August 27, 2014, 09:15:23 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 - Tyroop

Pages: [1] 2
1
Street & City / Re: Street Voyeurism Continued
« on: April 11, 2014, 05:34:13 AM »
Great shots and I really liked the B/W effect that you have achieved - it works very well.  I appreciated the humour and things like the juxtaposition between main subject and background in the first shot.

2
Photography Technique / Re: Help on what to bring to Krabi...
« on: April 03, 2014, 04:38:22 AM »
Without knowing what your photographic interests are it's difficult to suggest lenses.  The destination alone isn't enough.  Krabi is a pretty province and I would definitely recommend something wide for landscapes and seascapes - from your list I'd take the 17-40 with a full frame body.  I took a 10-22 with a 1.6 crop body.

If you like birds and wildlife there is quite a lot in that area and a long lens would be useful.  For example, Krabi is one of the few places where birders can get to see Gurney's Pittas.  You should take a boat tour in the mangroves.  I took a 400 f/5.6L last time I went to Krabi and used it quite a lot.  The 70-300L in your list should be ideal.

Those two lenses should suffice.  With the 6D's low light capabilities you shouldn't need a fast lens.  A possible third lens would be the 85mm f/1.8 (not in your list).  It's small, light and great for portraits.  If you also take an extension tube you can get great macro shots with the 85mm and this combo is lighter than the 100mm f/2.8L.

I always find it interesting to hear which places in Thailand people who don't live in Thailand recommend to others.  These are generally the places that I avoid.  It is also an idea to avoid referring to Krabi as Crabby.  The Thai pronunciation is quite different.

3
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
« on: February 08, 2014, 10:16:03 PM »
I had a nightmare with this lens.  In theory the 300mm f/4.0L and 1.4x converter combination should have been better than a 400mm f/5.6L.

300/4.0 + 420/5.6 + IS vs 400/5.6 No IS

In practice it didn't work like that at all.  I managed to get a few decent shots out of the 300 f/4.0L, but the vast majority were completely unusable.  I took it to Canon's service facility in Singapore for checking and calibration, but it was still no better.

The first generation IS is clunky and not very effective.  My other IS lenses feel as if a giant pair of hands has grabbed the lens and is holding it still.  The 300 f/4L IS helps a little, but not very much.

I sold it and bought the 400 f/5.6L.  This lens has been stellar with far superior image quality and consistency.  I don't miss IS all that much, but an update with the latest IS would be very welcome.

I can't really understand all the written praise in this thread.  Most of the sample images have been downsized so much that there is no detail visible, or horribly over-sharpened in PP.  The squirrel shot wasn't bad.

Perhaps I had a particularly bad copy, but after my experience I could never recommend this lens.  YMMV.  This is just about my own personal experience.

http://phil.uk.net/photography/canon_300F4LIS.html


4
Regional Boards / Re: Anyone from India?
« on: February 03, 2014, 05:18:17 AM »
Jogeshs, I just took a look through your Flickr gallery and was highly impressed. A combination of great artistic talent and imagination, combined with excellent technical skills - composition, colours, lighting, the lot.  You have a great eye and you have created some great work.  Very inspiring.

5
Canon General / Re: Lose or Loose?
« on: October 16, 2013, 03:48:08 AM »
Lose/Loose.  I also notice this one a lot.  The other one that really bugs me is using 'lead' (as in heavy metal) for the past tense or past participle of 'lead' instead of 'led'.  Even BBC journalists get this one wrong fairly often and I find myself having to write to them yet again.

6
Technical Support / Re: Photosharing That Pays Me?
« on: October 16, 2013, 02:45:25 AM »
I signed up for Fotolia a couple of years ago.  Pricing varies, but I normally make around 25c per photo.  They pay out when your account reaches $50, which is therefore 200 downloads.  I'm about half way there and still haven't received a payment.  The photos I like personally don't sell because there is no commercial value.  Stock photography requires very specific types of photo and there are tens of thousands of highly accomplished photographers (and illustrators) selling their work who you have to compete with.

Over 90% of the sales I have made have been of one particular photo.  It seems to be a photo that people want and that other photographers don't have to offer.  It was just a quick snap I took while wandering around a Burmese refugee camp on the Thai side of the Thai/Burmese border in Mae Sot.  The guy who recommended Fotolia told me that his best selling photo was of garbage collectors collecting garbage.  Photos you think will sell don't, and often the ones that sell are the ones you don't think will sell.

People don't necessarily want aesthetically pleasing photos, they want photos to illustrate a certain subject.  There are also lots of cliche photos, for example, happy families in perfect situations, attractive businessmen and women shaking hands on business deals, etc.  These contrived photos are not at all like the real world photos I take.

Then there is the business of model releases if your photos contain people, being careful not to include trademarks, submitting noise-free images, etc.  It can be a real pain meeting all the requirements and submitting the type of photos that are wanted.  I have had far more photos rejected than accepted.

When I started I thought it would be an easy way to make money, but that isn't how it has turned out.  It's still quite satisfying to think that someone has actually paid money - even if only a small amount - for a photo that I took, but like most things online these days the only people who make any serious money are the big boys.

You mentioned Flickr in your original post and I thought that images could now be submitted to Getty Images via Flickr.

7
Lenses / Re: How bad is the 24-105?
« on: October 13, 2013, 05:02:08 AM »
Those photos brought back some wonderful memories of visiting the Biltmore estate around 21 years ago.  Who cares which lens?

8
Canon General / Re: You know it is going to be a bad day when...
« on: October 11, 2013, 12:33:01 AM »
This past Monday, while in the bathroom my 2.5 year-old daughter 'lost' her miniature tennis ball and then we found that the shower water wouldn't drain.  Oh, where could the ball have gone?  The rest of the morning was spent locating and waiting for a plumber.  He was in for two hours retrieving the ball and then there was a big clean up operation.  A complete waste of a day, and of course Daddy had to pay the plumber.

Kids, eh?  I daren't leave any camera or lighting equipment out because everything in the house is considered a toy.

9
Software & Accessories / Re: My DIY "NO-POD"
« on: October 09, 2013, 04:13:01 AM »
Hello Surapon, no Facebook I'm afraid.  ไม่ใช่คนไทย  I spent quite a lot of time in Charlotte, NC on work assignments in the 1990's.  It's a nice part of the world.  Now in the deep south of Thailand.
ใชคดีนะ

10
Software & Accessories / Re: My DIY "NO-POD"
« on: October 08, 2013, 09:32:21 AM »
คุณสุรพลอยู่ที่ไหนครับ?

11
Software & Accessories / Re: My DIY "NO-POD"
« on: October 08, 2013, 05:28:37 AM »
เก่งมาก!

12
EOS-M / Re: My almost complete Collection of EOS M Equipment
« on: September 24, 2013, 10:34:04 PM »
I'm still happy with my EOS M, although the more I use it the more I am aware of the little irritations and annoyances that were never a problem with my DSLR.  EOS and EOS M are very different, but both have a place.  I can't understand Canon's policy regarding the EF-M 11-22mm.  It's available in Europe, but not in the States, and I still can't buy one in Southeast Asia.  I wrote to Canon's local office a few days ago.  Their response was very prompt, but the wait goes on:

"Kindly be informed that Canon EF-M 11-22mm is still under pre-marketing period which does not available in Thailand at this moment. However, We expect that it will be ready for purchasing in the next month."

Why are they treating various geographic regions differently for the same product?

13
EOS-M / Re: Mount EF, EF-S or L lens on EOS-M --- Your thought???
« on: September 18, 2013, 10:03:30 AM »
I went out today with the EOS M, EF-EOS M mount adapter, and a bag of lenses: EF 400mm f/5.6L, EF 70-200 f/4L IS, EF 17-40mm f/4L, EF 85mm f/1.8.  As soon as I picked up my backpack containing the lenses I was reminded what it is I like about the EOS M system.  I also took a tripod and ballhead to add to my load.

The image quality was fine, but the EOS M doesn't lend itself well to being used with long EF lenses.  Composing and focusing a telephoto lens at arms' length while looking at the LCD is difficult, and even more difficult in bright sunshine.  The AF is also problematic with long lenses in certain conditions, and I'm not referring to speed.  I tried to focus on a dragonfly with the 70-200mm, but just couldn't lock focus no matter how I tried.  It kept focusing on the background, no matter what AF options I chose.  This would have been easy with my 40D.

If you are going to carry heavy, bulky lenses around you may as well carry an SLR body.  You already have a heavy load, so a bit more isn't going to make much difference and shooting will be less frustrating and easier with an SLR compared to the EOS M.

I wasn't sure whether my EOS M system would be good enough to replace my SLR kit for the type of photos that I (personally) take - we all have different needs.  It is good enough for 90% of the photos I take, but I still need an SLR sometimes.

I regard my SLR and EOS M as separate systems.  The EOS M as a small, light, everyday camera that is easy to carry around and the SLR for more specialised or difficult shooting conditions.  The adapter allows me to combine the two to create one system, but I plan to keep them separate.  I will always find a use for the adapter, but as I have now decided to keep the systems separate it's not as important as I first thought.

http://phil.uk.net/photography/canon_EF-EOS_M_mount_adapter.html

14
EOS-M / Re: EOS M replaced my 5D kit
« on: August 05, 2013, 08:08:59 PM »
Great post.  This is exactly how I feel since buying the EOS M and you have summed it up very well.  I didn't come from full frame, but my APS C kit was bulky and heavy, and consequently I was becoming increasingly reluctant to take it anywhere for general purposes.  No, the EOS M isn't a replacement, but as you say, it's good enough 90% of the time.

I am now on the fence whether to keep my DSLR system for the other 10% or just sell it.  I really want the EF-M 11-22mm but it hasn't appeared in my region yet.


15
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Flash Diffuser
« on: August 04, 2013, 10:23:37 AM »
This looks interesting - thanks for the link.  Unfortunately, they won't ship to where I live but I would expect that some other brands will appear locally soon.

I have found that despite TTL, subjects are overexposed when shot from around 1-2m away and the light looks a bit harsh.  Dialling in -2/3 of a stop FEC gets about the right exposure .. if I remember, and if I have time to do this before taking flash shots at close range.  I'm sure that such a diffuser would help soften things up and make the lighting more even.  When taking shots from slightly further away the flash exposure is fine.

The thing that bugs me most about the flash is that it turns itself off after a set time.  My larger EX flashes just go to sleep and than wake up automatically when I press the shutter button half way.  The 90EX goes off completely and needs to be physically switched on again.  It doesn't have much battery life, with just two AAA batteries, which I guess is why it does this, but it's quite annoying.

My two year-old was in a show yesterday and I needed to use flash.  The 90EX kept turning itself off and I took several shots thinking the flash was switched on when it wasn't.

http://phil.uk.net/photography/canon_EOS_M.html

Pages: [1] 2