January 30, 2015, 01:45:19 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 - anthonyd

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
1
Quote
Killing something beautiful in nature just to take a picture of it
Hmmm...ya can't kill it for a picture...are ya allowed to take a picture of it, then eat it?      ::)
I always photograph my endangered wildflower stuffed turducken before eating it.

2
Lenses / Re: The Canon EF 50mm f/1.0L
« on: January 20, 2015, 11:19:33 PM »
Fastest ever lens was the Zeiss Super-Q-Gigantar 40mm f/0.33:
http://petapixel.com/2013/08/06/carl-zeiss-super-q-gigantar-40mm-f0-33-the-fastest-lens-ever-made/

But that was just a marketing gag.

So regularely Zeiss made sone with f/0.7, also mentioned in the article above.
Enjoy reading. ;)

From the article: "...and photographers became fixated on the speed of lenses on paper rather than their performance in real world situations."
Amazing how different photographers were back then... :-)

3
Photography Technique / Re: Aperture for total sharpness?
« on: January 13, 2015, 03:28:16 PM »
You are photographing a wall with a 70-200 lens from 1m away???  First of all, the minimum focusing distance of this lens is 1.2m, so nothing is in focus at 1m.  But even if that was not an issue, how many bricks fit into this picture?  Are you sure you can't move back a little bit?  As others said before this, moving away will improve your DoF a lot.

4
Pricewatch Deals / Re: B&H Photo Nows Carries Yongnuo Products
« on: January 09, 2015, 06:23:55 PM »
I've had their old tranceivers (603C) for several years and just purchased the 622 (mainly for the HSS). Have never had any problems with any of them.

5
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Preparing for the switch
« on: January 09, 2015, 03:49:23 PM »
I got the 24-70 f/2.8 last winter.  It has come off my camera two, maybe three times since then, and it was because I put on an f/1.4 to do more bokehlicious portraits.  It's a phenomenal lens, it won't let you down.  If you walk around a lot and the weight is a concern, don't buy a lighter lens, buy a harness that takes the load off your neck, like the "Cotton carrier" or something.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III Replacement Talk [CR2]
« on: January 09, 2015, 01:41:54 PM »
I bet a kidney and a lung that Canon would never launch such cameras. The with and without AA filter just makes no sense in the whole Canon scheme. It is the same as saying that AA filter is good and bad for your photos and Canon would never assume that they release products that is actually bad.
Also, it creates too much confusion when the customer is deciding which product to buy and will lead too many people to buyer's remorse (if one buys a camera with AA filter, he'll wish he bought the one without AA, and vice versa). Alas, Canon even amalgamated the 1D series into a single camera (no more full frame and APS-H formats, only full frame available now).
Anyone here willing to bet? I'll Fedex my parts if I'm wrong. Next day shipping.

What's your age, alcohol consumption and average daily exercise? We can't bet blindly, this is a spec oriented site.

7
Lenses / Re: What is your favorite lens/camera combo in your camerabag?
« on: January 04, 2015, 12:02:39 PM »
60D + 24-70 f/2.8L II

It's a little heavy but lighter than carrying a FF and that monster of a lens around.

6D + 24-105L still beats it :)

Alright, I'll bite.

No, it does not! Unless you are talking about weight only (which I assume you checked somewhere) but I'm not interested in giving up my 24-70.  Let me break down my argument in sections.

- Specs:
Sure, the 6D has better low light performance, better bokeh (given the _same_ lens) and a nicer viewfinder, just to name a few features. And these are differences that I can quote from having used the 6D next to the 60D, not from reviews.  However, while we are at specs, the 6D has a lower max speed and a lower max flash sync speed than the 60D, and while the 1/250 of the 60D is not enough for a sunny day it does give you some more freedom than the 1/160 of the 6D (not a big deal, but something to mention).

Let's revisit the strengths of the 6D though (low light and bokeh).  The combo you offer has a 4.0 lens, the combo I use has a 2.8 lens.  This is a whole stop difference, which pretty much makes up for the 1.6 factor of the crop sensor in both light let in and bokeh. So while the 6D beats the 60D, the 6D+24-105 barely beats the 60D+24-70.
There is still the viewfinder of course, but whatever.  I guess the 6D+24-105 is still better if you are doing low light landscapes with a closed down aperture for good DoF and high ISO to make up for the light, but who does that? I don't anyway and my post was about the equipment I carry.

- Return on investment:
I bought the 60D when I was on a much tighter budget, before the 6D came out, and long before I could afford the 6D anyway, since my walk-around lens was the Tamron 17-50/2.8.  When the AF on that lens died, I decided to go the extra mile and buy a lens (24-70/2.8L II) that not only is far superior, but also enables me one day to switch to a FF body.  At the time of purchase I spent $1800 for it (after rebates and whatnot).  The combo you are suggesting is still about $700 higher (and that's if you buy gray market on ebay) and back then it was a good $1K higher.

- The limiting factor:
I view photography like sport car racing. If all you can drive is a Suburban, you don't need to move up from your Porsche to a Ferrari, you need to learn how to drive better.  When you can fully control your Porsche and you miss some races because it can't deliver, then move up to the Ferrari.  I guess I'm not the photographer you are, or don't do the type of photography you do (low light landscapes?) because I'm barely every limited by my camera.  I've been limited by lack of sufficient control of external lights a lot, that's why my latest purchases have been  speedlights, modifiers, remote triggers and lately a witstro 360.  I've missed a lot of shots, and screwed up others, but I honestly can't think of a single shot that I missed because the 60D was not enough camera.

- The bottom line:
I shot those three over the holidays.  Can you tell that they are done with a four year old underspeced camera?

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Plastic/Resin Mount for DSLRs
« on: January 02, 2015, 10:31:21 PM »
And before you post a comment about how "All professional quality lenses have metal mounts" read this post on plastic mounts by Roger Cicala.

9
Lenses / Re: Comparison: Yongnuo 50mm f/1.8 vs Canon 50mm f/1.8
« on: January 02, 2015, 09:57:06 PM »
Soooo, since every review is praising this lens as having better quality than the Canon and it's half the price is it the new "highest value for price" nifty fifty?

10
Canon General / Re: What Canon stuff did you get for Christmas
« on: December 25, 2014, 10:43:35 PM »
No Canon gear either, but I got a Witstro AD360 with a few accessories and the YN622 triggers. I haven't player with the triggers much yet, but I absolutely love the flash.

11
Lenses / Re: What is your favorite lens/camera combo in your camerabag?
« on: December 25, 2014, 10:40:15 PM »
60D + 24-70 f/2.8L II

It's a little heavy but lighter than carrying a FF and that monster of a lens around.

12
I liked cat photo. But I made a poster of 1.2 meters of my cat and I saved a lot of money.
poor cat, don't you miss it now :-)
LOL :-)

Oh God! I DO NOT done this with my cat. :o
The word "poster" has another meaning in the English language? ???
The meaning I know of is "a large size print." ;)


It doesn't have another meaning, the joke was about making a poster "of your cat" versus making a poster "out of a picture of you cat", but it was only to be funny, not to be pedantic, don't take it seriously.

13
...
I liked cat photo. But I made a poster of 1.2 meters of my cat and I saved a lot of money.

poor cat, don't you miss it now :-)

14
... and we should give a little respect for a guy who is achieving such immense success.

Give respect to other photographers? You must be new here. :-)

15
The "ultimate" camera would not cost anywhere near $10K.  For starters it would have a frame rate of 100 billion frames per second.  Oh wait, that exists already!

Think out of the box  ;)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7