November 24, 2014, 07:58:47 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 - Skywise

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1
Software & Accessories / Re: BlackRapid FAIL - grrrrrr
« on: November 03, 2014, 03:10:22 PM »
In all the years of using these things, I've never had one loosen up on me.  How does that happen?  I mean, it hangs to the side, it swings up, hangs back to the side, swings up, over and over.  Where does all the twisting happen that causes these things to get so loose?  I just don't get it I guess.

In my case I was removing it when I needed to put the tripod mount on.  I've since gone to a manfrotto mount with the custom fastenR and that stays on forever but I was always leery that I was going to loosen the bolt by continuing to swap between the mounts.

2

You know the answer I think.
The 16-35 f4 is one stop less then the 2.8. So the same you did find on the comparison between the 10-22 and the 17-55, will here be the same. The 10-22 is an excellent lens on a crop body, but the f3.5 is not the strongest side of this lens for doing low light.

Yeah that was ultimately what I was thinking but I thought the FF sensor may be more of a factor than extra stops.  (as it is, the videos I took with the 16-35 on the 6D were breathtaking

3
One question I haven't seen answered - I'm heading out to Disney in a few weeks and planning on videoing the fireworks with my 6D and 16-35 F2.8II.  I've used it before with great success but I'm tempted to switch to the F4 version for regular photos plus the IS might be more advantageous while videoing but I'm leery of losing the F2.8 for the fireworks lighting.  I used to video them with a T4i and an EF-S 10-22 and the F3.5 never quite looked as good as shooting with the EF-S 17-55 F2.8 (but I preferred the wide angle of the 10-22).  That's what I'm using for comparison and I'm not sure it's fair given that I"m comparing a cropped to FF sensor as well.

How are the low light capabilities of the lens compared to the f2.8 version?

4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: clown* photographer
« on: October 23, 2014, 11:47:48 AM »
It's not the size of the tool.. it's what you do with it.   ;D

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 02, 2014, 09:01:23 AM »
If it goes EVF ... will Canon make it mirrorless? No more mirror-slap would be good!

Interesting to see how far Canon will go with this...

But obviously they're preparing themselves to do mirrorless in an SLR styled body, a la Sony A7.

I would think it'd have to be mirrorless - It doesn't make any sense to have a mirror relay the image to a secondary sensor for the EVF?

At that point though you have to start questioning why the need for a live display on the back and a tiny one with a magnifying glass that you can...see the exact same thing on the larger display with.  (Bright light conditions being one problem an EVF solve but I think that could be resolved some other way.)

7
It may be cool for your posterity too.

My grandfather was big into photography using slide film (any family get together it was assumed he'd be pulling out the projector for the latest trips).  After he died the slides got put into storage or distributed out among the family members.  A few years back I decided to go through the effort of scanning them all.

I came across a photo of the golden gate bridge he had taken in the 60s looking south with a hill on the right side and a large "bush" on that hill.

I realized I had taken nearly that same shot almost 40 years later and checked it out and that bush was still there... except it was obviously a TREE and had grown several feet in that time!

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D II or 6D
« on: September 15, 2014, 11:02:01 PM »
Coming from a cropped camera background (rebel xti, t2i and t4i) the 6D is going to take better portraits, period.

It will take FANTASTIC low light shots as well as video.

Where the 6D will fail is anything where you don't have the time to line up the shot.  The AF is good for static subjects but the 7D (and most likely the 7D II's) AF will outperform it everytime.

That doesn't mean the 7DII's shots will be bad, because they won't be.  They'll be phenomenal as well (just not as good as the 6D in most cases because this is a cropped sensor).

There's also other issues - A cropped camera and its lenses will be cheaper then an FF for the bang.  A 7D plus the 17-55F2.8 is an unbeatable combination and I think I still prefer the 17-55F2.8 to my 6D's 24-70F2.8 because it has IS and was $1000 cheaper!

9
Lenses / Re: The New EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
« on: September 11, 2014, 04:05:14 PM »
This could also be a decent transition lens from cropped to FF.  You could do video with AF on a cropped body right now then upgrade to FF with a 6D II next year?

(I checked and, no, the 6D can't do video AF with STM)

10
Lenses / Re: The New EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
« on: September 11, 2014, 09:45:39 AM »
I forget... does the 6D support AF while videoing using STM?

11
Photography Technique / Re: Is RAW worth it?
« on: September 10, 2014, 12:09:16 PM »
One more point - I shoot RAW+JPG.  I'll tend to shoot several hundred pictures per trip and friends/family members almost always want copies immediately so I take all the JPGs and put them on a CD for them. (You can set Lightroom to auto-convert but it's just more convenient to have the camera do it for me.)   Later, I'll go over the pictures and pull out the several dozen I really like and process them from their original RAWs.  (Also, having the camera's JPGs helps me with a point of reference when processing the RAWs)

12
Photography Technique / Re: Is RAW worth it?
« on: September 10, 2014, 10:38:01 AM »
Like others have said:
In ye olde school terminology shooting JPGs is akin to developing AND processing/printing your picture in the camera immediately.  The processing is done according to several settings you have access too and a few which you don't.

Shooting RAW is akin to developing the picture but there's almost no processing done on the image (I believe the camera's sensor auto-correct still applies)

This gives you total control over the processing after the fact using a program like DPP or Lightroom... YEARS after the fact.  I shot RAW on a few trips on a T2i years ago based on a friend's recommendation.  I understood the concept and certainly realized that storing all the sensor data was better than a lossy JPG but I never *got* the point because I didn't have Lightroom or any other decent post processing package at the time.  Then I got Lightroom to touch up some more recent shots and WHOA!  Suddenly I felt like a professional photographer making photos you'd see in a glossy magazine!  I was bringing detail out of shadows from photos that I thought I had screwed up at the time, making colors pop, correcting brightness issues.

Then I went back and started messing around with the T2i photos.  I took a trip to Vegas several years back and had gotten a sunset that looked beautiful in reality but the JPG was...meh...  Lots of editing the JPG in a photoshop like program didn't help much either.  But with the RAW and Lightroom I was able to adjust the exposure settings and my yellow sunset on bright blue sky turned into the burnt orange cinnamon sunset I had recalled with all the neon lights popping out...

The Bellagio fountains at night which were a nice amber color regardless of which white balance I seemed to set (really T2i?  Amber? WTF are you thinking?) I was able to correct in Lightroom and then enhanced the image to get everything to "pop" just so.  (Although my family still prefers the amber shots... go figure...)

13
Having a PIN to enable each lens to a given body strikes me as feasible - no aperture/AF/IS without it.  The disable-after-24 hour thing is interesting also.

Jim

I was thinking that too but what about those of use that have multiple bodies that use the lenses interchangeably on the shoot - You'd have to be able to pair a lens to X bodies and then "lock" it from being paired to any other camera.  Then, of course, there'd have to be someway to reset that when customers forget their PIN so I think that would all be pretty easily bypassable.


maybe a programmable joystick/button sequence....that way I can relive my youth and feel like I'm still playing mortal kombat.

up-up-down-down-left-right-left-right-menu-play.  :)

14
It sounds like a Magic Lantern request ;D.  Personally I'd never use this - I find the minor delay between turning on my camera and shooting to be bad enough as is!

Just put a fingerprint scanner on the power switch like the iPhone!  I've NEVER had a problem with that!   ;D

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 6D N
« on: July 11, 2014, 02:26:28 PM »
I've heard that the GPS is useful for setting the camera clock accurately.  Wish i'd done that on an Alaska train trip i took last year where i was snapping wildly with two cameras, and the camera clocks were a few minutes apart.  Trying to synchronize the pictures afterwards was a huge pain.

The problem with the GPS is that it takes FOR-EVER to acquire a signal (on the order of minutes, not seconds) even if you're in an open structure like an airport at 5am in the morning.  Heck, even on the airplane I tried turning it on and still couldn't get a signal in under 3 minutes.

The Wifi is cool (if not a little quirky) for quick downloading images to my smartphone for texting.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4