October 20, 2014, 01:18:57 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 - KKCFamilyman

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31
1
Reviews / Re: Camera Store Trashes New G7X
« on: October 19, 2014, 11:42:45 PM »
I have used the camera since friday. It is inconsistent in af accuracy. Most pictures are soft. When all hits then the pics are great but for a $700 convience camera it shoukd work better than that. I would like to consider the rx100 but do not like the short focal range and handling. I think the extra bulk and IQ would be better invested in the sony a6000 for the money. At least your carrying apsc sized sensor and hopefully the af can keep up.

2


IPhone 6



Canon G7X



Molly my dog. It shows decent detail when really close.

3
I just got the G7x today and took some shots on a walk and indoors. The camera is nice but after looking at the jpeg and raw files. The picture appears to have a decent IQ but looking at it closer there is a tough distinction to determine if it was even in focus since it does not have any sharp areas in the image. there are details but slight at best. Was hoping since it was a good option for a portable camera. I liked the touch interface but the pictures are just soft even at low iso's. I can try taking a pic of a book on a shelf but that's not how I am going to use it. I am going to have to rethink this. Maybe the G1x II or look at the Sony Nex series again even though I prefer to stay all Canon. $700 is too much for just ok.

4
Iphone 6. Tried the 6 plus but it was too big. The 6 so far has the better sensor. I have had every Iphone and the main reason I stick with them is the focus on the camera function to some degree. Like this one has better focusing. The front camera has a larger aperature which is nice. They will never replace my dslr but can produce some good images for what it is. I like the time lapse they added. Also the metering and colors are pretty good for a phone.

5
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Which body to bring
« on: September 07, 2014, 09:49:34 AM »
Ok brought
5d3
1dx

16-35
24-70
70-200
600ex
Tripod first ever for disney since the family always made me leave it back

Figured that should cover it. Also brought a spare sling bag if it gets heavy

6
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Which body to bring
« on: September 06, 2014, 11:09:24 PM »
Random got there first but it occurs to me that a better answer might be two parts; the things I'd leave home with, and the things I'd take along for the day at the park itself.  I'd take a camera bag with both bodies and the zooms for the trip as a whole, but for actually walking around the park all day I'd pack light. 

I would like to hear from anyone who has been to Disneyland with a family and anything bigger than a P&S; the closest experience I had was walking around a comic con with a 5D2 and a full-up camera bag.  I wouldn't do it like that again!

Jim

I could bring the extra body and a spare smaller bag so I have options.

7
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Which body to bring
« on: September 06, 2014, 10:40:22 PM »
Consider actually carrying all this; a 5D3 and one lens (I'd say the 16-35) will pack down into one small bag, and is easier to carry on a sling with the lens pointed forward so you can keep a hand on it.  Your call, but I'd limit myself to the essentials.

Jim

Yeah I want to but I have always left the 70-200 2.8 behind and just have to try it in the parks. And the 16-35 is new and want to try that. I coukd leave the prime behind since that will most likely not get used and that woukd lighten up a little.

8
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Which body to bring
« on: September 06, 2014, 10:38:09 PM »
Unless you ask a7 vs 1dx/5dIII, otherwise, can you really go wrong with 1DX ::)

If I have to shoot with DSLR, the X would be my 1st choice ;)

I thought that would be the answer but the 5d is lighter and like I said it will be hot but this would be a rare opportunity to focus on photography so excited about the 1d. Only thing is I only have one battery but charged daily should be fine.

I was bringing
16-35 f4 is
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8
35mm 1.4

Too much?


So many lenses, and just one body?

Yeah I could bring both and decide there.

9
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Which body to bring
« on: September 06, 2014, 09:53:38 PM »
Unless you ask a7 vs 1dx/5dIII, otherwise, can you really go wrong with 1DX ::)

If I have to shoot with DSLR, the X would be my 1st choice ;)

I thought that would be the answer but the 5d is lighter and like I said it will be hot but this would be a rare opportunity to focus on photography so excited about the 1d. Only thing is I only have one battery but charged daily should be fine.

I was bringing
16-35 f4 is
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8
35mm 1.4

Too much?

10
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Which body to bring
« on: September 06, 2014, 09:41:04 PM »
I am leaving for a trip to orlando, fl tom and love photographing disney. I went during june and with the family rwlized my af was front focusing and ruined a lot of pics. Since then it jas been fixed. Just curious if I should bring the 1dx or 5d3 for this trip it will be hot and may rain. I may only get 3-4 hrs a day to shoot. Would the 1dx be overkill? Or shoukd I bring the 5d?

11
There is a misconception than Apple production does not need calibration :) The truth is that you have to calibrate all monitors if you need accurate colours. Also, this calibration should be performed on a monthly basis due to shift in colours. Generall laptop monitors (even with IPS) are worse than normal monitors. My suggestion for you would be simple: buy calibrator (x-rite i1 display pro or Spyder) and calibrate your monitor. I bought x-rite i1 display pro and i am very happy with it. I was surprised when I saw a really huge difference in colors after my laptop calibration. Also, x-rite i1 display pro has an ability of assessing ambient light in calibration process.

I have always used my spyder 4 pro but when looking side by side. The dell looks to be warmer and was wondering if an accurate display was pure white say on empty space in a web browser or a slightly warmer yellow was the more accurate colors. Basically its not the color space but the white point that I am concerned about. I am not sure if it will get me closer to white buy altering the targeted gamma of 2.2 to 2.0 or when they show 6500k change it to 6000k to cool down the white point? This laptop if you look it up is design for photo/video editing and is considered a mobile workstation. Just stuck on the whites

12
Hello all CR,

I have been using macbook pro's for my editing running windows. I have tried several laptops and while they are close in color gamut and contast. The Macbook whites look pure white. Is this just because its a cooler (k temp) screen or does all the others that are a bit more warm and slightly leaning toward yellow correct? Does anyone have a test they do when calibrating a laptop? The one I have settled on is the dell m3800 with the 3200 x 1800 screen. For $1500 it seemed like the best editing laptop for the money not including mac's.

13
Biggest choice is OS vs Windows 8.  OS is a clear winner - i recently switched from PC to Mac and glad I did.  There are a few frustrations (I can not hot key as often on the Mac as a PC), but otherwise glad I made the switch.

When looking for PCs (both laptop and desktop) I could not find any that had only USB 3.0 interface.  All I saw had mix of USB 2.0 and USB 3.0.  USB 2.0 is okay for keyboards and mouse about not data.  I need 1 plug for kb/mouse and the rest for data.

Right but I made it clear. I am in search of a highly accurate display 13-15" laptop running windows only. Will never use osx. Just was looking for other users on this forum who would value the same specs as me for photography. Also the usb port selection led you to mac???. Thats the main benefit in the variety of windows devices is the extra port availability. The mbpr has only 2 so plug in a kb/m receiver and there is only one left.

14
The discussion got a little away from the w540 comparison requested.

I use and really appreciate a w520 bought in late 2011 IIRC and I have upgraded components all along as my needs increased. I was tethering with this on a shoot today. I look into the Lenovo forums occasionally to stay up with what the new "W" (workstation) models offer. Anyone considering a w540 needs to read a lot of angry, disappointed forum messages. Some do refute the large numbers of complaints, but some people who evaluate ThinkPad laptops as their job suggest that people buy a w520 instead!

I like my "FD" 1920 x whatever (16:9) screen, although I was sorry to see the old 4:3 screens disappear. Have not tried to calibrate it but keep meaning to get around to it. (I own a Color Munki Photo.)

I am writing just to ask KCC and anyone else reading this to read the "w" machine Lenovo user forum carefully. Sorry not to be able to put the link in this post. I am responding on a tablet.

I have used the 520,530 and now 540. They lost a lot of the tough older styling but made it lighter and has a much better screen than any one before it. The problem I had was the color temp was closer to 7000k so my whites looked more yellow and then it made pp difficult. Also the left palm rest did get pretty warm. I am either going to get another macbook pro and run windows again or try the dell precision m3800. I brought the 540 back because of the screen.

15
The Lenovo Yoga 2 Pro has a great IPS screen (bright, glossy, outrageous resolution) and the new Surface Pro 3 is also spectacular IPS (also bright, glossy, high resolution).

Appreciate the suggestion but the yoga pro 2 has inaccurate yellow issues and the surface is great but I woukd struggle with LR on a 12" screen. I wanted a true 15" workstation class machine. Just curious if anyone has been down my road.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31