May 18, 2013, 12:30:55 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 - mjardeen

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Describe the 6D in one word...
« on: September 17, 2012, 11:10:53 AM »

 I am not switching to Nikon, not as long as I can't put a 70-200 F/4 IS on a Nikon mount...


The Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 OS HSM costs the same and it's as great. Plus, you have a fully usable f/2.8, if you can live with the extra weight. AF works better on Nikon cameras than it does on Canon, if that was your concern.

No, there is no Nikon, or other lens that compares to that lens. It is the sharpest medium to long zoom on the market. It is also very light. If you are a landscape shooter like me, you could care less about 2.8.

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Describe the 6D in one word...
« on: September 17, 2012, 02:43:46 AM »
As usual the complaining starts because either it has something a more expensive camera does not have, or it does not spray unicorn poop and flowers.

This camera is not meant to replace the 5D2, that was the 5D3. The recent pricing of the 5D2 was done to sell off the stock that Canon had in channel and warehouses, as well as serve as a temporary place filler. For those of use who have a 5D (like me) this camera is an upgrade, for those who have any crop camer this is a bridge camera designed to get people into full frame. For the 1st time both Canon and Nikon have full frame cameras in the 2k range!!

For those who complain that the 6D isn't a D600, who gives a rats ass other than those who chew specs. I own 5 full frame lenses and have an IR converted 20D. This new camera becomes my standard color body and my 5D gets IR converted. Perhaps I will get two and IR convert one. The point is that my price point just got sweeter for full frame. 5D2 used bodies will drop to around 1500 so maybe I get two of those, either way I have more options.

Rejoice and stop bitching people.

3
F4 and don't look back. It's lighter and it is also the sharpest zoom that Canon makes. The f2.8 is only needed if you do a lot of portrait/wedding work and then you need the IS version.

4
Lenses / Re: What lenses do you own?
« on: August 17, 2012, 03:51:56 PM »
Zenit 15mm Fisheye
Canon 17-40mm f4 L
Canon 24-105mm f4 L IS
Nikon 45mm f2.8 GN pancake (so freaking sharp)
Canon 50mm mk1 f1.8
Olympus 50mm f3.5 Macro
Nikon 50mm f1.4
Canon 70-200mm f4 L
Contax 135mm f2.8
Nikon 180mm f2.8
Lensbaby Composer

These are the lenses that I actually use. I also own a bunch of classic manual focus lenses from Nikon, Olympus, and Pentax. I have a collection of classic cameras including a meter-less Nikon F, Nikon Ftn, Nikomat, Nikkormat, Minolta, Pentax, Olympus, and Minox. One sweet thing about being a Canon shooter is that you can get adapters for almost any lens out there other than Minolta.

I got started with the best Christmas present ever when I was 14 and opened up a Minolta Srt 101. I got a 28mm and 135mm lenses later and have never looked back.

My advice -- gear just makes more things possible but it does not make, nor improve your ability to be a photographer. I have a set of images that I printed at 8x10 shot with a 1mp epson digital camera. The camera was a piece of crap, but people buy the photos.

5
Lenses / Re: If you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they...???
« on: August 14, 2012, 12:51:12 PM »
This is a great question that has a pretty simple answer for me:

16-35 L II   (I own the 17-40 L)
24-70 Tamron  (I own the 24-105 L)
70-200 F4 L which I already own

The reason I take the F$ is sharpness and weight. The Tamron because it has IS and is lighter. The biggest upgrade I want is to sell my IR converted 20D, convert my 5D to IR, and then get the new 6D that is rumored to be coming for higher resolution color.

IR has been an artistic dream for me and one I would suggest to anyone.

6
So this last weekend I got to handle and take a few shots with this lens at a local store. I have to say that I am really impressed, to the point that I may sell my 24-105 and spend the extra cash to get one.

Size is at a sweet point, it did not seems all that heavy on my 5D mk1, but then I use it with the battery grip. The effect of the VC was obvious when I looked through the lens. The build feels solid. The real test will be images. I am not posting any of the few images I shot because frankly they sucked not because of the lens but because a setting error on my part. I plan on taking one out to test shoot.

7
Lens Gallery / Re: Lensbaby
« on: April 20, 2012, 10:57:09 AM »
This is a fun lens that gets puled out when I feel the need to play. I do love the focus effects.


Cat in the plants by mjardeen, on Flickr


Parked Roadster by mjardeen, on Flickr

8
Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF17-40mm f/4L USM
« on: April 20, 2012, 10:43:05 AM »
When I had my 20D converted to IR I sent in this lens to have the body calibrated to use it as a standard lens. It was a perfect choice.


Spruce Burl Trail - Kalaloch by mjardeen, on Flickr


Beach 2 Log by mjardeen, on Flickr


Tacoma Waterfront in Fall by mjardeen, on Flickr


Railroad Tracks and Rainier by mjardeen, on Flickr


Nisqually Threatening Clouds by mjardeen, on Flickr

9
Black & White / Re: Your best Architectural & City B&W shots?
« on: April 20, 2012, 10:27:25 AM »

Narrows Panorama by mjardeen, on Flickr


10
Black & White / Re: So..what sucks about this shot?
« on: April 18, 2012, 01:00:27 AM »
IMHO after looking at the pic some more the very best you can do with this picture is use it as a learning experience... and toss it in the don't do this pile. It's one thing if it's candid and that's all you could get, but that hand is too difficult to remove and the framing is dead center which is normally a big no no. At the end of the day you could Photoshop it to death and it still won't make it a great shot simply due to composition and the visual distraction. I have a great many shots like this myself and I just try to see what I did wrong and try to improve on the next one or simply don't hit that shutter until it's perfect (even if it means missing the moment).

IMHO the goal of this should be to look at all the ways you can see an image, recrop, and reprocess to get it closer to your idea of a better image. Below is an original image, it's a piece of crap, but I think the final processing changes it into something that hits my vision of what the images ideal is.

The amusing part is that it was taken with my first digital camera which was a 1mp. To me it shows that vision, composition, and processing all add up to creating the image in your minds eye. Mind you that I do not think this is some fantastic image, but I do remember it as being the image that got me thinking that I could goo all digital and I did when 5mp became common. My inspiration for precessing always goes back to Ansel Adams taking more than 20 years of work to get the print he had always seen for Moonrise over Hernandez NM.

11
Black & White / Re: So..what sucks about this shot?
« on: April 17, 2012, 11:17:20 AM »
Here's another take that removes fine detail and crops out the distracting ear and most of the hand. I did this quickly just to make the point that there are millions of ways to change the image -- this one is meant to focus in on the main point of the image, the connection between the two subjects.

12
Black & White / Re: Black & White
« on: April 16, 2012, 10:29:53 PM »
Sorry you caught me in an irritable mood and should have left the last sentence off the post. I hope you can find good homes for the cats.

13
Black & White / Re: Black & White
« on: April 16, 2012, 11:09:52 AM »
That is not B/W but Sepia or something.

After 40 years I did not realize that, I will go back and redo all my work.

Toning of images has a long history, both in recreating classic B&W looks and to increase permanency of B&W images. They are still considered by most to be B&W. If they are not to your taste that is fine.

As for your image, it's a cute image of two animals.

14
Black & White / Re: So..what sucks about this shot?
« on: April 15, 2012, 02:04:18 PM »
For me the best way to respond is to recrop and slightly reprocess your image. I do think there is an emotional connection in the image that gives it worth beyond simply those who know the two people in the image. I see the love of a mother/grandmother for her child. I do think that going B&W is a good way to go so that the distracting colors are removed from the essential content of the image. I toned the image as I think it gives the image a more emotional feel. I used to never tone my images and then started at first with more subtle ones and now go bold. The tone I used here is one that replicates the Silver Gelatin look.

15
Lens Gallery / Re: Canon Body Nikon Glass!
« on: April 15, 2012, 01:37:24 PM »
This was taken with a Nikon 45 GN pancake lens. I was getting my mail and looked up and said, "oh S___!" I ran inside and grabbed my IR converted 20D and that lens. It is wicked sharp!


Tree and Clouds by mjardeen, on Flickr

Pages: [1] 2 3