April 18, 2014, 08:51:42 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - dickgrafixstop

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 16
1
EOS-M / Re: How do you carry your EOS-M?
« on: April 15, 2014, 07:05:26 PM »
I carried it right back to the place I bought it and got a refund.  I did however keep the Naneu Pro Lima that
I had thought would be the perfect size for a mirrorless camera.  (It now fits my Fuji XE2 perfectly!)

2
EOS-M / Re: Canon EOS M3 in Q3 of 2014?
« on: April 15, 2014, 07:03:11 PM »
Looks like Canon is pasting feathers on a turkey hoping it will fly.  They ought to lay off the whole group that
worked on this - and then fire the management team that approved it.

3
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dissuade me to get a Rolleiflex
« on: April 14, 2014, 07:49:59 PM »
Shoot with a tlr Rollei for
 Pure pleasure of using the basics - no auto anything and nothing
To blame but your technique.  You'll note that the prices have held value
Far better than other med format gear - must be a reason!


4
Maybe you can tell me, how much will I drive a Porsche when I already have a Mercedes sedan?

What kind of a question is that?  How would anybody know? If you can afford it, if you want it, get it.
Remember, gear acquisition syndrome (GAS) can be cured, but why?

5
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Lens survey - your favorites, and your most wanted?
« on: March 25, 2014, 01:04:35 PM »
I'd like a fast 28mm and a fast 85mm - oh, yea, that's why I bought the Fuji.  Now if they add a fast 135mm,
I'm set.

6
Lenses / Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« on: March 18, 2014, 01:18:05 PM »
You talk about taking the telephoto on your bike, so I'd guess the faster lens is of marginal use for most cases.
I'd narrow the choice to the 70-200 f4.0 or the 70-300.  Difference is about $300 which would almost get you
a 1.4 extender.  My choice would be the longer reach, slightly more weight penalty but an excellent and versatile
lens.  If you really want reach there are several other manufacturers - Sigma and Tamron - which make good
long telephoto zooms (up to 600mm) at less than $1000. 

7
EOS Bodies / Re: 100D/SL1 Discontinued already??
« on: March 11, 2014, 04:27:54 PM »
Is it selling?  Have sales slowed?  It is being discounted and that's usually an end of life sign.
For this one, the fat lady isn't singing - but she is warming up!

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Medium Format
« on: March 11, 2014, 04:22:26 PM »
Well it's certainly feasible to pack a square sensor within the 35mm full frame image circle and that would yield about 20 % or so more pixels at the same density.  As the pixel size decreases it would be reasonable to expect
a 50-60 megapixel image size within the same form factor that is currently available and would use existing full format lenses.  How about coupling that with an interchangeable back (think the old 35mm date/time backs) as a seating for the sensor and you could have multiple backs for depending on your shoot requirements.  Be good for photographers but bad for suppliers if you could just switch the back for an upgrade.  Ricoh's experiment with sensor embedded backs didn't work  out to well but users loved the camera.

9
EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: March 11, 2014, 01:25:31 AM »
dead end is a generous description.  this system was still born - Canon shoved it out the door with lousy
AF performance, limited lens selection and insane pricing.  When discounted (over 50% to clear the inventory)
it still lingered on retailers' shelves and is only now becoming hard to find (at the discounted price.) 
In the meantime Canon introduced the SL1 which took further wind out of the M sales and also flooded the
information market about how the G1X was a better solution (it probably was) and released two rapid marginal
"enhancements" to the T3i all within the same MRSP.  They announced an interesting new lens - but not in the
largest USA market - and a new model with minimum enhancements for Europe but again not the US.  It would
appear that Canon USA knows a turkey when it sees one and wouldn't sign up for any volumes.  Now you're in
a "pasting feathers on a turkey" mode and you might be better off kissing it off and starting from scratch.

10
Lenses / Re: What to do with an old 17-85 f4-5.6 IS USM?
« on: March 10, 2014, 07:34:32 PM »
They seem to be going for $200-250 on Ebay.  Advertise it as a deal on craigslist or donate it to a local camera
club. 

11
Lenses / Re: Glass is the most important?
« on: March 10, 2014, 05:44:50 PM »
OK - you've talked the talk, now walk the walk.  A good way to start is to convince yourself to absolutely master
the equipment you have.  Not only is it a good way to "discover" what you're missing, it will show you what you
have.  Once you decide, avoid the popular photo magazines and blogs - including this one, that discuss "new"
equipment.  If you can't break the browsing habit, force yourself to only read technical and technique articles. 
When your self-imposed sabbatical is over, then survey the current market and pick something that allows you
to do something you haven't been able to do (photographically, that is) and have at it. 

By the way - during your exile, save your shekels because whatever it is you'll want to acquire will be expensive.

12
Lenses / Re: Lens Advise for Europe Vacation
« on: March 10, 2014, 05:35:47 PM »
I would take the 35L, the 85L and a good pair of shoes.  If you need a third lens, and if your vacation is primarily
photo oriented, take the 24-70 as a third lens.  If not, or if your wife is as impatient as mine, "less is more" is
a good philosophy.  (wouldn't hurt to have a S90/100/110 in your pocket - particularly for places where you may
have to check your messenger bag.)

As a second point - I wouldn't bother with the Pelican bag.  Aside from being bulky and heavy, it marks it's content
as something worth protecting.  I'd put a small messenger bag in my carry-on and use it when I got there.  I do
that with a Naneu Pro Lima - good protection, fits nicely inside my 20" rolling suitcase, and cheap (~$50) while
being un-obtrusive.  The two lenses and the camera fit perfectly - it'd be stuffed with the third lens.

13
Lenses / Re: Collecting gear
« on: March 10, 2014, 01:03:41 PM »
Back to the original question - buy a new (fill in the blank) when you need it.  Many an excellent photographer
uses only one lens, but they use it incredibly well.   A standard camera package for many years was the body
and a 50mm lens.  Adventuresome types added a 35mm and/or a 90mm or135mm to meet their new needs. 
In there somewhere was a flash and a tripod - again depending upon the "need" to overcome some limitation in
a shooting situation.  A Rebel with the standard 18-55 zoom and a 55-250 telephoto can effectively handle most
peoples' "requirements" and in some cases it could be argued a better "travelling" combination than a 5DIII with
the 24-70L and 70/200L grouping - especially if you have to walk long distances.  No one but you can answer your question for you.  Good luck!

14
Canon General / Re: In need of a "walk around" camera
« on: March 07, 2014, 10:11:08 AM »
Since this is a Canon blog, I'd recommend the G15 - recently quite nicely discounted and still widely available.
Before Canon abandons this segment the G series, the S90/95/100 are excellent, small, versatile offerings for
most things other than sports.  If you're opposed to saving the cash, the new Leica C looks good and I will
probably replace my DLux with one soon.  For me, the ultimate "walking around" camera is the Leica M with a
35mm lens - but it's a little out of the budget here.

15
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: P-51 Mustang
« on: March 04, 2014, 06:20:37 PM »
Good place to plug the Chino CA. airshow that usually takes place the first weekend in May.  Emphasis on this
show is usually piston powered warbirds with an occasional nod to jets (before Obama cut demonstration funds from the air force and national guard).  great weekend for anyone interested in the old birds.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 16