1
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: CamRanger,anyone tried it?
« on: May 21, 2013, 04:31:26 AM »
Thanks again guys, it's on my wish-to-get list for sure!
May 22, 2013, 08:37:26 AM
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.
2
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Is the Sigma 35 supposed to be as sharp as the 70-200L?
« on: May 21, 2013, 03:50:38 AM »A lot of people say the Sigma is razor sharp. It just isn't nearly as sharp as my 70-200L. It is only as good as my 50 1.4. Don't get me wrong. I think it's not bad. It's just not as sharp as I was hoping. Things look nice on LCD but come out slightly disappointing on monitor. Its AF seems slow too, not as snappy as I wanted. I've never used the 35L so I can't compare. Am I expecting too much? After all, a wide angle is more difficult to make than a tele. Do people really sell their 35L to get this? Well, maybe I have a bad copy...
I was also very dissapointed in the AF-performance of the Siggy. I own the 35 L, after talking to a few people, I seem to have a very nice copy of it as it is very sharp at 1.4 and the AF is of the best I have owned and currently own, except the insane 70-200 mkII of course.
This is shot at 1.4:
3
Lenses / Re: Canon 70 - 200 f2.8L version 2
« on: May 18, 2013, 03:15:22 PM »
I've owned and used the 85 and 135 and the 70-200 II (I) a bunch of times each because my needs change. But if I were to buy only one the 70-200 II IS fantastic! I've recently forced myself to use
It, since I didn't like it before and the more I use it, the
More I love it, it is magnificent !!
It, since I didn't like it before and the more I use it, the
More I love it, it is magnificent !!
4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Do you trust your camera?
« on: May 15, 2013, 09:48:42 AM »
I use the 1d X exclusively and I can't say I KNOW it will have accurate focus as I shoot a lot with lenses that aren't optimal AF wise, like the 50 L. But mostly I blame the lenses not the camera, because I am never at fault whatsover 
I don't use One Shot and have accepted that Servo of fast moving subjects at f1.2 isn't going to be 100%, but I trust my gear enough to try ridicolous things with the AF, and very seldom is it completely off.
I always try to be better at focusing, trying different settings for different subjects all the time, and shoot a lot so I know where it's VERY accurate and where I need to blast off a few more. Using the 70-200 I would say it's 99,99%. In a situation where I can't afford to miss, I use burst to be sure.
I don't use One Shot and have accepted that Servo of fast moving subjects at f1.2 isn't going to be 100%, but I trust my gear enough to try ridicolous things with the AF, and very seldom is it completely off. I always try to be better at focusing, trying different settings for different subjects all the time, and shoot a lot so I know where it's VERY accurate and where I need to blast off a few more. Using the 70-200 I would say it's 99,99%. In a situation where I can't afford to miss, I use burst to be sure.
5
Reviews / Re: The Digital Picture Reviews the Tamron 24-70
« on: May 14, 2013, 04:15:00 PM »
Is it a way to check if a lens is decentered with Focal?
6
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: CamRanger,anyone tried it?
« on: May 13, 2013, 04:48:29 PM »Does it do tethered with Lightroom?No ... CamRanger has its own app for iPad/iPhone/iPod and it only works with that app ... but that app is excellent and works flawlessly.
Great, thanks! Oh, and it's the same app for mac.
7
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: CamRanger,anyone tried it?
« on: May 13, 2013, 12:37:30 PM »
Sweet, thanks all for your very helpful insights!
8
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: CamRanger,anyone tried it?
« on: May 13, 2013, 08:38:58 AM »
Only that it is excellent and works as advertised, then it|s good enough for me! I saw that it was for iPad/iPhone, but later saw it works as Beta on Mac aswell, which is my intended use. Does it do tethered with Lightroom?
I will be using it for the 1d X. Came across it when I was searching around for that DIY wifi-solution.
Thanks!
I will be using it for the 1d X. Came across it when I was searching around for that DIY wifi-solution.
Thanks!
9
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / CamRanger,anyone tried it?
« on: May 13, 2013, 08:00:58 AM »
Hi guys!
Saw this http://www.camranger.com/ and wondered if anyone had any experience with it? Also if there are any deals around.
Looks cool
Saw this http://www.camranger.com/ and wondered if anyone had any experience with it? Also if there are any deals around.
Looks cool
10
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: AF Adjustment : What Am i doing wrong!
« on: May 11, 2013, 04:29:04 AM »
Save yourself a lot of anger and frustration and get Focal right
Away. It gives me the accurate results I
Need. I use the 1dx with 50 L aaaaall the time. And after I bought the EC-s focusing screen it got even more fun.
Away. It gives me the accurate results I
Need. I use the 1dx with 50 L aaaaall the time. And after I bought the EC-s focusing screen it got even more fun.
11
Software & Accessories / Re: ColorChecker passport, what's wrong?
« on: May 10, 2013, 05:25:14 PM »
I actually bought the QP-card, but cancelled my order when I learned it's a piece of cardboard that comes already scratched and splattered ink and poorly glued together. I love the Passport as it is rugged and can take being used extensively and always be in my bag.
Another reason I decided to stick with the CC is that I learned that the best results isn't by using the X-rite software, but Adobe Profile Editor. And after a small amount of testing today I absolutely agree! All the things I didn't like with X-rite's results, to saturated colors, blues too blue and often off reds, is not the case with Adobe PE. It gives by far the most natural accurate results from everything I tried.
Can't wait to try outside tomorrow in different light!
Another reason I decided to stick with the CC is that I learned that the best results isn't by using the X-rite software, but Adobe Profile Editor. And after a small amount of testing today I absolutely agree! All the things I didn't like with X-rite's results, to saturated colors, blues too blue and often off reds, is not the case with Adobe PE. It gives by far the most natural accurate results from everything I tried.
Can't wait to try outside tomorrow in different light!
12
Software & Accessories / Re: ColorChecker passport, what's wrong?
« on: May 09, 2013, 10:11:00 AM »13
Software & Accessories / Re: ColorChecker passport, what's wrong?
« on: May 09, 2013, 07:00:21 AM »I have tested all reference card and software solutions,and I can tell you people that qp-card with their software solution and new smaller color card are fast and better than any other reference card and software solution on the market today to create a own color profile to your camera in different light. And the same result has the tester at the Swedish photographer covenant concluded in their test.
Do you have link to where I can get one? I like to try everything :oP
14
Lenses / Re: 35 & 85 or 50 & 100 for photographing kids
« on: May 06, 2013, 09:36:54 AM »
I use the 24, 35 and 50 when shooting the kids, I used to own the 85 (a bunch of times) and it doesn't keep up with two-three year olds. The 35 L is my favorite, I like the contact you get with the subject with wide apertures and that focal, really pops. I have gotten a few fun, cool images laying on the floor with the 24 also. i recently bought a 24-70 mk1, and that is veryvery useful with kids, I set my desired focal and move my feet to frame instead of zooming to frame, that way you can control the perspective and best of all, change it in a split-second. I find the 70-200 also very useful (and I am a prime guy) and I see people mention the 135, I have also owned that a few times, but for ME I can't really find a place for it, it's too long or too short for me. The 70-200 on FF is awesome for all sorts of people shots.
15
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM
« on: May 06, 2013, 02:26:18 AM »
I had a chance to finally try the Sigma out and it looked cool, it felt heavy and big for a 35 f1.4. Loved the focusing ring, very good color and contrast. I used LV to focus, since it wasn't afma'd, and I wouldn't trade my 35 L for it because of sharpness, others will. But all of that wasn't really important. I wanted to see if the AF is indeed "same as the 35 L" as I've seen claimed, I have always doubted that, because the 35 L is fantastic. And I was right, the AF of the Sigma feels like the 35 L in slow-motion.. VERY slow... I'm not sure if people who have tested the Sigma vs 35 L have used a 5d, and the 1d X spins the 35 L faster because of the higher battery voltage, but it's not even in the same leauge as the 35 L.
So I'll take my small light, VERY sharp, superfast AF 35 L a million times over.
So I'll take my small light, VERY sharp, superfast AF 35 L a million times over.