March 04, 2015, 03:49:24 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 - Plato the Wise

Pages: [1] 2 3
Get the 70-200 2.8L and one of the non-L macros or extension tubes if your strapped for cash.

70-200 2.8L is big, but it is great for portraits.

Canon General / Re: Havasupai Falls
« on: October 08, 2013, 01:08:18 PM »
17-40 and 70-200 if would want to travel light. You will have pretty much all focal lengths needed. Don't underestimate the use of a telephoto for landscapes. You can isolate interesting subjects and flatten/compress vistas.

Lenses / Re: Need advice taking pictures of jewellery
« on: May 03, 2013, 11:36:34 AM »
Use a light tent that is brightly lit.

It will keep unwanted reflections to a minimum and give you soft, wrap around lighting.

If you show some photos, it would probably be easier for people to comment.

Black & White / Re: street please!
« on: May 03, 2013, 11:09:48 AM »
The same rules apply to color or black and white. Composition, line and form, pattern and juxtaposition of visual elements all play a critical roll in making something visually interesting.

I agree that seeing in Black and white is BS. Everyone sees in color unless you are colorblind. Envisioning what something will look like reproduced in black and white is a skill that is learned through practice and patience.

As an artist who works in a wide range of mediums in addition to photography I have learned to do this. When you have to draw something in black and white, you learn to interpret color as values and through trial and error learn what works and what renders flat.

With that said, your first images looks like street photography to me. The second violates the rule of observation. The subject should be involved in their activity and not the photographer.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS 40D?
« on: April 28, 2013, 02:29:05 PM »
I had a 40D and it was a great camera. I only sold it because I purchased a 5D mII. Good value, frame rate is decent, build quality is far superior to the rebels, and RAW files are great to work with since they switched to 14 bit from the prevous 12 bit on the 30D.

You should be very happy.

With that said - your lens choice will make a huge difference in image quality and lenses hold their resale value longer. So spend a little more on the lenses and I promise you that you'll not regret it. The 18-135mm is the perfect walk around lens and has excellent image and build quality for the price. It's the rough equivalent to a 28 to 200 mm on full frame.

50 mm is a bad choice for a crop body. It's two tight. If you would rather have a decent "standard" prime, get the Canon 28mm 1.8 or the Sigma 30mm 1.4 v1 - which you can find for a steal at $350 right now because they are coming out with a new version. I have both and they yield excellent results and are usable wide open.

Shoot 100 ISO with a flash or studio lighting and have the shutter speed high enough to block all ambient light.

I have shot with Hasselblads, Nikons, Canons - both film and digital. The sharpest images come from fast studio lights freezing motion and creating strong contrast (paired with decent camera and lens of course).

Rent a Prophoto or other high end studio rig for a weekend.

Canon General / Re: What's your definition of "Pro"?
« on: February 07, 2013, 02:33:22 PM »
I don't see this question as black and white as some.

There are so many different types of photography and markets for different types of photos that the term pro or professional doesn't really apply.

For example - Ansel Adams was a fine art photographer. He didn't shoot weddings or to my knowledge even do any commercial work. Would you consider him a pro? He studied music and probably was broke for the early part of his career.

Professors at University's very often produce fine art photos or do commercial work in addition to teaching. Are they not professional photographers because they don't make photos "Full Time."

I know many photographers who earn all of their income through photography and even their work is not so cut and dry. They sell stock, make fine art prints, shoot photos for ads, or work on portraits for politicians.

Animal Kingdom / Re: images from our Aug -Nov 2012 photosafari
« on: January 17, 2013, 08:20:40 PM »
Beautiful work!

Would love some additional information on lenes used etc. Post more!

EOS Bodies / Re: 5dc still relavent
« on: January 13, 2013, 10:58:32 AM »
Thet depends on what you are shooting now and what lenses you have. $450 sounds like a good price, but if you are shooting aps C bodies now and you have mostly EFS glass - you'll need some full frame lenses in order to use it. If you are shooting with L glass already on aps C then it would make sense as an entry into full frame. If you are shooting anything else full frame - don't bother.

The tech in this camera is nearly ten years old now. They take great photos, but you will be at a disadvantage in several areas, especially high iso photography.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Pocket Camera
« on: January 09, 2013, 02:55:26 PM »
Taken last summer with the Olympus TG-1

Little cropping and tweaking in PS.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Pocket Camera
« on: January 09, 2013, 01:16:58 PM »
I have two options:

Canon G10 and the Olympus TG1 - Tough.

I've had the G10 for quite some time - but it still works great for snapshots and it just fits in my pockets on most pants and shorts. It easily fits in a coat pocket. I like the option to adjust things manually if I want to and to shoot RAW.

The TG-1 is an awesome camera. It's what I take on fishing trips or to the beach. Anywhere where I do not want to risk my other cameras getting damaged. It doesn't shoot raw or have all the other bells and whistles of some of the other cameras - but it's built like a mini-tank. The photos are pretty decent - but no RAW or Manual control.

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS Resolution Tests
« on: January 04, 2013, 06:46:00 PM »
I'm really disappointed with the price-point of this lens.

While I like the 24-105 - the barrel distortion at 24mm is really annoying. If this lens were under $1K - I would definitely be in the market for it and trade in my 24-105.

From the tests it seems reasonably sharp. It is weather sealed, has IS, is small, and has a lot less distortion. It would be perfect to carry as a companion to a couple of primes.

Reviews / Re: My Mini-Review of the 85mm 1.2L II.
« on: January 02, 2013, 11:34:50 PM »
Just my Little mini-review of this sweet lens. Feel free to critique it if you like, I don't do many reviews.

85/1,2 is a fine lens but 90% you can do with the much cheaper Canon  85/1,8  which is also optically better.
I do not understand the hype around 85/1,2 and 50/1,2. is it the price and  looks impressive?
min.distance not short enough for tight portraits , slooooow AF and  LoCa.
Mine is not used a day since I got the  70-200/2,8 IS MK2.

Look at som details around the lovely dog, some blades of grass look almost synthetic and the bokeh is nervous, looks better with 135/2.0.

I have both the 50L and 85L and have shot the 85 1.8 and reviewed work shot with the 50 1.4.

The non-L versions are nice lenses, but they are NOT in the same class as the L versions. The richness in color, the contrast, and bokeh on the L versions are superior.

They don't have the same look at all. Some lenses impart a quality to the image capture that is hard to describe in words alone. The only comparison I can make here is that quality is imparted by other lenses, such as the Zeiss versions of the old hasselblad lenses. And I am in no way equating the look of a Zeiss lens with a Canon L. They are much different. But both have a distinct look that the lower end lenses lack.

Lenses / Re: 5D3 + 50 F1.2 L
« on: December 30, 2012, 01:48:52 AM »
I have a 5DM3 and the 50L.

At f1.2 and close distances - say a half meter - the depth of field is less than 5mm! Even if you do get the AF dead on, you and or your subject will more than likely move enough to throw off the focus.

It's a futile effort.

Just to put this into perspective. I have shot tight portraits where one eye is in focus - but the eyelashes are not.

I have heard of many people on this forum sending 3 or 4 copies of the 50L and the 80L back to try and find one that focuses perfectly. These are just very specialized lenses. Most folks just don't understand their purpose and the mechanical tolerances involved.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Cannot Keep Screwing It's Customers Over
« on: December 22, 2012, 09:06:46 AM »
I don't want anyone to think I am a fanboy - but I don't think the 5D Miii is way overpriced.

When I first started shooting digital circa 2000, making the shift from film, I switched from Nikon 35mm to canon 10D. Since the,  I have been tied to the system I had decided was best at the time. Each camera from that time has offered excellent image quality and features, all on par or in some cases better than Nikon.

Fast forward to 2012, and I was an early adopter of the 5D miii. Knowing full well that the price would drop, I took the risk to get a camera that on paper boasted all of the features I was looking for. I have not regretted my decision one bit. The camera is astonishingly good, allowing me to shoot in situations that were impossible with previous cameras.

Is the price high? Yes. But it is worth every penny. I have the 5D Mii, which I thought was really great when I bought it. The Miii is leaps and bounds better. Even the build feels more solid.

Innovation and higher standards cost more money. And other than the 1DX, this is the best camera Canon has ever offered and at half the price of the flagship model.

Is it better than the Nikon D800? I honestly don't know - and don't care. I have too many lenses and flashes to even think about switching systems. As someone else stated earlier - if you can't afford it - then it is not the right camera for you. Be happy with what you have and create the best work you can.

 In the end, no one cares if you shot a master work with a Rebel or a D800 or 1DX. Other than fellow photographers, no one has ever asked me what camera I shot a great photo with.

Pages: [1] 2 3