March 02, 2015, 02:19:07 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 - ranplett

Pages: [1]
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Promotional Videos for the EOS 5Ds & EOS 5Ds R
« on: February 06, 2015, 07:56:33 PM »
7360 × 4912 - Nikon D810

8688 x 5792 - Canon 5Ds

1058 x 880 pixel difference. It just seems like Canon is saying 3 years later, look what I can do!! I'd rather have a better, more well rounded camera. I think 36MP is plenty, even for studio work.

EOS Bodies / Re: FPS and Flash Sync Speed
« on: February 02, 2015, 12:52:28 AM »
A variable ND filter will fix that. Unfortunately it can also make it quite difficult to see through the viewfinder depending on the strength.

ND gels over the strobes could be easier and less costly. I also shoot 1/8000 sec at f1.4 with my 600RT EX speedlights.

Lenses / Re: EF 11-24 f/4L USM Specifications
« on: January 30, 2015, 06:03:30 PM »
Do you think this could be a good replacement for a Zeiss 21mm 2.8 and a Canon 17mm TSE? I usually leave one or the other at home, on the shelf. I don't really have much use for the TSE either. I'd probably prefer a 14-24mm 2.8 though.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS M Update Information [CR1]
« on: September 19, 2013, 03:06:41 AM »
I'm sorry, but I have yet to see one person prove the difference means anything in practice. I push/pull some of my Canon photos pretty hard, including crop sensor RAWs, without difficulty. Is there more noise then there would be on a Sony sensor while pixel peeping? Yes. Does it ruin the image when viewed normally? Can't even see it.

Sure you can underexpose a dark brick wall and shove the ACR slider to +5 and the Sony looks better. (And if you want to bias it, turn NR down or off completely.) Right up until it's compared to a properly exposed shot and you realize that A) you shouldn't rely on ACR to fix gross exposure errors, and B) if you need dramatic DR then you are best off blending exposures. Tonality is typically trashed in the dark brick wall samples people use to "prove" that Sony sensors have better DR.

Sony sensors have better DR, but not by enough to be worth the forum drama. Personally I would rather have the cleaner overall high ISO.

Oh yeah..."real photogs" do everything in their power to capture great light and/or shape their light, because light is everything. If their choice is between pushing shadow detail that has no real tonality or pushing an image that was blended or shot with a graduated ND filter, they will choose the latter if at all possible.

Hey, no need to be sorry. We can agree to disagree. From my experience, I get a lot of pattern noise when I push shadows, and they are very visible, especially if the sensor heats up (which it does quickly). This is from a 5D mk II. From the sample images I've worked with, the more recent Nikon images seem much cleaner and more workable. As for the various ways of working with light, bracketing, HDR, strobes, reflectors, scrims, etc. I think ND grads don't really apply because they are quite limited in what you can do, along with the bulk and time it takes to set up, I'd rather just bracket and manually piece the image together in PS.

A beautiful photograph is most important. I just want it to look cleaner. Pattern noise in the shadows of a 5dII image, or even 5DIII image somewhat inhibits my processing. I appreciate your perspective though. Sometimes I can be too OCD.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS M Update Information [CR1]
« on: September 18, 2013, 10:24:48 PM »
The high ISO on Canon's current FF sensors is admittedly pretty amazing. (As for the "Canon's sensors are behind!" crowd, I say the 6D is 1 stop better overall at the highest ISOs then the D600 even though the D600 has better noise in shadows that are pushed hard.)

I'd rather have cleaner pushed shadows at base ISO's, effectively improving DR over slightly less noise at ISO 12800. To me Canon sensor tech is still way behind Sony. I just love pushing shadows and pulling highlights.

Anyone using the old argument of learning the gear better, or bringing fill lights, that is such a joke. A real photog knows that they'll have to push and pull to get the image looking right.

I got the Fotodiox Wonderpana filter system for my 17.Very well built.
It accepts a 145mm filters (no Costco does not carry them) and I have a circular polarizer for it that works wonderfully.

Would love to see some samples with a polarizer and this lens. Could you show us?

Pages: [1]