March 06, 2015, 11:50:07 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 - DBCdp

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
I started out with Eneloops some years back, made the switch to Imedions from Thomas Distributing. For me, the Imedion cells give more flashes per charge. I use an 8 bay MAHA charger and am very pleased.

Y'all do know that Panasonic bought out the Sanyo Eneloop and starting here pretty darn soon the battery is undergoing some changes. The Eneloop name will be there, but very small, carrying the Panasonic name. Not a big deal I guess along with the new packaging but the real issue is that Panasonic has large facilities in China that they will be delegating production of the new Eneloops to. So they won't be made in Japan anymore. This bit may be the killer for the Eneloop. Folks in the flashlight world are very disturbed by this, as they drive a flashlight very hard compared to the way we use a flash. Many more amps pulled for top power output and they are very worried the new cells won't take it.

To see what is being said, check it out here:

Lighting / Re: The Flash Bracket? Do they really matter anymore?
« on: January 19, 2013, 12:35:59 PM »
I also use the ring flash from Really Right Stuff, have for years and love em. Very quick to adjust between portrait and landscape and not rediculously heavy. Very well made and strong enough to carry the camera by.

I have 2 of em, 4 years old or so and they pretty much look and work like the day I first got em. Great product.

They're also capable of carry double flash assemblies for macro work. ;)

Canon General / Re: Why buy from a bricks and mortar store?
« on: January 16, 2013, 10:29:53 PM »
I'd shop locally if it were an option, but it's not. Went to a store 40 minutes away with cash in hand to purchase the 135 f/2. (Took extra cause they're known to be high) They don't stock it, it's too expensive.

The other, bigger, store is 70 minutes in the other direction. Also high priced but very helpful.

In TX, you have a Sales Tax Permit and if the item is a business use it's tax exempt. So shopping at either local store would only be more expensive as the stores higher markup, which can still be substantial. The times I've made the drive to check out an item I needed, they didn't have it and the wait would be 2 weeks or more, if they could get it at all. So I go to Adorama virtually and get it here in a few days.

Small items are simply not worth the hassle of going to the city to find. The mailman or UPS comes by here whenever needed.

I would hope that basement was done from the block and mortar store...

Canon General / Re: refurbished Canon 5d mk iii
« on: January 13, 2013, 07:32:11 PM »
I don't understand why you're worried about it at this point. You decided that a refurb was worth the savings when you placed the order. You had already decided you needed this level of camera when you went about spending that $2200.  Use it for what you bought it for and don't look back!

Depreciation is an ever-present fact of business. Regardless of new/used/'re going to use the product for a period of time, then move it on towards the next product. It's very basic accounting principle in play, and once you buy the product you've accepted the facts.

Second guessing your purchase will do nothing more than keep you discontented. Be happy for the deal you made, take much delight in the product in your hand, and have fun in the use of a top tier camera. If I'd seen one at that price, you might not have had to worry about it!! :)

Has anyone else noticed Amazon selling it new for $2975??

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Need you to critique this annual calendar
« on: January 01, 2013, 10:13:07 PM »
I have to agree with several of the others points. The borders need to all be the same. There's currently more border at top than bottom. And there's more space between June/August July/Sept than the others. And why 10x14? Move to 11x14 and open up the middle, enlarge the Hawk as has been said.

Put a '13 to the right of each month in the montly headers, leave it out otherwise. Perhaps using the gold in the Hawks eyes to standardize the Month/Day/Yr text. And I also agree that the red for weekends is off, not to mention that weeks are almost always listed with Sunday first, Saturday last. Splitting the weekends like that, the red might still work.

Also agree with the suggestion to mask off the Hawk, apply some noise reduction to the background, then use some sharpening on the Hawk itself...Topaz Detail 3 or even some Viveza 2 strengthening on the bird would go a long way. Print it and enjoy!

Lenses / Re: What 2nd lens for a designer
« on: December 29, 2012, 07:03:07 PM »
The 50 1.4 tends to be sharpest at around 5.6 as is the 24-105. But, the 50 in my experience is not as contrasty, so the images don't have the pop you might be used to.

The 100 2.8 Macro is a great buy, the 100 2.8L IS Macro is that much better for hand held work. For me, I'd say the Hybrid IS would more than make up for the 1 stop speed advantage of the 100 2.

That being said, and your poll asking for a choice of 2 specific lenses with a shift on the second, I'd have to recommend the 50 1.4, so that's my choice in your poll.

Reviewers are finding the new Sigma 35 1.4 DG HSM to be very impressive though, so you might have to revise your scope on things! ;)

Lenses / Re: A few words on Adorama's customer service
« on: December 29, 2012, 06:51:19 PM »
While I haven't had a price drop issue before, I have bought over half my gear from Adorama with very good results. They're the first place I go when I need something.

Some 5 1/2 years ago I bought a 70-200 2.8L IS from B&H. Something was wrong with it, like the aperture was messed up or something, it just wouldn't take a clear picture but had clear/blur areas all over at any setting. So I called them and told them, and needed it exchanged quick as I was going to an out of state wedding. The guy sent the replacement even before I sent the defective one back so I thought all was ok. The new one worked fine and I made the trip to VA from TX without a hitch. But when I got home I found that B&H had charged me a $50 restocking fee! For a defective lens! I called, I effort ever made to resolve that issue.

That's when I found Adorama and I've been with them ever since, without a hitch! Purchased my used 1DsMkII from them on the phone, as usual it got here quickly and all was well...a very good example of the camera in excellent shape for a good price. How do you complain about that? :)

Lenses / Re: do image stabilisers decrease image quality?
« on: November 08, 2012, 06:43:57 PM »
As an aside, let me ask you to point a laser at an object while standing, say...a doorknob across the room. Can you keep the dot exactly in the center? Sitting? Laying down? Now extend the distance to what you'd shoot with a 300mm or 400mm lens. How do you like the way that dot moves now?

So basically, if we're touching the camera, we're disturbing the shot. Learn what foods and drinks skew your aim and how to control that bullseye accuracy necessary and watch your keeper rate go up! Funny how we spend thousands on the newest high tech equipment to help us in our quest, even while many of us let our own bodies go to pot (in varying degrees, intentional or not, as aging is unavoidable).

Good luck!

Lenses / Re: do image stabilisers decrease image quality?
« on: November 08, 2012, 06:38:38 PM »
This is a very good question. It would seem that it's a matter of perspective. If one handholds the camera then IS helps make the obvious difference in your own body movement. If you handhold a lens without it, then the 1:1 shutter speed/focal length rules really come into application and if you don't observe this religiously your hit rate will suffer accordingly.

My 70-200 2.8 IS was a phenomenally sharp lens 5 1/2 years ago. Now I notice it's flaws. I think the variables within ourselves far outweigh the IQ differences in IS/non IS lenses and render it a mute point.

I also remember that little test with all the filters stacked on a lens. Given, light passed through. But the IQ was horribly mutilated as I recall.

I used to try and use my old 100mm 2.8 macro for portraits and was almost always disappointed. My own fault for not obeying the 1:1 rule. My new 100Macro with IS is a far better tool for this, as it helps me where I need the help.  So, like all questions concerning lens/camera combinations...what are you using it for? What is your style? The person operating it is the weak link in most cases and the knowledge/abilities we have are almost always the limiting factor.  Can you shoot a football game with a 300 2.8? Of course. Will you get more keepers with a 300 2.8 IS? Definately! Will either one of these great lenses save you from certain disaster when the play comes your way and 5 250lb+ guys land on top of you? Sorry, not gonna happen!

So the bottom line is that there are always trade-offs and it's up to us to know what applies and when then put the best key elements into play that are available to us to make our vision a reality.  So, what am I missing? :)

Lenses / Re: Canon Announces New Lens Caps!
« on: November 06, 2012, 11:44:27 PM »
I have to agree with trojdor in that the expense/quality/need of the equipment makes it a necessity to protect it. My lenses always have caps on in the Pelican case with hood reversed. When selecting a lens it's a very quick matter to drop the caps in the bay the lens came out of and flip the hood after attaching. I also use B+W filters so that I don't have to clean the lens element itself. I've had fingerprints smudge a lens element and found it a pita to clean on site, hence the filters. Fingerprints, sweat, dust are all a big problem when the vast majority of one's working days are in the 100 degree range. Easy enough to spin one off if necessary under time constraints.

Define professional tomusan? Define amateur? I don't do so much business that I can afford replacing lenses and/or repair work regularly, would prefer to keep my profits going where I choose. Just because I don't live on the high end of professionalism doesn't mean I depend any less on my equipment.  I'll never understand why someone can get so challenging over the simplest of statements when others are trying to offer sage advice.

It's been my experience that years of experience don't necessarily make one better at what they do, all too often it just makes them very good at doing it wrong. Please take note the preface to this statement, IN MY EXPERIENCE. So if one doesn't want to be mistaken for a sniveling 19 yr old first timer, one shouldn't make such an obvious effort to sound like one!

I'm sure that as many people here are photographers there's at least that many different ways to approach the business.

Cudo's to Canon's attentiveness in a small detail. Will I purchase replacement lens caps due to the new design? Nope.

I'm looking at this in light of the way Canon has behaved in the past year. Super high MegaPixels, resolution and dynamic range a new high point....this points at the top professionals in the studio in high fashion and marketing. Those demands would want the larger, tougher, more stable 1D sized body. If the camera is going to compete with 30-40K MF camera's, they'll definately raise the bar on the price point to be a high standard for the Canon line while much lower than the competing MF line.

As much as I'd love it to be in the 5 series or such, and moderately affordable, I highly doubt Canon will see it that way. Premium camera will demand premium price point. Simple as that.

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« on: September 20, 2012, 07:45:48 PM »
My 3.2MP Pentax Optio S took wonderful pictures. My Canon 20D was soft over the entire 20K+ range I took with it. The 5D Classic I had was Superb. As is my 5DMkII. But I prefer the images from my old 1DsMkII. What does all the rhetoric actually mean without the burden of proof? Where are the PICTURES?!? 8 pages of hyperexented talk about this or that with zero pictures to back or explain any of the viewpoints!

I like the way a Canon body fits my hand. I like the build of a Pro series 1D. I do not like the ergonomics of Nikon. Either one takes pictures. Neither one composes them. Not a single camera out there sets up the lighting for a perfect shot. Who's perfect shot? Well that would have to be the client. Not the guy who buys the camera, but the multiple clients that pay for it! My client last night was tickled to death with the shots of her business taken with Canon's 5DMkII. That's what counts. Does she know about DxO? Does it matter? Does she or any of my other clients know wether Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony or Olympus would give them the look they want? Or do they simply trust me to deliver? So in the end isn't it always a subjective issue based on the need and the delivery and NOT anything at all to do with test results in the lab?

I look at DxO. I look at SLR Gear. I also read DP Review's outlook as well as delve through the pages here. And the only thing I can say with absolute certainty is that I'm not getting my Client's wedding album built while doing any of this.

Show Me The Pictures!  8)

Software & Accessories / Re: Selling Your Wedding Pics Online???
« on: September 15, 2012, 12:02:05 AM »
Mighty nice of you to be "giving" away what those in the industry count on to feed their families. Have you given any thought to tax law? If you're selling, you need a tax ID in the US. If you give a DVD, you've manufactured product and are required by law to pay tax on the "compensation for services" that you described. It has been tax exempt to allow digital files to be downloaded on the internet, this is about to change but as yet is still true as far as I know. The reason is that you have not produced a physical product...that one copy at $0.21 changes everything!

So, if your friends paid you $200 to cover your expenses and you sell 1 print...even at .21 (or $0.09)'re required to pay tax on the entire amount you got for shooting the event. Even at that minimal amount...$200.21...States in the US are willing, in this economy, to prosecute for not paying the tax and this means that they can assume (and WILL assume) you've been doing this for 10 years and hit you with whopping fines and backtaxes! Welcome to the wonderful world of doing business!

This is why pro's charge what they do for their work. Insurance, overhead, equipment costs....yada yada yada. And yeah, the desire to feed their families.

No big expert here, and for this pic it really isn't needed. When you cheat! :) Viveza2 in CS5 makes it really easy. Contrast boost 22%, Structure about 20%, Brightness 3%, Shadows a minus 7% then I used smart sharpen at 62% with a 1 px radius, masked the eagles out and used Imagenomic to take some noise out of the cropped image...mainly to soften the edges of all the leaves without dulling the details of the eagles. Voila! About 2 minutes.

Sports / Re: Shooting the Olympics - what separates us from the pros
« on: August 19, 2012, 12:02:21 PM »
Great story, amazing insights, awesome pictures! Thanks for sharing this.

And as an aside, the closing picture here with the full moon sitting behind/under the lit Olympic Rings on the Tower Bridge...during the Olympics the top guy for NBC was commenting on this "snapshot" taken of the moon. Really? A snapshot? This story helps show that there's so much more to it than simply noticing something and snapping a picture. All the planning, the footwork to be in the right place at the right time, packing the equipment in and possibly waiting hours to get that shot that you KNEW was going to be there.

Thanks for clearing up what goes into a Professional Snapshot. :)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5