July 22, 2014, 06:31:48 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 - grahamsz

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
1
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Best tablet for on-location preview
« on: December 16, 2013, 01:49:54 PM »
Eye-fi card along with an iPad Air :).

I use the Eyefi along with a Nexus 7 and it works really well. Especially with a dual-slot camera - I write low res jpegs to the eyefi so they are nearly instantly on the tablet then drop the raws to the compact flash card.

I wouldn't use it for proofing the exposure or anything like that, but it's really nice for product photography since it works on site and you can use it to proof for composition, making sure things are square, catching reflections that aren't right.


2
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: A 40mm f/0.85 for Your EOS-M?
« on: December 16, 2013, 01:45:30 PM »
Looking at the sample images here (scroll to "Sample photos with SONY NEX-7 Camera"), the bokeh looks distracting


Yeah i'm leaning towards not-acceptable. The effect is neat on the xmas tree but it doesn't give the separation that you'd normally want from a fast lens. I suppose it'll be good to see some full resolution crops too - hard to tell how bad the CAs are on those images. If it has stellar loca performance then it might find a niche.

3
Your comment was pure speculation and not based on any research. If Adobe is lying in this matter it will bite them in the ass. LR is a money maker for them.

LR competes in a different market than does the rest of CC. If they put it strictly in CC they lose to Aperture and other products. It makes no business sense.

My inquiries with Adobe make it pretty clear that when they say "indefinitely" they mean "we have no plans to change this in the next 12 months". That's their answer on the $10 price, and I have no reason to believe that they have longer plans.

Your point about business sense seems reasonable. Lightroom fills a different need and people who use it often dont need any of the other tools in the creative suite. However this is the same company that now forces print shops to subscribe to things like After Effects - so I'm not necessarily counting it out.

4
Software & Accessories / Re: What fits in a CRJ-700 overhead bin?
« on: September 06, 2013, 12:09:36 PM »
I am traveling to Maine to do a workshop at Rockport.  I am afraid to check my camera and lenses and would like to know if anyone has experience on what size camera backpack will fit in the overhead bin on the United Airlines CRJ-700 regional jet?  I have a 5D MkII, lenses are 70-200 2.8 IS II, 16-35 2.8 II, 24-205 4.0, 100 macro 2.8 IS, 40 mm 2.8 pancake, T2i (as backup). I will put accessories flash, tripod etc. in a suitcase to be checked. 

I wanted to use the CaseLogic SLRC-206 but it does not look like it will fit the published 12x14x9 dimensions for the bin.  I have a smaller Canon 200EG but if it has to be checked it has very little protection.

I flew one a couple of weeks ago and I was only just able to get my Mountainsmith Borelais AT into the overhead, although only after removing my laptop to make it slimmer and a fair amount of forcing. I only had a 5D3, 24-105, 100-400 and maybe an 85mm samyang.

Height is your main issue as the bin is probably only 8 inches high. Something like a Lowe Minitrekker works well as long as you don't have anything in the front pocket that would make it overly thick.

5
Adobe is being very clear about the price being "not introductory." They go back on that at the risk of a heap of bad PR, but of course in life their are no guarantees. If the price goes up later, I'll re-evaluate. I disagree with what some others have said about this being a "trap" or you'll have no choice if/when Adobe raises prices. You ALWAYS have a choice, AS LONG AS you take steps to maintain your independence. Here, I'm thinking of using the "maximize compatibility" option when you save out Photoshop files, and saving your photo Raw files outside of a proprietary database. (Exporting edited Raws as .DNG is worth considering here, as I expect your Lightroom edits will be preserved if you open them in Adobe Camera Raw later.)

The biggest risk I see is Lightroom. There's a good chance that LR6 will be Cloud-Only. At which point you install it, it upgrades your LR5 catalog and you are stuck. There will be no legal way to get at your lightroom catalog without continuing to pay Adobe.

Photoshop has some of the same issues, you can create files that presumably use features only available in CC and those won't open properly in CS6. Though that's pretty unlikely at this point as most CS6 files open well in CS3 so it's likely we've got a fair few years before that comes into play.

I think you are right that Adobe would look bad if they hiked the price up dramatically. I don't really mind if it goes to $11 next year, but I do worry that they could release LR6, then discontinue this bundle and force us onto the full creative suite.

6
If it's $10 for life, I might jump on it even I already have LR4 and CS6.

But if it's $10 for e.g. 12 months, and then some ridiculous amount, no way.

So can someone confirm how long they promise the $10?

From their online support

Janella: I do understand your concern, however, price are subject to change at any time. For the first 12 months, the price for the bundle Photoshop CC and Lightroom 5 will remain same i.e US$9.99 per month

Looks like after 12 months they can change the "standard" "non-introductory" price to whatever they like. I suspect what they are trying to suggest is that it won't double like the trial price of the whole cloud membership, but who the hell knows. They could just discontinue it after a year.

Wow, seriously? Because in some of the later semi-clarifications they made it sound like it for for life, so long as you never missed a payment and signed up before 2014.

Yeah so everyone seriously needs to NOT do this. Gotta force them back.

Adobe: You must never again leave the cloud and bring your $35.00 a month to my bank account!
Lando: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

They promise they'll keep that price for 12 months, but you also have to sign up for a 12 month commitment.

I also don't begrudge them price increases if they are justified. I think I got Photoshop 1 when it was bundled with a black and white scanner, clearly CS6 provides more value than that and I don't mind that the price has risen faster than inflation. However I'd really just like Adobe to say that "Subscription price increases are limited to 10%/year" or something like that. That way I could accurately plan.


7
If it's $10 for life, I might jump on it even I already have LR4 and CS6.

But if it's $10 for e.g. 12 months, and then some ridiculous amount, no way.

So can someone confirm how long they promise the $10?

From their online support

Janella: I do understand your concern, however, price are subject to change at any time. For the first 12 months, the price for the bundle Photoshop CC and Lightroom 5 will remain same i.e US$9.99 per month

Looks like after 12 months they can change the "standard" "non-introductory" price to whatever they like. I suspect what they are trying to suggest is that it won't double like the trial price of the whole cloud membership, but who the hell knows. They could just discontinue it after a year.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: More Medium Format Talk
« on: August 22, 2013, 11:39:19 AM »
I don't see a "mess" so much as products that are targeted at specific markets. The larger and more profitable Canon become the more they obviously have to invest in R&D(including buying on existing companies) as well so its not an "either or" situation.

My guess would be if Canon take someone over it'll be Mamiya, they have the knowhow with medium format but the brand itself isn't as valuable as something like Hassleblad so rebranding it Canon would be less of a loss.

Well maybe "mess" is the wrong word, but I'd love to see how sales stack up across all the different product lines. I always thought the 60D line was an odd one, if price is a concern then most people seem to go for the rebel (especially since the rebel line gets refreshed more frequently) and if price isn't a concern then the 7D makes more sense.

I agree with you on Mamiya, however my interpretation of the original rumor suggested that the lenses would be in some way compatible with EF. Obviously they can't be mechanically compatible so that means they'd have to be electronically compatible. Imagine the outcry from Mamiya users if Canon changed their lenses to now use the EF connections and protocol instead of whatever they use now.

I suspect that if they dipped their toe in by making sensors for someone else then they could reserve the option to buy that other party outright later.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: More Medium Format Talk
« on: August 21, 2013, 09:45:11 AM »
A digital MF camera is never going to be "cheap" but just look at MF prices today, a new IQ 180 + camera will set you back what $35K? I very much doubt that the production costs make up much of that price, rather Phase One have choosen a business model that targets limated high end sales to offset R&D.

The main argument against it seems to be Canon devolping a high resolution FF sensor, if they were considering MF it would seem to make more sense to leave the high resolution market to it.

Canon may have the expertise in image processing. It seems more likely to me that they might partner with an existing MF company to provide large sensors and the digic 6 to them. That would be a revenue stream for them that wouldn't cannibalize any of their existing market. It also wouldn't commit them to building a new line of of LargeEF lenses to run on it, which would likely have a very long ROI.

I already worry that Canon's lineup is such a mess it'll be unsustainable without some sizeable cutbacks. They've currently got 3 lines of full frame EOS, 3 lines of crop sensor EOS, Mirrorless stuff in the works, Cinema EOS and probably some others. Adding another imaging sensor and then trying to support a whole new line of lenses seems like madness.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: An Update on the 75+mp Camera in the Wild
« on: July 25, 2013, 06:19:23 PM »
Will Canon releases more NEW lenses to support 75+ MP?

I was trying to figure out how much of an effect that would make. If they have 3 "pixels" per photosite (one for each of rgb) then I don't know that they'll need any big lens jump.

That would bring the color resolution inline with the luminescent resolution

11
HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Post your HDR images:
« on: May 17, 2013, 05:01:52 PM »
How's this - it's a stack of 12 frames, 3 exposures at each of 4 focus points



Need to find some more interesting subject matter for this technique

12
Lenses / Re: A review of the Samyang Tilt Shift
« on: May 01, 2013, 07:29:44 PM »
I'm more concerned about distortion than outright resolution given the insane amount the 14mm had. Thankfully they report 2.5% barrel which is not great, but not too bad either. The Canon mk2 was under 1% barrel as measured by photozone though.

I think it's unreasonable to expect a 14mm to have distortion in line with a 24mm - they are very different lenses. I like my 14mm (though admittedly don't use it often) because it's sharp and the distortion can be pretty well corrected.

However with a tilt shift the distortion is uncorrectable, but i'd mostly want it for landscape use so 2.5% is acceptable if the resolution is there.

13
Lenses / A review of the Samyang Tilt Shift
« on: April 30, 2013, 03:20:55 PM »
Finally good to see one of these in the field (even if it is the Nikon mount)

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/samyang-t-s-24mm-f-3-5-ed-as-umc-lens-review-21853

Hopefully there will be some Canon reviews up soon, but I expect the results will be very similar.

14
Landscape / Re: Post Your National Park Photos
« on: March 05, 2013, 03:34:31 PM »
I'd love to see your national park landscape photos. Post them here! I'll post a few more later, but I want to see yours!



Took this a few months ago in Olympia National Park



Got a lot of landscapes here, but I was surprised how few of them are actually in national parks

15
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rokinon 14mm f/2.8
« on: November 09, 2012, 12:45:07 PM »
Wow...absolutely beautiful!!

Might I ask your camera settings for those images?


Thank you!

The Northern Lights shot was a 13s exposure at ISO 10,000
The Milky Way shot was a 30s exposure at ISO 16,000

Both were shot on a 5D Mk3, and were probably at either f/2.8 or f/4. Unfortunately I'm lazy about taking notes these days

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6