but the cost is very high. Likewise the 35mm f1.4 performs no better than the L or the Samyang lens. The 85mm f1.4 does seem to be nicer than the competition, but not appreciably so, at least for video shooters.

The 50mm f1.8 is garbage because it has bad bokeh and a terrible focus ring and the 50mm Zeiss will be a big upgrade. (It's pretty good garbage fwiw, optically it's aces I just don't like that bokeh.) But so will a $40 Nikon and an adapter. Get the lens if you want, but you're paying for build quality. Optically it will be very similar.

Zeiss does have some special lenses: the master primes obviously (I've never used one!) and even the Super Speeds are wonderful (if very, very low resolution relative to what you might expect). I anticipate that their 50mm f1.4 Distagon will be the best of the best and possibly blow away the competition, but it will also probably be $4000. And of course for video the difference will be impossible to detect, except maybe in a lab measuring charts wide open.
Policar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 22, 2012, 10:22 PM   #11
matteusclement
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
matteusclement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: victoria
I'm open to other lenses in that price range by the way.
__________________
try this:
take an empty pop can, place it on the floor, smash it flat, now try to pull it back to how it was.
see how it looks like crap? that's called compression
matteusclement is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 22, 2012, 10:37 PM   #12
nateo200
macrumors 68030
 
nateo200's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Rendering......
I'm going for a nice collection of Canon glass....heres what I will be using for my video. Canon EF 35mm f/2, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8, Canon EF 100mm f/2, Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 and of course my crappy kit lens which is an EF-S 18-55....I've used all of these lenses for a bit but only own the kit lens and the nifty fifty but Ill have all of the above by the end of this year hopefully...ordering my 35mm f/2 next week on pay day and grabbing the 100mm f/2 for christmas hopefully...

NOW these may not be Zeiss Master Primes but in the future I'm looking to Rent a RED Scarlet for serious work...that means Ill rent the Canon mount one and be able to use a solid 35mm, 50mm, 100mm and of course the 75-100mm and I believe the EF-S kit lens will work so I can get my wider 18mm and 24mm range if needed (though I might need a nice 14mm). I always like the 24, 35, 50, 85, and 100mm set in 35mm sensor cameras...lets you do allot and with something like a RED Scarlet I believe my quality of glass is not going to need to be on par with top of the line Cine glass from the get go when I am working with RAW REDCODE...No RAW is not a crutch but in video I find glass quality to be less of a concern when you light a set properly and use appropriate appetures. I do have to say that I do not like the bokeh on the 35mm and 50mm Canons as they have 5 bladed apertures so when the lens is stopped down from 1.8 to even 2.0 you get hexagonal bokeh which is meh...regardless I've seen some VERY nice stuff from Canon DSLRs with only Canon glass (not even L series all the time)...I have no excuses.
__________________
-15" rMBP 2.4/8/256/650M, FCP X, AE CS5.5, PS CS6
-USB3 180GB SSD, Intensity Shuttle Thunderbolt
-iPhone 6 in Space Grey 128GB
-Canon 550D, GoPro3 Black
nateo200 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 22, 2012, 10:48 PM   #13
Policar
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Why all the outlandish focal lengths? Aren't we all used to 18/25/35/50/85 prime kits or zooms covering the same range? It's all I ever ask for or seen rented, except on music videos, of course, where you need tighter for glamor and wider for masters. Prometheus was shot on two fast mid-range zooms. Why all these weird focal lengths when people ask about video lenses? Cover the basics first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by matteusclement View Post
Assuming at some point I upgrade to a Black Magic Cinema or RED, would the zeiss be worth it then?
I assume you're shooting APS-C. Do you plan to rent or are you an owner/op? What focal lengths do you normally rent on a show? How fast do your lenses need to be? Which focal lengths and speeds do you use the most of those you've rented? Just figure out the focal lengths you like, how fast you need those lenses to be, then weigh that against performance (again, charts are easily available) and build quality, which can be read about in any review.

Canon's dSLRs have garbage quality video so any lens (with a few exceptions, the 20mm f1.8 sigma, the 35mm f1.4 and 24mm f2 AIS Nikkors wide open are the two I've tried so far) will be good enough. Not all lenses have great bokeh, of course, but on APS-C it's usually not as much of an issue.

The Samyang cinema lenses are the best from a price/performance standpoint by far and optically they are on par with Zeiss except for their inferior coatings but there's no fast UWA for APS-C (not that any manufacturer has one), the build quality is worse than Zeiss with inaccurate witness marks, and rental rates are WAY lower. The 24/35/50 (coming soon)/85 kit is a great deal for FF; for APS-C you'll need to add an 11-16mm Tokina or 17-55mm zoom or something to get that UWA.
Policar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 22, 2012, 11:50 PM   #14
mBox
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by matteusclement View Post
Assuming at some point I upgrade to a Black Magic Cinema or RED, would the zeiss be worth it then?
Very interested as well in this lens.
I just picked up a Scarlet and will need to stock up on decent Canon type glass.
mBox is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 23, 2012, 01:08 AM   #15
nateo200
macrumors 68030
 
nateo200's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Rendering......
Quote:
Originally Posted by mBox View Post
Very interested as well in this lens.
I just picked up a Scarlet and will need to stock up on decent Canon type glass.
Do you know anywhere I can find some sample footage from the Scarlet? Like some REDCODE of something I can practice cutting in FCP? I've been meaning to give this a shot...I thought RED had something on their site but God only knows. Nice new toy though...feel free to show it off here I've been dying to get my nasty DSLR covered hands on one for a serious shoot. If your not already on REDUser.com head over there. TONS of advice on everything you can imagine, Graeme Nattress is a real expert with the whole RAW workflow and its really trickled down to some users on their, I read and posted in a great thread about RAW workflow and learned a ton of things about post workflow in general.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Policar View Post
Why all the outlandish focal lengths? Aren't we all used to 18/25/35/50/85 prime kits or zooms covering the same range? It's all I ever ask for or seen rented, except on music videos, of course, where you need tighter for glamor and wider for masters. Prometheus was shot on two fast mid-range zooms. Why all these weird focal lengths when people ask about video lenses? Cover the basics first.
.
Me? Well I am "Covering the basics" I'm shooting on 1.6x Crop and I don't have the cash to buy 18/24/35/50/85 all at once...I am covering my basics....I need a fast lens to get wider than 50mm shots because a 50mm on an APS-C is...well you might as well buy a damn 85mm! 18 or 20 will act as my wide (might even go to 15 though) 35mm will act as my standard lens, 50mm as tighter shots on the face only and I skipped 85mm because Ill grab a 100mm and step back a bit or throw on a 70-300...Do you shoot Full frame or APS-H or crop? Some people think its a tiny difference but its really not...my friend shoots exclusively on 35mm film...I told him I was grabbing a 35mm f/2 and he said "Wow thats a fast wide" WIDE?!?! Yeah ok...not on Super35...Ill need like a 0.8x crop factor to keep me from bitching! :roll eyes: I'm a huge fan of wide angle shots...sure its different but I like it. You can always get closer I say and if your working at 5K resolutions just crop to get rid of nasty edges if they pop up.
__________________
-15" rMBP 2.4/8/256/650M, FCP X, AE CS5.5, PS CS6
-USB3 180GB SSD, Intensity Shuttle Thunderbolt
-iPhone 6 in Space Grey 128GB
-Canon 550D, GoPro3 Black

Last edited by nateo200; Oct 23, 2012 at 01:13 AM.
nateo200 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 23, 2012, 12:03 PM   #16
matteusclement
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
matteusclement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: victoria
Quote:
Originally Posted by Policar View Post
I assume you're shooting APS-C. Do you plan to rent or are you an owner/op? What focal lengths do you normally rent on a show? How fast do your lenses need to be? Which focal lengths and speeds do you use the most of those you've rented? Just figure out the focal lengths you like, how fast you need those lenses to be, then weigh that against performance (again, charts are easily available) and build quality, which can be read about in any review.

Canon's dSLRs have garbage quality video so any lens (with a few exceptions, the 20mm f1.8 sigma, the 35mm f1.4 and 24mm f2 AIS Nikkors wide open are the two I've tried so far) will be good enough. Not all lenses have great bokeh, of course, but on APS-C it's usually not as much of an issue.

The Samyang cinema lenses are the best from a price/performance standpoint by far and optically they are on par with Zeiss except for their inferior coatings but there's no fast UWA for APS-C (not that any manufacturer has one), the build quality is worse than Zeiss with inaccurate witness marks, and rental rates are WAY lower. The 24/35/50 (coming soon)/85 kit is a great deal for FF; for APS-C you'll need to add an 11-16mm Tokina or 17-55mm zoom or something to get that UWA.
I am shooting 5dii. Full frame.
I shoot 50mm the most often. Then I need a wide angle for tight spaces like workshops and bathrooms (for commercials). SO maybe the 14mm Rokinon?
I'd opt for a 35mm after that.
I don't shoot action yet, so there's no need for anything long like 135mm.

I like getting in tight to the action when ever possible, so 14, 35, 50 would be awesome. f1.4 or f1.8 are good, 2.8 is as low as I want to go.
__________________
try this:
take an empty pop can, place it on the floor, smash it flat, now try to pull it back to how it was.
see how it looks like crap? that's called compression
matteusclement is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 24, 2012, 12:30 AM   #17
Policar
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by matteusclement View Post
I am shooting 5dii. Full frame.
I shoot 50mm the most often. Then I need a wide angle for tight spaces like workshops and bathrooms (for commercials). SO maybe the 14mm Rokinon?
I'd opt for a 35mm after that.
I don't shoot action yet, so there's no need for anything long like 135mm.

I like getting in tight to the action when ever possible, so 14, 35, 50 would be awesome. f1.4 or f1.8 are good, 2.8 is as low as I want to go.
The 14mm f2.8 has a LOT of distortion (mustache on FF, barrel on APS-C). It's a super sharp lens but not great for video unless you avoid straight lines. I far prefer the 14mm f2.8 L II (which is not as sharp) for video on FF, since it has almost no distortion, and the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 on APS-C (also borderline usable at 16mm on FF, but I wouldn't get it for the 5D, admittedly). I use a 17-40mm f4 L for FF and am not wild about it, but it has less distortion than the Samyang and it's easy to find cheap (but f4 is not great). There's another nice UWA in this range that I'd recommend but I'm currently trying to snipe on on eBay. I recommend trying the Samyang before buying. Great lens, but the distortion might be a dealbreaker. It was for me, but not for others I know and I have seen nice footage from it.

Action can be anything from UWA to telephoto, imo. But imo wide is more interesting than long though near-orthogonal action pans can be really sick sometimes. James Cameron mixes a lot of UWA and telephoto, so does John Woo. But long lenses are more useful outdoors, where you have the light for tons of stop, so even the 70-200mm IS is fine whereas UWAs can be useful indoors, too, so speed matters.

All the 50mm lenses are good optically. The 50mm f1.8 unfortunately has bad bokeh but it's fine otherwise. I use a 50mm f1.4 Nikkor AIS and like it a lot...plan to also get a 50mm Samyang when it is released. The Zeiss is probably better than either, but not by a lot. The build quality should be amazing, though, and pulling focus nice and easy. Not a bad lens, just depreciating returns. Imo, the Samyang 35mm and 85mm are amazing for video (about to try the 24mm--we'll see).

The old 24-70mm is worth considering, too.
Policar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 24, 2012, 01:43 AM   #18
matteusclement
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
matteusclement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: victoria
Quote:
Originally Posted by Policar View Post
The 14mm f2.8 has a LOT of distortion (mustache on FF, barrel on APS-C). It's a super sharp lens but not great for video unless you avoid straight lines. I far prefer the 14mm f2.8 L II (which is not as sharp) for video on FF, since it has almost no distortion, and the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 on APS-C (also borderline usable at 16mm on FF, but I wouldn't get it for the 5D, admittedly). I use a 17-40mm f4 L for FF and am not wild about it, but it has less distortion than the Samyang and it's easy to find cheap (but f4 is not great). There's another nice UWA in this range that I'd recommend but I'm currently trying to snipe on on eBay. I recommend trying the Samyang before buying. Great lens, but the distortion might be a dealbreaker. It was for me, but not for others I know and I have seen nice footage from it.

Action can be anything from UWA to telephoto, imo. But imo wide is more interesting than long though near-orthogonal action pans can be really sick sometimes. James Cameron mixes a lot of UWA and telephoto, so does John Woo. But long lenses are more useful outdoors, where you have the light for tons of stop, so even the 70-200mm IS is fine whereas UWAs can be useful indoors, too, so speed matters.

All the 50mm lenses are good optically. The 50mm f1.8 unfortunately has bad bokeh but it's fine otherwise. I use a 50mm f1.4 Nikkor AIS and like it a lot...plan to also get a 50mm Samyang when it is released. The Zeiss is probably better than either, but not by a lot. The build quality should be amazing, though, and pulling focus nice and easy. Not a bad lens, just depreciating returns. Imo, the Samyang 35mm and 85mm are amazing for video (about to try the 24mm--we'll see).

The old 24-70mm is worth considering, too.
That's all good to hear.

From what I can tell, investing in a good EOS mount lens isn't going to hurt me since I plan on having it for a long time. I say this because I see that Black Magic is using the mount and it's also available on the RED's. So if I take what some people here have said and that is that the build quality means a long lasting lens, I see no harm in that.

Good to hear about the 14mm. It's going to be hard to find a 14 or so that doesn't have distortion. I have to have f2.8 or faster. Any other suggestions?

Good to hear that the Samyang 35 and 85 are nice. Unfortunately I don't have anywhere I can test the lenses first (part of the reason I am in a jam).
__________________
try this:
take an empty pop can, place it on the floor, smash it flat, now try to pull it back to how it was.
see how it looks like crap? that's called compression
matteusclement is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 10:03 PM   #19
Policar
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by matteusclement View Post
That's all good to hear.

From what I can tell, investing in a good EOS mount lens isn't going to hurt me since I plan on having it for a long time. I say this because I see that Black Magic is using the mount and it's also available on the RED's. So if I take what some people here have said and that is that the build quality means a long lasting lens, I see no harm in that.

Good to hear about the 14mm. It's going to be hard to find a 14 or so that doesn't have distortion. I have to have f2.8 or faster. Any other suggestions?

Good to hear that the Samyang 35 and 85 are nice. Unfortunately I don't have anywhere I can test the lenses first (part of the reason I am in a jam).
The issue you'll run into is that a normal set of lenses for APS-C/Super35 (7D and Scarlet) is 18-85mm, for FF it's 28-135mm, and for BMC it's 10-55mm or so (not sure exactly). So while some lenses are useful on all three, it's hard to make a nice kit that works with all three.

The Tokina 11-16mm is an awesome UWA on APS-C, a solid normal lens on BMC, and it works at 16mm on the 5D but with CA and ridiculously soft corners. I would actually take this over the Samyang (for video, not stills), but I'm less bothered by soft corners than I am by distortion and the CA has bitten me in the ass once before. I prefer the 17-40mm L to both, though, but it's not that great. There's a 17-35mm f2.8-f4 Tamron that I've never tried but should be quite good (soft corners and distortion, but all the UWA have those problems).

The Samyang 35mm f1.4 is world class (comparable to the Zeiss) but it breathes quite a bit. I might have some footage I can dig up somewhere. I have some of the 14mm L wide open...looks great. Great lens.

On the 5D I loved the 24-70mm f2.8 L, 70-200mm f2.8 II L, and 14mm f2.8 L as a set of lenses for music videos. For dramatic narrative the 24-70mm is 90% of what you need. But pulling focus can be tough.

If you're going for ultra-wide don't get the Black Magic camera! You'd need a 5.8mm lens to get as wide as 14mm on FF! Not going to be easy to find. But 14mm is wacky wide.
Policar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2012, 01:21 PM   #20
mjsanders5uk
macrumors member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateo200 View Post
I'm going for a nice collection of Canon glass....heres what I will be using for my video. Canon EF 35mm f/2, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8, Canon EF 100mm f/2, Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 and of course my crappy kit lens which is an EF-S 18-55....I've used all of these lenses for a bit but only own the kit lens and the nifty fifty but Ill have all of the above by the end of this year hopefully...ordering my 35mm f/2 next week on pay day and grabbing the 100mm f/2 for christmas hopefully...
The biggest problem with Canon EF lenses for video use is the lack of a iris ring. You can control the iris from the camera whilst shooting, but you will see bumps in exposure if you change/rack the iris during a take.

A lens with a manual iris is a much better option for video work

Michael
DP/Camera/Edit
mjsanders5uk is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Video

Tags
5d markii, zeiss

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are Crizal lenses worth it? MacNut Community Discussion 25 Jun 9, 2014 12:24 PM
Sigma takes on the $4,000 Zeiss Otus compuwar Digital Photography 5 Apr 22, 2014 01:30 PM
Advice on lenses AT06 Digital Photography 40 Apr 18, 2013 09:51 AM
Why are fast wide lenses so expensive vs long lenses nateo200 Digital Photography 12 Oct 30, 2012 12:30 PM
Lenses rubsal70 Digital Photography 47 Aug 6, 2012 11:35 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:03 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC