Messages

1

Software & Accessories / Re: Help me finalize my tripod & ballhead choice

« on: April 20, 2013, 08:29:48 AM »

Thanks again everyone for all the excellent suggestions and tips.  I really got some great advice and I’m sure it will be very helpful for lots of other folks too.  I looked into every single person’s suggestion and came up with the two following options:

Option 1:
Gitzo - GT-2531 (3 section, 26.46 load, CF)
RRS – BH-40 LR (mid-size 18 lb load)
RRS – B5D3A plate (AS plate for 5D3 body)

Total cost with current rebates $992


Option 2:
Manfrotto - 055CXPRO4 (4 section, 17.64 load, CF)
Manfrotto - 468MGRC2 (Magnesium Hydrostatic Ballhead, 22 lb load)

Total cost with current rebates $540


I’m going with option 1.   Is it an overkill for my needs/uses?  Probably, but I hoping this will last my lifetime.  Although option 2 is very nice gear and nothing to snarl at, I will always wish I had gone with option 1.  Later I will pick up a Wimberley P-20 plate for my 70-200 ring and a plate for my 7D.

Now the one piece of advice I’ll give back (and what so many others have already given):  Don’t buy a mediocre tripod and head.  You will become frustrated like I did and end up spending more money in the long run.  I broke my own rule and did not buy a quality item in the first place. 

A great tripod/ballhead setup is one that you can keep for a lifetime (as a matter of speaking). The added cost doesn't really matter then. A good or mediocre one is one that you'll upgrade sooner or later and in the end it will cost as much or more....

Sounds like a good, future proof plan. Also, given the fact that you have an expensive camera (5D3), I wouldn't go cheap on a tripod/ballhead setup.

2

Software & Accessories / Re: Help me finalize my tripod & ballhead choice

« on: April 16, 2013, 01:19:14 PM »

Quite easy.

1) Tripod: Gitzo or RRS
..............

Why?

What additional functionality do you get from the $700 Gitzo or the $900 RRS that a $400 Manfrotto doesn't give you?

I am all for quality engineering, and there will always be customers for Rolls Royce, but if the object is to safely drive around surely a Mercedes "will do" for most people, especially when cost was mentioned originally by RC.

After trying Gitzos, I just don't see the cost/function equation approaching that of the Manfrottos. I have never owned a RRS tripod, but clearly I do value their brackets and plates, but again, whilst you might get a fraction more stability sometimes for your $900, unless you have nothing better to spend $500 on, or you truly do NEED that last fraction of performance, or if you have requirements RC doesn't, then the far cheaper options are more than up to the simple task of holding an average weight camera and short tele lens a few feet off the floor.

If the OP said "I have a 600 f4" then the added cost of the beefier tripods is a small supertele tax, but in this instance is just not needed. I use the Manfrotto fine with a 300 f2.8, 2xTC and 1 series body, way over the stated requirements of RC.

A great tripod/ballhead setup is one that you can keep for a lifetime (as a matter of speaking). The added cost doesn't really matter then. A good or mediocre one is one that you'll upgrade sooner or later and in the end it will cost as much or more as the great one mentioned in my first sentence. I made that mistake once with my first tripod... With longer exposures every tiny bit of extra vibration is seen in your final image. But if it has to be cheaper I'd probably go for a Feisol or Benro tripod with a Sirui ballhead or something like that.

3

Software & Accessories / Re: Help me finalize my tripod & ballhead choice

« on: April 16, 2013, 12:23:53 PM »

Quite easy.

1) Tripod: Gitzo or RRS
2) Ballhead: Arca-Swiss (Monoball Z1 sp or dp) or RRS (BH-55)

I have a Gitzo GT3541XLS tripod and an Arca-Swiss Monoball Z1 sp ballhead. The ballhead feels like it's bulletproof. Just by holding it you immediately notice that you're dealing with a top quality product.

4

Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?

« on: March 28, 2013, 01:57:12 PM »

My parents wanted a digital camera in (I believe) 2003. I helped them with the decision after reading various reviews on the internet. After hearing my advice, they bought a Canon Powershot A40. My parents actually never used the camera. I always took the pictures even though I didn't know anything about photography back then and I always used the fully automatic mode. I have always been very satisfied of that camera except for the low resolution (1600x1200).

In the beginning of 2010 I wanted to spend some money on any "gadget". At first I wanted to buy a videocamera, but a friend of mine told me to get a DSLR since they could shoot video too. And the "reading reviews on the internet" phase was there again backed up by my good experiences with the Powershot A40.

I finally decided to get the 550D with the 18-55mm kitlens after reading the review on dpreview. I also learned everything about exposure/lenses thanks to the video tutorials of Ben Long on the lynda website. At first I was blown away by the difference in image quality compared to the Powershot A40.

After about a year I experienced that anything past ISO800-1600 was too noisy for my taste. Last Summer (2012) I was really considering switching to Nikon because of the superior Sony EXMOR sensors even though I've always loved Canon. So I played around with a D3100, D5100, D90 and D7000. At that point I knew Nikon wasn't an option anymore even if it had 2234232 stops of dynamic range. Those Nikon DSLR bodies are ugly as hell (I guess I could get used to that), the menus are made by a "designer" who was born somewhere before Jesus Christ (I could probably get used to that too), but my hands didn't like the various Nikon DSLR bodies at all (this I CANNOT get used too). Ergonomics and especially grip were horrible in my opinion. If a camera isn't fun to hold, it will spend the rest of its life in a closed camera bag which would be a waste of money.

So here I am. Still owning the 550D, but preparing a move to the 6D/5D3 somewhere this year (5D3 is in pole position right now).

5

EOS Bodies / Re: 6D Autofocus not impressive

« on: March 26, 2013, 02:00:57 PM »

Another scenario where the 6D will fail is this one:

Taking portraits at very large apertures ( F/1.2 - F/1.8 ) at close or minimum focus distance while following the rule of thirds without using liveview and without cropping the image in postprocessing. That's the reason why I'm preferring the 5D3 at the moment. I like to have points exactly located on the thirds of the image in the viewfinder.

6

Animal Kingdom / Re: How would you fix this RAW of 2 baby snow leopards

« on: March 19, 2013, 12:44:50 PM »

It was actually quite easy & fast. Not much editing either. Wanted to keep a rather natural look and thus nothing fancy. I performed 3 steps:

1) Changed the White Balance
2) Used Curves
3) Applied Unsharp Mask

And if you count in resizing the image, then I performed 4 steps...

7

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Picture quality questions 6D.

« on: March 17, 2013, 02:51:38 PM »

You will have to do some postprocessing for this, but it can be VERY easy with Alien Skin Exposure 4. Just choose one of the presets and there you go. They offer a very big list of presets (analog look).

8

Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?

« on: March 14, 2013, 06:29:21 PM »

electronic motor control of the aperture blades.(100% electrical contacts between the camera and lens)
wide, high quality lens selection.
fast AF.
option of using nikon, and other glass with adaptors.
ergos-a quick look at the back of their flash units makes much more sense to me than what is on nikon gear.

 that all still applies, but when i moved into the canon system i would have also said that nikon's camera offerrings where a joke. that's not so now. now they have their act together, but then, they were pretty bad. (digital up until the D3) i now have a 1n, but when i REALLY shot film i used a pentax so i can't say.

Also, canons look very nice. they are smooth and modern, nikons look like tractors.

I LOLed because it's sooo true.

9

EOS Bodies / Re: Cost of Canon 5D mk III

« on: February 10, 2013, 08:04:02 AM »

Actually it's quite easy. If you REALLY want the 5D3 and don't have the money for it, then just wait until you have the money for it or wait until the price drops. Over here in Belgium the price of the 5D3 is 2.859 EUR which is 3,820.62 USD. So even more expensive. I'm still deciding between a 6D (1.759 EUR / 2,350.64 USD) and a 5D3 (2.859 EUR / 3,820.62 USD).

10

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS 6D Rating by DXOMark

« on: December 13, 2012, 02:26:01 PM »

If you have to raise your exposure by 4 stops afterwards, you are not 'very good' at nailing the exposure... Then again, it's nice to be able to do that without introducing a lot of noise.

Wow! Another clueless self proclaimed expert, making a fool out of himself with the "proper exposure-comment".

Unbelievable! That's all I have to say.

I'm no expert at all, but I never ever had to go past +2EV. Probably because I'm not a landscape shooter. I'm also a person who thinks that shadows need to stay true to their nature i.e. being dark and not revealing a lot of detail.

11

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS 6D Rating by DXOMark

« on: December 13, 2012, 01:50:26 PM »

If you have to raise your exposure by 4 stops afterwards, you are not 'very good' at nailing the exposure... Then again, it's nice to be able to do that without introducing a lot of noise.

12

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS 6D Rating by DXOMark

« on: December 12, 2012, 03:22:07 PM »

Nice to see that the 6D has a better DR score than the much more expensive 5D3 and 1Dx. Weakest point of the 6D is its AF system. But then again, people could shoot sports back in the days when cameras were manual focus only. Makes me wonder if we have become noobs because we need a great AF system (e.g. 5D3) to shoot sports nowadays...

13

Canon General / Re: Is canon going to come back?

« on: November 29, 2012, 01:32:42 PM »

Well I'm also one of those guys that worries a lot about Canon lagging behind a lot in sensor technology/performance. That's why I recently played around a bit with a D90 and a D7000 (last summer I wanted to buy the D7000 before I even held it because of its sensor performance). I must say that Nikon DSLR's are a thing of the past for me now. I really didn't like holding those Nikon DSLR's. In my opinion Canon has way better ergonomics (the grip is the best example of this). What I want to say is: don't judge a camera system only by its sensor. Do I wish that Canon made better/competitive sensors? Yes. Can I live with a better sensor but inferior ergonomics? No. Ain't no fun in shooting pictures with a camera that I don't like to hold in my hands...

14

EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF

« on: November 23, 2012, 01:35:26 PM »

I get usable 12,800 Color and 25,600 B&W's out of my MK3. How much more ISO performance could one really need?!

That kind of performance in a APS-C sensor would be groundbreaking.

Because every new month/year, is a month/year closer to new Canon sensor technology. And they have been lagging behind Sony sensors for quite some years now. So maybe they are almost ready to strike back...

15

EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF

« on: November 23, 2012, 12:19:25 PM »

I'm also looking forward to the 6D (and will probably buy it). I'm just scared that the next APS-C sensors from Canon will be so good that they are better than the 6D sensor when it comes down to DR and low ISO noise.