March 04, 2015, 12:19:39 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 - leGreve

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 16
1
Heh.... This would be fun to use in our studio along with our Bron Color Graphite generators :D

2
Everyone can make art.... But "real" art is not only beautiful and timeless, it can also take resale.
Some of the best art even manages to incorporate a story or an emotion.

That phantom / ghost shot..... Yeah its pretty, but hardly anything beyond that.

But if you want to admire a guy because he's able to pull out money of ignorant people who thinks art is purely based on price tag, be my guest.

3
Canon General / Re: Do More Mega Pixels translate in a richer photo?
« on: February 28, 2015, 03:49:13 AM »
The increased MP will increase perceived sharpness.... The image will appear sharper, but in the end the limiting factor on sharpness is quality of glass. A 28-70 will look horrible compared to a 24-70 II regardless of sensor.
As posted by CR ealier Canon had stated that all lensed after 70-200 2.8L II are optimized for those sensors. So with those you should get good results.

As for richness.... It doesnt only come with lighting. Ive always found Canon dslrs to be a bit on the weak side. Personally I would settle for less pixel and then 2 more stops of dynamic range.

We have old PhaseOne backs in our studio mounted on Hasselblad bodies that has better DR than our 5D III and 6D. Of course they have other drawbacks such as low iso range and a need to be tethered. But for studio use they are quite optimal...

So, Canon have yet to build a dslr that suits all needs and will probably never do so because of the need to make money rather than making the perfect camera.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: More Canon EOS C300 Mark II Talk [CR1]
« on: February 21, 2015, 07:59:31 AM »
I really really don't see an issue with the FS7..... 14 stops in latitude, and the skin tones render quite naturally.

I think the reason that people have bad experiences with it is because they simply haven't taken the time to balance it properly.

Check out this video with the FS7 and Leica lenses:
https://vimeo.com/119813319

https://vimeo.com/112150427

And this group:
https://vimeo.com/groups/fs7/sort:date/format:thumbnail

Nothing against the FS7, but those videos look awful. Cheesy teal/orange LUT on the first one with undersaturated color and poor highlight roll off... plastic skin in the next with inconsistent color between takes. I've seen better video from the Black Magic Pocket Camera (which is a solid little thing, but nonetheless).

Then again, if you think that looks good, the problem might be with your eye and not the camera.

You're kidding right.... the BM pocket cam was a nice try from the beginning. Nothing about it could justify using it for a proper production.

We'll just have to see. I have seen nothing better from the C300 mk I that tells me it's better than the FS7 and I doubt the Mk II will be any better as it's Canon we're talking about.
Everytime someone shoots something with a C cam they all churn out this awful misunderstood flat desat look, that every semi-pro thinks is a film look.


Watch this from start to finish

https://vimeo.com/112820371

5
EOS Bodies / Re: More Canon EOS C300 Mark II Talk [CR1]
« on: February 21, 2015, 03:49:40 AM »
I really really don't see an issue with the FS7..... 14 stops in latitude, and the skin tones render quite naturally.

I think the reason that people have bad experiences with it is because they simply haven't taken the time to balance it properly.

Check out this video with the FS7 and Leica lenses:
https://vimeo.com/119813319

https://vimeo.com/112150427

And this group:
https://vimeo.com/groups/fs7/sort:date/format:thumbnail

6
EOS Bodies / Re: More Canon EOS C300 Mark II Talk [CR1]
« on: February 20, 2015, 02:12:58 PM »
Quote
Canon does not see the FS7 as a competitor, as they expect their camera to be better in every way.

Which interprets into: ...therefor our camera will be significantly more expensive than the competition and we hope you'll pay the price.

EDIT:: hah... see someone else beat me to that statement :) Guess that underlines the theory (atleast for me ;P)

7
It makes sense to me to buy it as a second body as I work full time as a commercial photographer.

I also love the high resolving Otus lenses from Zeiss, and with this high a resolution on the 5D they will finally completely outshine the likes of Sigma.

I will though have to invest a new camera for filming as the new 5D cameras have lost their breath to the competition.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: What will become of the 5D Mark III?
« on: February 03, 2015, 03:22:50 AM »
The death of the 5D3 will mean that I will stop filming with the Canon cameras.

Most likely I'll get one of the new 5Ds for photography depending on how versatile they each are.

But I will also throw money after a proper video camera, most likely from Sony, Canon just can't follow suit in the video film area.

9
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony closing down?
« on: January 16, 2015, 04:14:31 AM »
Sony isn't going anywhere, they just finally realised that you can't run brand name stores... it's business smart to let the retailers handle the sales instead.

I'm even more amazed that Apple stores in fx. Denmark still exist. They hardly make any money, because Apple have certain standards to how the stores are equipped, but the store owners have to pay for this design themselves as well as the courses for the employees to be able to serve Apple.

10
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 7 inch monitor for 5d3?
« on: January 12, 2015, 05:42:14 AM »
300 dollars... it's about resolution not inches. (I told her that yesterday as well.... hah!)

Anyways, I hear some people are satisfied with a brand like Lilliput, but I wouldn't really skimp out on this part.
Unfortunately there is no cheap way to get a quality monitor. You really get what you pay for in this department.

I would however advise you NOT to get Cineroid as the monitor is trash, the software system is appalling and the customer service non-existent.

I went the TV-Logic way myself since I could get full HD in a 5.6" monitor which makes for pretty accurate focusing.
And also since I'm a small time rental business it's a brand that most productions can rely on.

11
Sports / Re: Critique My "Running" Photos?
« on: January 12, 2015, 05:36:56 AM »
Your shot ain't that bad... I would try and save the highlights in the background in the raw file. Don't apply it to the runner as it kills subsurface shimmer, which is completely natural and compelling.

I also took the liberty to shop it around a bit... a mix of different layers.

12
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New Firmware Coming for EOS 5D Mark III
« on: January 03, 2015, 02:09:10 PM »
...maybe they just closed the Magic Lantern entry point  :-[

My initial thought as well......

There's nothing I'm missing that would give me reason to upgrade to 1.3.3 when it arrives.

But if the ML team reports back that they can still make their awesome software work, then I might give it a go.
Canon ML raw is too good for such a small price that I will do without it :)

13
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Co-worker dumps $5k on Nikon
« on: December 08, 2014, 03:04:11 PM »
For what it's worth.... a lot of Danish high end fashion photographers, if they shoot on DSLR instead of Contax or Phase One with a digi back, they shoot Nikon; because of the image quality. And yes... it does look better.

But you will always hear hobbyists and semi-pros rant the Canon fanboi talk, either because they can't start over, or because they simply don't know what they are talking about.

I chose Canon over Nikon, because I was used to the gear, and because now I've invested so heavily in Canon that I can't be bothered to change, not even because of IQ. But if I could (be bothered), I'd go Nikon for stills and something like Sony or Panasonic for video.

14
The problem would be:

A. Sony or Panasonic would have better video options

B. Nikon would have better stills option.

Canon has their own goals confused; if you focus solely on making more and more money, your tech will suffer in the long run.
But if you tech up and innovate, then you will automatically see sales increase and therefore also revenue.

15
Reviews / Re: Are Gitzo's really overrated?!
« on: December 03, 2014, 07:28:29 AM »
That brands like Gitzo are overrated you often hear from inexperienced and hobby photographers, who are not out shooting 3-4 times a week.

I was like that as well when I started out, constantly looking for that "good bargin" instead of crying once and getting the best.

At our studio we have Gitzo's going back 15 or so years still being used. Sure some of them could use a bit of tuning up, but I will guarantee you that you wont find that kind of reliability in cheap brands.
Also that spare part story with the Benro tripod: pathetic. ANY company with respect for itself and its customers will make damn sure they can support their products, especially if the product is cheap to begin with.

I just broke my safety catch on my Manfrotto video head, and I was a bit bummed out, but then realised that Manfrotto (much like Playmobil :D) have part numbers for EVERY single bit going into a head.
So now I've ordered that one part I need to make it work again, and will be replacing it myself.

That's part of what you are paying for.

In Gitzos case, those newer Traveller and mountaineer tripods will handle weather and bruising a lot better than a Benro.

So... cry once, and get the best. 10 years from now, you'll be happy you did.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 16