November 01, 2014, 01:34:56 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 - preppyak

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 53
1
The answer is easily no for me. I can own a 1DX and a 7dII right now and still have enough leftover for a few L lenses. If the $10k body came with a fixed 16-300 f/1.8 lens, then it'd do something the others couldn't. Otherwise, $10k is about double the max I could ever see a body being worth.

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Listed as Discontinued at Amazon UK
« on: October 28, 2014, 08:45:33 PM »
A little more fuel for the fire - Nikon has lowered the price of the 610

http://www.cameraegg.org/hot-price-drop-nikon-d610-for-1696-d7100-for-946/

Nikon USA has finally drop the price of new Nikon D610 and Nikon D7100. The Nikon D610 body only now $1,696.95, and Nikon D7100 Body Only now $946.95.
Right, so Nikon's entry level full-frame now matches the price of Canon's (6D is $1699 most places right now). Makes sense to me. That Nikon's dropped that far already despite being a year newer (technically) is probably not great for their margins.

That said, its a great sign for the 6DII or D620, they may well end up <$1500 in a few years if prices keep pushing down

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Listed as Discontinued at Amazon UK
« on: October 27, 2014, 09:16:54 AM »
Get the 6D better AF coverage and more points, get dual cards and what would be the need for 5D3 that you lack on such 6D2?
Frame rate, flash sync speed, max shutter speed, over 30+ AF points (just because a 6D would have 19 doesnt meant they'd have a good spread)....all things critical to a pro photographer vs a hobbyist. And those are the markets they are targeting. You'd find few, if any, sports or wedding photogs who would go 6D2 over 5DIII in that circumstance.

And as a hobbyist, I'd certainly like a 6D2 that has the IQ and low-light ability of the 6D, but with a little better AF spread so I can use it for the times I capture action/nature.

Agree. 6D is an amazing value option for Canon shooters and underlines how little an "upgrade" the 5DIII was.
Huh? The 5DIII was a massive upgrade over the 5DII for photography. As in, pro's dealt with the hilarious limitations of the 5DII because it was their only real option (without going 1D), while they flocked in droves to the 5DIII.

It added 50+ focus points, 40 of them cross-type...added 2fps to the rate...the list goes on for days. The 5DII was out-spec'd by the 60D in everything but sensor size; the 5DIII is beaten only by the 1DX.

If that's a little upgrade to you, you'll be horribly disappointed by every Canon upgrade from here to the end of time. Few, if any, cameras will get more of an upgrade in one cycle

4
Lenses / Re: Night Sky
« on: October 22, 2014, 09:15:31 PM »
I'm not adverse to picking up the Rokinon 24 if it is actually good for this type of shot. The problem is I understand it can be soft, and I'm not sure what use I would have for it besides night shots, where the 24L I could see myself using more.

Thanks,
Jeff
Wrong Rokinon lens. Get the 14mm f/2.8, generally considered one of the best astro lenses out there. It's got a hard-stop for infinity, and the f/2.8 is plenty at that focal length. Honest truth is many lenses are not great for night work, as they are designed for other purposes. There's only a small handful of lenses that are ideal, and that Rokinon is the cheapest.

Night photography needs 3 key things

1. Dark skies (way away from cities, you can see here: http://www.jshine.net/astronomy/dark_sky/). No combo of high ISO and f/1.4 will make up for light pollution.

2. High ISO/large aperture (5D3 is a good option)

3. Wide angle (allows you to take slower shutter speeds)

The difference between your 24-105 at 24mm f/4 vs 14mm f/2.8 in night photography is pretty big, and in many cases, will be the difference between an ok night shot, and a great one with the milky way clear.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announces the Cinema EOS C100 Mark II
« on: October 21, 2014, 11:10:13 PM »
I get the feeling this is the wrong forum to understand this announcement...many won't understand how important timecode + super 35mm is for many productions. The EOS-Cinema line is very clearly aimed at indie and studio production and workflow. They dont care about being cutting edge, because production studios care far more about saving at the margins than they do about DR and high ISO. The C300 sold well because it worked great for TV production. This'll ren well because its cheap and decent for doc and indie work.

Why people are comparing a theoretical 5dIV (which has literally none of the same specs as this camera) is beyond me. Productions would choose this over a 4k 5D because of timecode alone. Whats confusing is why they didn't up the bitrate to make it cover broadcast quality.

6
Business of Photography/Videography / Re: Website Advice Please
« on: October 19, 2014, 07:14:35 PM »
So many thousands (millions) of photos are being uploaded these days that I do not think there is any way to guarantee your photos show up in a search. I am not sure a different website format would help (but I am not expert and would be interested on hearing stories from others who have switched).

One of the things I read in articles on the subject is that one factor to increase your ranking is the number of verifiable external links you have to your site. In other words, the more legitimate websites that have a link to your site, the higher you will be ranked in a search.
Yep, the reason you arent showing up high on sites is that, in the abstract, you aren't providing value to the web. Looking at your site, your work is good, but, its just a collection of photos.

Things that show up atop search rankings are things that other people link to a lot. Which makes sense, you want popular items that a lot of people link to to show up high in the rankings. Whether you have a wordpress site or zenfolio, if people arent consistently showcasing your work, you wont show up early in search results. Especially doing work in NYC, that's a high bar to clear.

The move to Wordpress would be worth your time if you were also going to start blogging and providing content that people would want (tutorials, travel advice, etc). If its just a different spot for your portfolio and print sales, you'll be wasting time and money. Truth is, its a TON of work to show up high in search results. It takes years of work, lots of networking with other sites, and some luck.


7
Landscape / Re: Within Forests
« on: October 18, 2014, 10:38:28 AM »

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon 2mm f/1.4 Lens for Small Sensors
« on: October 18, 2014, 10:37:24 AM »
I wonder how wide a (very improbable) full frame 2 mm lens would be...
I cant even imagine. This is what a 6mm lens looks like...a 2 mm lens would probably have to warp back over the camera body


9
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announces CN20x50 Cine-Servo Ultra Zoom Lens
« on: October 17, 2014, 12:27:50 AM »
I think you guys are way off with the price, the closest comparable mainstream super 35 lens is $96,000.
Yeah, though there is a HUGE difference between T/2.8 and what this lens does.

But, since its basically designed for sports broadcast, the price will be whatever the networks decide they want to pay. Makes a lot of sense since Canon is updating their cine line

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announces CN20x50 Cine-Servo Ultra Zoom Lens
« on: October 16, 2014, 10:59:53 AM »
Too bad Canon does not make similar lens for still photographers.
Would that many still photographers really want 50-1000mm f/7.1 or f/8ish lens? Would they pay $20-30,000 for it (I imagine it'd be cheaper if it didnt have to be parfocal)?

Just trying to imagine the photographer that would use that. Wildlife photogs might prefer their f/2.8 and f/4 super-teles. Sports guys might prefer the 200-400 f/4. Cant imagine trying to do sports photography with that beast of a lens.

Sounds amazing...but I can only image what this puppy is going to cost.  More than my car, I suspect.
Yeah, if the 17-120 costs $30k, I bet this thing is easily double that.

11
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Video Editing Work Flow?
« on: September 30, 2014, 10:23:43 AM »
Paid professional video, and like all of you guys, I'm a one man team.
We don't want the final video to be choppy or the voice like too close or too far from someone's mouth.

https://youtu.be/h4xF2qtMuLk
Ok, so a lot of this is fairly basic editing. 90% of that finished product is dependent on how well they shot their footage. They are doing fairly simple cut edits, their video isnt choppy because they shot it smoothly.

Quote
Glidecam is a must???!
External mic is a must???!

I got a 6D and will have 70D soon. I may set 70D, due to easy control via touch screen.
I am looking for a Lens: 24mm equivalent, got IS, and good at still at the same time. Couldn't find at the moment. and Less barrel distortion at 24mm.
Yes on external mic (Rode makes a good $100ish one), Glidecam will depend on your shooting style. Something to stabilize off your shoulder is probably worth it. Also looks like they do a decent amount of tripod based shooting.

As for your lenses, IS will be required. I wouldnt consider any lens that doesnt have it, as that is a run-and-gun style of shooting, and you dont want to spend time stabilizing in post.

Lots of IS lens options from Canon (24, 28, 35, etc), and there are 3rd party options that would be good as well. Something like the new 16-35L IS would be a good lens for both cameras; it'd be a good walk-around lens on the 70D for that style of shooting, and a nice wide angle for your 6D. Combo'd with a prime or two for closeups and you'd be off to a good start.

12
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Video Editing Work Flow?
« on: September 30, 2014, 10:16:28 AM »
Thanks. I don't know how to ask the correct question. So I started this thread.
A lot of thanks..
Alright, so lets go through some basic questions.

1. Mac or PC
2. Do you already have editing software? If so, what is it?
3. What type of video are you shooting (of your travels? of events? of your kids? of sports?)
4. Where would you be putting the video? (DVD? Youtube or Vimeo? Just on your computer?)

Once we have that info, we can walk you through a workflow. It will be heavily dependent on the editing software you have (some you need to convert, some you dont), and where you are putting that final video.

For example, for work, I edit on Macs with Final Cut. I convert all my footage to ProRes, edit, and export usually to Youtube or Vimeo. Both have standard settings (h.264, 5000kpbs, etc) and I tend to export at 720p. For stuff outside work, especially if I just use a GoPro, I might just edit in GoPro Studio with the original files. Simpler workflow because it doesnt need to be complex. So, it depends on what you have.

13
Photography Technique / Re: Why 3:2 aspect ratio?
« on: September 26, 2014, 10:15:13 AM »
I'd say for 80% of my shots I dont really crop, especially not my landscape and astro shots. But, for my action stuff where I cant always get the perfect composition on the fly, as a video/film person, I often find myself cropping to ratios of 16:9 in my landscape shots. Just feels more natural. And yeah, the portrait 3:2 really throws me off, so I tend to crop more 1:1 for those shots.

I generally let the rule of thirds determine my crop, if I centered someone in 3:2, and they hit the thirds in a 1:1 crop, Id rather go 1:1 than follow the tradition

14
Lenses / Re: Official: Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM Pancake
« on: September 16, 2014, 11:28:38 PM »
The full frame version of this already exists.  It is the 40mm f/2.8 STM.  And a full frame 24/2.8 also exists, but is not a pancake.  Likely it could not be built as a pancake, at least not with an f/2.8 max. aperture.  At f/4 they could probably make a 24mm pancake.
Yeah, the only real full-frame pancake that exists for Canon is the Voigtlander 20mm, and that's f/3.5. And pretty crappy at f/3.5, so, it really becomes f/4 or f/5.6...which limits it largely to a portable landscape lens.

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/504-voigtlander20f35eosff?start=1

15
Site Information / Re: Noisy obtrusive ads
« on: September 15, 2014, 01:52:03 PM »
But clearly I am in a minority as these ad companies would not invest in such technology unless they got back a good return.  So some people (probably many people) are using these pop up type ads to order stuff.
I think you'd be surprised. The guy that invented pop-up ads wrote an article a month back...the effectiveness of pop-up ads is laughably minor. Click through rates in the hundredths of a percent, etc

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/08/advertising-is-the-internets-original-sin/376041/?single_page=true

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 53