July 29, 2014, 11:24:03 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 - dryanparker

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
1
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: July 21, 2014, 05:06:16 PM »
5D2 + 24-105L

Admittedly, it's not really a portrait. I've just always enjoyed these two.

2
I just was looking in my 5DmkIII manual to see where it says you can't print larger than 32x48. Can anyone direct me to the page that says that? I can't find it. Thanks for the help in advance.

+1

I love when people complain about not being able to print "larger than AxB". How often are we really printing anything larger than 36x24? I've printed that size with amazing detail from the 7D. I'm sure you could print 40x60 from a 5D3 with fantastic results. Larger artwork, just like larger TVs, are really meant to be viewed from greater distance.

Obviously, there are limits. You definitely don't want to be printing posters from iPhone photos...which I've seen...IN GALLERIES!!

But, these late model cameras are more than capable of beautiful prints at most reasonable sizes.

3
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: July 06, 2014, 02:23:57 PM »
5D2 + 24-105L

brilliant, great photograph great humour

Thanks @zim!

4
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: June 30, 2014, 09:59:10 PM »

5
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: June 30, 2014, 02:38:39 PM »
5D2 + 24-105L

That is a real cute photo!

+1

I really like this picture. Nicely done dryanparker.

Hey thanks, @Click and @candyman! I call this "Chatting Sea Birds". It's one of my personal favorites.


6
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: June 30, 2014, 11:20:31 AM »
5D2 + 24-105L

7
5D2 + 24-105L

8
Landscape / Re: Astrophotography - which camera?
« on: April 11, 2014, 09:01:58 PM »
It's often easier to do these things in arcseconds. The ISS is ~63" (arcseconds) long. We can compute the number of arcseconds/pixel ("/px or asp) using this formula:

Code: [Select]
(206.265 / focalLength mm) * pixelPitch ┬Ám
For the 7D and a 200mm lens, our asp is (206.265/200mm)*4.3 = 4.43asp. For the 5D II and a 200mm lens it's (206.265/200)*6.4 = 6.6asp. If we take the 63" length of the ISS, and divide it by our sensors arceconds/pixel ratio, we get ~14px for the 7D and ~9.54px for the 5D II.

Now you can slap on teleconverters to get longer focal length. The 7D will suffer from the effects of diffraction and less lignt sooner, meaning the 5D II will then be more capable of using a longer focal length with a teleconverter, or for that matter stacking teleconverters (you can stack in a number of ways...2x III + 1.4x Kenko, 2x III + 25mm ext tube + 2x TC III, etc.) Let's say you use a 2x TC on the 7D and two 2x TC's on the 5D III. The 7D and 5D II are going to be producing roughly the same noise, and diffraction softening will be roughly equal (slightly more on the 5D II):

7D: (202.265/400)*4.3 = ~2.2asp
5D II: (202.265/800)*6.4 = ~1.1asp

We have a roughly equivalent IQ case here (similar amount of noise), but a much longer focal length on the 5D II. The ISS is 28px large on the 7D, but 57px large on the 5D II. Since we are talking about highly collimated light, all you need to do really is manually focus in the stars or the moon...so you could, theoretically, stack as many teleconverters as you think your pixels will handle. The larger pixels of the 5D II will handle more than the 7D before you start achieving similar results on both (diffraction blurring will eventually reach a point where the ISS is blurred the same mount on both if you just keep stacking TCs, and the 7D will simply be oversampling that blurry image more than the 5D II, albeit with more noise.)

Yes, definitely arcseconds. Couldn't agree more.

Wizardry alert. :)

9
Black & White / Re: The TRI-X 'look'...
« on: March 07, 2014, 03:37:07 PM »
I once came across a parkour group in downtown Jacksonville. One of them was falling from the sky.

Mamiya RZ, 75mm Shift Lens, Tri-X 400

10
Can someone please do the following:

1) Explain how these eBay stores can offer a 5D3 for $500 less than amazon and other retailers, and

2) Reassure me that it's exactly the same as buying from the bigger retailers (valid warranty, etc)

Thanks!

11
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 5d Mark ii ebay advice
« on: February 06, 2014, 02:01:42 PM »
Do not even think about buying it.

+1

Walk...not worth it!

12
Photography Technique / Re: What makes a photo great?
« on: December 24, 2013, 04:31:09 PM »
If we construct a Cartesian graph with X and Y axes, with X representing the technical merits of the photograph, and Y representing the artistic/social merits of the photograph, then answering the question "What makes a photo great" becomes an exercise in mathematics.  We assign a numerical score to both a photo's technical execution as well as the importance of it's artistic/social content. We then plot those values on the appropriate axis of the graph. If a photograph excels in the technical merit - i.e. is well lit, thoughtful composition, in focus, etc etc, but depicts nothing of social/artistic importance, it's plot will fall in the lower right quadrant of the graph.  If the subject matter is of significant artistic/social importance, but poorly executed from a technical standpoint, its plot will fall in the upper left quadrant of the graph.  In both cases, the photo has failed to achieve an measure of "greatness".  Only a photo whose plot falls in the upper right quadrant - one that is of a worthy artistic/social subject but also technically well executed - will be considered a "great" photograph.

Of course, all that is a load of s**t - nothing more than a tongue and cheek nod to same simplistic analysis ridiculed by Robin Williams' character as the literature teach in "Dead Poets' Society".  But I just couldn't help myself.  When I read the question, that scene was the first thing to pop in to my head :)

Extraordinarily well played.

+1

13
Canon General / Re: Renaming and storing photos
« on: December 21, 2013, 11:18:26 PM »
If you've ever seen Chase Jarvis' YouTube video on his workflow and backup methodology, he goes over file naming as well. I've adopted a variation of his naming...

Date_project_camera_initials+sequence.ext

So, this: 20131221_SISWIM_5D3_DRP0013.JPG

4 digits is good for project sequences, unless you're shooting 10,000 frames in each session...in which case you may have bigger issues than file naming!

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-A1 with Hybrid EVF? [CR1]
« on: December 21, 2013, 02:00:12 PM »
Not sure I understand the correlation between a flagship studio camera and a switchable Optical/EVF. If I'm doing studio work and need the EVF feature, I'd much prefer Live View. Am I alone here?

Seems EVF makes a lot more sense on smaller cameras, particularly mirrorless or rangefinders.

15
Photography Technique / Re: What makes a photo great?
« on: December 20, 2013, 03:27:41 PM »
I don't think it matters whether a photo has good IQ or bad IQ, and neither do I think that a world renown great photo "has" to have crappy IQ. The key is simply that it has emotional impact. Any photo, of anything, can have emotional impact, doesn't matter if it is of a person, people, animals, landscapes, still life, whatever.

Agree 100%

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7