March 01, 2015, 06:34:38 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 - danjwark

Pages: [1] 2
Lenses / Re: Canon 6d vs 24-70mm mark ii
« on: October 31, 2014, 01:20:32 PM »
As a current 6D owner also having moved from crop (no regrets), I would suggest you may end up using your 70-200 more for portraits anyway as it's focal length on FF feels much better than on crop. It actually feels a bit long on crop which makes it tougher to use for portraits. My vote is to go the 6D route as you may just find it with the 70-200 is a killer combination.

Black & White / Re: Black & White
« on: October 08, 2014, 03:09:55 PM »

Black & White / Re: Black & White
« on: October 08, 2014, 03:09:20 PM »

Landscape / Re: Please share your snow/ Ice Photos with us in CR.
« on: February 21, 2014, 10:54:25 PM »
Wall of ice. Taken in Jasper National Park, Alberta, Canada.

Landscape / Re: Please share your snow/ Ice Photos with us in CR.
« on: February 21, 2014, 10:51:22 PM »
Another close-up shot...

Landscape / Re: Please share your snow/ Ice Photos with us in CR.
« on: February 21, 2014, 10:48:24 PM »
Macro shot of frost on my front door window...

Landscape / Re: Waterscapes
« on: October 28, 2013, 07:04:20 PM »
Here is one of mine from Canmore, Alberta.

Canon General / Re: What's so bad about HDR?
« on: July 31, 2013, 10:15:00 AM »
I think there is a general misunderstanding regarding the term HDR. Most of the "HDR" images we see on the internet these days are not an example of basic HDR - they are an excellent example of tonemapping. Basically, simple HDR is just adding dynamic range to the image by merging several exposures. The "HDR" look that many complain about is not caused by extending the dynamic range but by the optional and additional tonemapping process which actually takes the extended range created by the HDR, and then compresses the number of tones and colours. This results in the image looking very overdone at times and to many - garish. I use HDR to overcome impossible exposure situations (much like dodging and burning) however, I am definitely not a fan of the overdone tonemapping that people have incorrectly assigned the general HDR term to. The unfortunate thing is that many of the HDR tools that are available, automatically add the tonemapping process as part of the default HDR process. This has added to the confusion between the two terms.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« on: May 13, 2013, 04:26:03 PM »
I have both the 40D and the 6D. The only real difference I have noticed is that the 6D is able to focus with way less light. Now in all fairness, I typically am a centre point shooter most of the time and the 6D is definitely better at that. If you are happy with your 40D, they you will have no issues with the 6D.

You won't see a huge difference in image quality over your 400D. Yes they can do higher ISO but that doesn't mean you should use it! Basically, I have found that for any of Canon's crop cameras, anything over ISO 1600 is very messy. You can clean it up with NR but you lose a lot detail that way. Between the 3 bodies you mention, 650D, 700D or 60D, I doubt you will see a stitch of difference IQ wise between them as they all essentially use a very similar sensor if not the same. Even the 7D is no different IQ wise. Where you do benefit is in build quality and speed. If you are shooting RAW, then even the Digic chip differences mean little to nothing. If you shoot Jpeg, then the newer ones will help some. The 60D is a better build than the Rebels but the latest Rebels have some features that the 60D doesn't have. Basically, hold them in your hand and see which one feels the best (feel and button placement) and which features you care about. They will all give you the essentially same IQ and really not that much better than your 400D - just more cropping ability :)
My 2 cents.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 700d/100d as a first DSLR or wait for 70d?
« on: April 05, 2013, 05:44:29 PM »
The best advice I can give is to go to a store and handle each one. Pick the one that feels the best in your hands. Between the 100D, 700D, 650D, 600D, 60D, etc. you are unlikely to see any difference in image quality (even at 100%) as they all use essentially the same sensor/tech. The only difference you will notice is how they feel and how much you are willing to pay. They will all produce great results if you know how to use them.
A good lens will make a bigger difference that any differences between these bodies. Remember, think of camera bodies especially in the XXXD and XXD range as disposable every few years. Investing in good lenses will outlast any of these bodies.

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: What size Softbox
« on: April 04, 2013, 02:46:24 PM »
I am writing about the studio set up seen in the photo on this page showing the two alien bee 800's with the umbrellas. I am going to shoot bands and am curious what the two lights are that are being used to light the back drop.

Not directly familiar with which lights are used in the picture. However, the basic idea is that you try to meter the backdrop (for white) 1 stop over your subject, your key at 0 and your fill at -1. This will make the background completely white without bleeding back onto the subject. Keeping your fill at -1 helps your subject not have flat lighting but some soft shadows. So basically, almost any colour matched light source works for the background - just don't over do it. A light meter will greatly help in setting it all up correctly.
Just my 2 cents.

I have found many of the ebay stands are of poor quality. I bought a set for a project and was very disappointed. They were rather flimsy and tipped over easily especially if using a soft box or umbrella. I ended up getting much better ones locally for not much more cost. They are much more sturdy. The last thing you want is for your lights to come crashing down.

As for lighting, I am in a similar situation with not a large space. I originally tried with some ebay monolights but the output control on them is terrible. I have switched to using speedlites and life is much easier. They are very portable and have plenty of power in a small space. Continuous lights might be easier for some situations but are more difficult to control the individual output. Just my 2 cents...

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D - How bad is it? Really?
« on: January 23, 2013, 09:59:22 AM »
The 7D still is a great camera. However, ISO wise it is really no better than any other current 18MP APS-C cameras - even the Rebels. The key to having less noise in your high ISO shots is to have good light. In poor (low) light, ISO 1600 will look noisy on a 7D. With better light you can go up to 6400 in a pinch and it may look OK. Just don't try using 6400 in very low light as the noise will be very bad.
In terms of comparing it to your 30D, try this site:
It allows you to compare different models side by side. Just bear in mind that these are studio shots with good light so it makes it hard to see huge differences.
Handling wise, you will definitely enjoy the 7D over the 30D. Almost everything about it is a vast improvement.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Specs Leaked?
« on: September 15, 2012, 12:03:08 PM »
I may be out in left field but Canon may have been a bit concerned that the D600 was going to be $1500. They were then in the position to try to come up with something to be in that range as well. Thus the 11 point AF etc. GPS and wifi were likely added to make it sound better as both of those cost next to nothing to add. Now that the D600 is out at a higher price with better specs, I can bet Canon is going back to the drawing board. These "specs" may have just been released to get feedback which if they read this forum, feedback has been loud and clear!

Pages: [1] 2