November 26, 2014, 10:28:35 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 - RGF

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 87
Lenses / Re: Lens as a gift. Non Photographer buying... :)
« on: Today at 11:22:04 AM »
A B&H Gift Card

Cash is simpler and allows her to pick her store.

Not sure but Canon seems to charge for hood.  Strange since all my other L lenses came with a hood

Lenses / Re: Lens as a gift. Non Photographer buying... :)
« on: November 25, 2014, 09:31:15 AM »
you say you want to get her a mid range zoom

Good choice - the wide angles is over covered and the 70-300 covers that range well.

Canon makes 2 lens you could consider

24-70  (L version - $$$)
24-104 (L version - $ to $$)

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 25, 2014, 09:20:55 AM »
I browse this website quite often since 2012. I have never seen so many negative comments about Canon these days in comparison with before.
Does Canon really not satisfying its customers lately or is it that there are new members in the forum who like to put down Canon in comparison with other companies?

It is fun to complain - and to do it on line without having look the other person in the eye, is even more fun.  I can get nastier than I would in person  ::)

Bottom line - no but human nature is lash out.

Software & Accessories / Re: No LR 5.7 version for CC (yet)
« on: November 25, 2014, 12:11:33 AM »
Eventually showed up, about 8-12 hours after announcement.

EOS Bodies / Re: Another 50mp FF DSLR Mention [CR2]
« on: November 24, 2014, 02:13:09 PM »

it's possible - the 7DII sensor scaled up would be 51.2Mp - close enough to 50Mp to call it spades.

Will the new camera have a Bayer sensor or something more akin to the Foveon multilayer sensor?  If the later, is that 50 actual MP or equivalent (Perhaps 25 actual MP but claim twice the resolution)?

Software & Accessories / No LR 5.7 version for CC (yet)
« on: November 19, 2014, 07:20:17 PM »
I used the link to upgrade my LR CC (on Mac) and found that I had provide serial number to activate LR 5.7.  I uninstalled it and reinstalled the latest version using Adobe CC ap manager.  Got LR 5.6 installed and when I checked for an update there was none.

Wonder if there is LR 5.7 for Win and when the LR 5.7 CC mac version will be available.

I had a minor problem with 10.10.1 - softraid driver needed to be updated when I updated the OS.  Seemed that I lost my Thunderbolt disks but not my TB monitor so I started to look at disk.  Found that non-raid disks worked well so I eventually I narrowed it down.  Took around 12 hours (clock time) but only 1-2 hours of my time (ran errands and had meetings for most of the time).

Lenses / Re: 400mm thoughts
« on: November 17, 2014, 01:09:56 AM »
I had the 400 DO and found that the image looked a bit soft until I sharpened them.  Then they were very good, but not quite great.  I think a lot of people commented on this.  The lens is lighter than my 300 F2.8 (v1) though the 300 was sharper.

The real advantage of the DO is its weight.  You save around 1/3 the weight off a similar non-DO lens.  Of course your wallet is also that much lighter.

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Need Best Monitor for Photo Edits
« on: November 11, 2014, 05:41:50 PM »
NEC Spectraview series.
Sold my PA271 and looking to upgrade to the PA322 - this is a 4K monitor, with SpectraView calibration, available any day now.

I recommend a look at Lloyd Chambers "Mac Performance Guide" regarding the new iMac.

He is reviewing 4K monitors, should have the LG up for review soon.

Lastly, here is a interesting article regarding true monitor calibration:

Thanks.  Very interesting.  One thing I have is that I need to keep my monitor brightness turned down, else the monitor is too bright and the print is too dark.  I know a lot of people who have work around for this (apply a curve, adjust levels x points, ...) but in the end, just dim your monitor.  It is much simpler.

I was going to get one of the 82mm UV filters when I remembered that I have almost 2 dozen B+W filters tucked away and never used.  UV, ND, Pol, I just don't use filters.  so, I forced myself to resist adding another one.

I have a draw full of 81A, 81B, from my film days.

I occasionally use a UV filter in bad, windy weather but most of the time I don't have on the camera.

I do use CP and afterward regret not using them more.

And of course ND filters (3 and 6 stop mostly).


Spec sheets make for good marketing materials, but the proof is in the pudding of shooting through the filter.  Color cast and consistency of the NDs?  Flare resistance?  Build quality (it's more than just materials)?  Thread quality, resistance to cross-threading and thread wear/damage?  Resistance to polarizer delamination and other environmental damage?

I'm intrigued and I'm not saying that these filters necessarily lack in those respects.  But those qualities haven't been proven either.  That only comes with direct comparisons of performance against competitors and experience over time.

+1 Like to see a review on IQ and build quality.  Without real world tests, it is hard determine if this is good deal or not worth the $

Besides I think this post is nothing short of an advertisement.

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Need Best Monitor for Photo Edits
« on: November 08, 2014, 12:17:09 AM »
I am running a 27" NEC spectra view and I found that I get much better colors out of it than any other monitor I have used.  HIGHLY HIGHLY recommended.

EOS Bodies / Re: do you hope for sony sensors in the 5D MK 4?
« on: November 07, 2014, 02:00:45 AM »
Hope yes

Expect no

Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 06, 2014, 10:25:48 AM »
Sweet!  Looks like the length might be similar to the 70-200/4. 

I think performance is a gimme, the price is what will dictate when I'd upgrade from the 70-300L (unless I can convince myself that both lenses can live together   :P )

I bought the 70-300L mainly for it's compact size for travel (chose it over the 70-200/4 IS for the shorter length, more a concern to me than weight).  I could see having both the 70-300L and 100-400L II in a kit.  Perhaps not mine (I already sold my 100-400, wasn't really using it after getting the 600 II).   

If this new 100-400 takes TCs and only a minimal IQ hit from the 1.4x (similar to the 70-200 II), I'd consider getting it as a more portable birding lens (size precludes the 150-600 3rd party zooms for me, that big I'll just take the 600 II).

I, too, have the 70-300 and plan to get the 100-400 II (assuming its IQ is as good as the rumors claim).

The challenge for me will be 70-200 F2.8 II and 200-400 or the 100-400 II and 600 II.  the 70-200/200-400 will be lighter and sharper but the 100-400/600 will have longer reach and sharper at the long end.

Nice to have options  ;D ;D

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 87