December 20, 2014, 01:11:43 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.

Messages - Khufu

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
Lenses / Re: FF Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 IS lens pricing announced
« on: December 19, 2014, 01:35:47 PM »
I can certainly see the appeal of it, but as you mentioned already, from an Events PoV... Also, UWA videography has possibly just gotten a fricktonne more exciting for lots of folk!

Lenses / Re: $600 burning a hole in your pocket?
« on: December 19, 2014, 01:32:48 PM »
2 or 3 EOS M Cameras with the 22mm f/2 and 18-55mm, if they're still available so cheap and her editor's got some time to spare for multicam edits?! ;)

otherwise, yeah, the 35mm could be a wise investment if anyone's planning on hand-holding... Otherwise a few cheaper, fast prime lenses like the new 24mm f/2.8 plus a 50mm prime lens could be fun!

I really don't think L Series lenses are necessary (the costly, professional, obsessively refined and grossly expensive lenses)

Also, apologies if slightly patronising  (I'm not familiar with those involved!) but it could be worth considering how happy people are with the audio quality and if investing in that area could be more worthwhile, bearing in mind high quality audio with crappy footage vs vice-versa?.. Clean audio wins EVERY tiime :) we all know 5 minutes clicking around on YouTube can demonstrate that!

Another lens? A fast zoom like the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 could offer lots! There are stabilised and non-stabilised versions, apparently non-IS is shaper but I can't imagine the stabilised version would be bad for video at all!

Lenses / Re: Quick Comparison: Canon's new 400mm Options
« on: December 19, 2014, 01:14:07 PM »

Google brought me back around to the CR forum where some of you guys were comparing various 400mm Canon lenses around this time last year - interesting stuff! I'm not really sure how to compare these figures with this thread's figures though - but as was always the case, the prime wasn't looking too bad at all in December 2013... :)


Lenses / Re: Quick Comparison: Canon's new 400mm Options
« on: December 19, 2014, 12:26:05 PM »
Numbers! I'm safe to assume bigger numbers mean better, er, awesomeness, right?

Looks like they forgot to throw the 400mm f/5.6L prime in the mix ;)

Really though, I think there are plenty of us wondering how our trusty primes measures up and if it's finally time to grab something a little more "new-school"... But judging by people's responses to the improvement, giving me the impression it's marginal regarding the non-DO, I'm inclined to ask if hopping over is a bad idea if IS and de-zooming is of little interest unless stepping up to throwing cash at a DO purchase. Thoughts, anyone?

I don't really know all this chart stuff inside or at the moment but I'll have a nose around these sites, see if there's any data on the prime that makes sense to me :)

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 18, 2014, 11:03:58 AM »
3D? It looks so... real  ::)

I get the prehistoric reference but, really, does anyone reeeally believe this is more likely to be called a 3D than a 4D or the flying spaghetti camera? Not that I don't believe it's coming, just that... '3D'?

certain AA lithium batteries, in rare cases, may become extremely hot during usage in such products.

Certain? Particular? Precise brand selection?... They could never let us know which though, not without years of rigorous scientific testing, that would be slanderous and could provoke lawsuits! Not telling us though, that could be dangerous and provoke lawsuits!

My lithium batteries just here say they're suitable for camera flashes. I don't know who to believe!

I might do if phones hadn't taken a step backwards, in my experience, over the past 8-10 years in regards to how quickly you can access the camera and get shooting. My iPod 5 is pretty handy though... and I'll only use these devices' cameras in a journaling kinda' way, to document a happening or a... thing, you know, like sticking your dinner on Facebook? Yeah, that.

I've downsized to the EOS M and SL1 for APS-C quality and find myself considering anything bigger with such a sensor to be a bit daft... But I think most people here are aware of the benefits of sensor size when choosing to lug around a dSLR ;)

...oh, and I'm totally getting me a Sony a7 series body in good time so I can leave the 5D3 at home.

wait, what was your question? Nevermind - I'm sure I must have answered somebody's question, at least!

Canon General / Re: Canon USA Addresses the Gray Market
« on: December 17, 2014, 12:01:59 AM »
I feel so foolish now for having paid £1800 for a 5D3 when it was being sold locally for just £2999.99 without running the risk of receiving an incorrect power cord   :-\

That power cord must be made of pure gold to be worth £1199

*sigh* I guess I'll never know...

I also grabbed a cheeky £620 70D instead of paying around £900... I'm such a cretin. I must be a Nikon employee or something, abusing Canon like this on an international scale.

Lenses / Re: What would you choose to compliment a 50mm prime?
« on: December 16, 2014, 11:45:11 PM »
Meh. I'm a fast prime shooter (well, at 399mm and below...) and love my go-to selection and would probably grab them all again if they disappeared!

24mm f/1.8 Sigma
50mm f/1.4 Sigma
100mm f/2 Canon EF
400mm f/5.6L Canon EF

Lovely :)

From the selection you're considering I'd most likely enjoy the UWA to shoot stopped down, I guess.
Have you considered how cheap, small, awesome and fast Canon's EF 100mm f/2 is? Just throwing that one out there :)

Canon General / Re: Canon USA Addresses the Gray Market
« on: December 16, 2014, 10:43:58 PM »
I feel so foolish now for having paid £1800 for a 5D3 when it was being sold locally for just £2999.99 without running the risk of receiving an incorrect power cord   :-\

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Canon EOS Rebel SL1 w/18-55 IS STM $323
« on: December 16, 2014, 03:17:31 PM »
The small sizes of the SL1 and EOS M have never bothered me like they seem to bother others. I generally perch the cameras on the butt of my left hand and use the tips/pads of my right hand's digits to hit the buttons and make contact with the grips. I wonder if this just comes more naturally to me and if others who work with their hands less tend to try clutching at everything in life with the palms of their hands... But I really don't experience these apparent problems, though I do find myself sometimes extending my little finger out and underneath these camera bodies.

There are super-cheap third party grips on ebay! I'd been considering getting one myself. Can't find any pictures of an SL1/100D with a grip mounted though, but there are shopped pictures of how it should look. Lots of the eBay grips come with IR remote triggers, too... bonus!

Freaking love the SL1, it's brilliant with the 100mm f/2 USM and the old 50mm and 35mm primes sit beautifully on it... as do adapted old Pentax, Helios et al lenses :)

PPPS. I bet those grips can be inserted into the EOS M battery compartment if anyone's looking to make a monster ;)

Lenses / Re: Yongnuo EF YN 50mm F/1.8
« on: December 16, 2014, 10:47:42 AM »
You pointed out the reason.  If it rips off any Canon patents, it's likely expired ones.
Expired patents = public domain prior art = no cause of action for a lawsuit

Right, that would be it - I'm forgetting just *how* old this lens is and how long Canon has been developing lenses. Probably just the reason why Yn is releasing 50/1.8 and 50/1.4 just now, they had to wait for the oldest lenses to be not protected anymore.

Imho suits Canon right, still producing a dinosaur like the 50/1.8 needs to be punished.

Yeah but the Mark 1 is a solid, little workhorse... with the Mark II they added a nifty feature where the lens barrel pops right out of there! Imagine what they can do with a Mark III when considering all the more recent developments in thrifty plastic manufacturing!

EOS Bodies / Re: Noise - maybe it's good?
« on: December 16, 2014, 10:34:50 AM »
If you are trying to pass your noisy pics as art to the Technogeeks on this forum your pictures are not going make the grade.

However if you take it to other forums it might be ok and accepted.

This for the most part is the wrong crowd to consult on this matter.

I wasn't trying to pass off my crappy pics as anything other than what they are.  I mostly lurk here and there are endless discussions of noise in the pics.  I can see the noise as well as anyone but sometimes it seems like people can't see the picture for the noise.

Like that crappy pic.  Yeah, it's noisy, but I love that picture.  I'd much rather have that picture, noise and all, than not have it.

The guy who I suspect might agree is Dustin Abbott, in reading his review of the canon 35mm vs the Sigma, he seems to be looking at the picture more than the technical stuff.

...and I love that you have and get to love that picture, too!

You've noticed there's conflicting opinions here already so I don't see any need to dismiss everyone here as being on one side of a fence and ready to collectively attack or agree with any single posting or opinion - carry on being curious and inquisitive, we'll never let the internets wear us down! ;D

EOS Bodies / Re: Noise - maybe it's good?
« on: December 16, 2014, 10:30:31 AM »
Also, the picture of the lady before this shot (clicking "back" or "left" or whatever) I think is a much better example of shooting decent pictures in these conditions, and compositionally speaking, too. I much prefer how the subject is placed, both in regards to the framing and the background, in this image! There's no harm in throwing yourself around a little to see how framing and arrangement of foreground and background details can compliment an image... not doing is why "that guy" with all the expensive gear who doesn't move around much always produces "meh" shots ;) 

EOS Bodies / Re: Noise - maybe it's good?
« on: December 16, 2014, 10:19:14 AM »
I've got several digital photographs per day for a period of around 3 or 4 years which were all taken on camera phones, interestingly in a time when the camera functions were much quicker to access and shoot with (first Sony Walkman phones with cameras, circa 2006, anyone?! You just slid over a lens cover, documented your day and had it back in your pocket within seconds).

I actually believe this practice developed and benefited my framing skills immensely, technically learning to frame with the restrictions of a prime lens and alls... the colours were often wonderful in bright daylight (and the wee LED light much preferable to camera flashes) - but to look at now, yeah, these images can be terribly grainy, full of digital artifacts and often with poor focus or blurred exposures... but they're amazing... to me. They document my everyday endeavours with people I know and love and I'd be gutted if I were to lose them.

I doubt there are any I'd push for publication in a technical photography magazine or the likes though.

This picture you've shared is great. Your fellow being looks happy and warm & friendly and it's great to capture this!

I personally shoot a fair amount of High ISO, monochromatic pictures with my EOS M & 22mm f/2 lens and I love them, both technically and emotively, to varying degrees!

Since "going full frame" I've come to really appreciate the perspective and artstic merit of a larger focal plane and, trying not to sound like a b*****d, it often feels kind of silly and unnecessary to me that anyone would purchase anything larger and more expensive than an EOS M or SL1 to shoot people or their immediate environment with a crop-sensor system. I really do feel that, whilst the APS-C sensor is a massive step-up from many compact cameras, these larger/apparently more advanced bodies and their expenses are quite excessive, ridiculous even, for photographing friends, family and interiors. (Harsh when people have invested so many pennies, I know, but it's how I feel...)

Simply, there are cheaper, more compact, larger sensor cameras with superior low-light capabilities out there than the EOS 7D2...

Whilst I'm being self-rightious about this stuff - I do really like the perspective of the 22mm on the EOS M but between that and around 100mm, maybe 85mm focal length, I see these photos and they really do feel cropped and compromised to me in a way that would prompt me to just wish I'd shot with the 22mm.

Technically though, eek... there's a lot of compromise here, the image is very soft so there's no magical sparkle in your friend's eyes. The EOS M, and I assume the 7D2, has great jpeg sharpenning/High ISO Noise Handling features though, so banging that right up alongside the High ISO and switching to monochrome can really help produce some great results! I've not even touched on colour noise, have I? Well, I'm going to stop typing now anyways... but I do think it looks better in Black and White ;)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9