March 01, 2015, 10:34:45 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 - dhr90

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
Edwards AFB
SR-71 Sunset Edwards AFB DXO LR V2 vib 9424 © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal Photography, on Flickr

Beautiful, Keith. Solitary shot of the aircraft which has been confirmed (maybe) to have the highest operational ceiling and fastest speed at whatever altitude its pilots chose to fly of all operational aircraft ever. Its last record - Edwards AFB to Andrews AFB, ground to ground - 91 minutes. I've seen one up close at Huntsville's Air & Space Museum and it is the most ominous aircraft I've ever seen. Too bad that the SR-71 has been sunsetted (as your great shot symbolizes) for being too costly to continue to operate.

What is the distance between those two bases? There is one at the Duxford museum in the UK, whilst its dwarfed by the B52 in the same hanger, the Blackbird just has that presence about it...

Can we have some more F22 Raptor photos please?  ;D

Are the front landing gear wheels on the Bleriot specially designed for it? The look very similar to bike wheels...

Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: January 27, 2015, 03:40:08 PM »
Really happy with how this turned out.  Five shot panorama with Canon 5D MKii and Sigma 105mm F/2.8 EX DG Macro at F/13 iso 100.

I really like this. Personally I might have ended it roughly where ice meets the sides of the frame, but thats just a personal preference. Very well executed shot/stitch  :)

Photography Technique / Re: Which eye do you use?
« on: January 27, 2015, 03:32:04 PM »
I've never even seen someone shoot with their left eye. Although I don't tend to look that closely. Seems a bit almost unnatural to me. Doesn't it squash your nose somewhat?

As to the to question, right handed and use my right eye. Although I do use right or left eye only at times if inspecting certain parts at work, but I'm trying to get out of that habit as it was causing me grief after doing it.

Lenses / Re: My New "L"
« on: January 17, 2015, 03:11:22 PM »
Be aware, the GAS for L lenses has no end - bigger and faster is the ONLY way out ;D

Bigger and faster until we end up with 10-2000/1.4L HIS USM DO TC WTF OMG lenses :D

Then you get GAS for the latest vehicle to carry it  ;D

Lenses / Re: My New "L"
« on: January 16, 2015, 04:02:10 PM »
My first L was the trusty 24-105mm. Combined with a 7D it was a mind blowing increase in image quality from my old Sony DSLR. Then I got the 700-200L f2.8 II which made me tingle inside (and also realise I had a LOT of work to do to improve myself).

Yesterday I got the ef-s 24mm panckae for my birthday. It looks so bare without a red ring around the end  :( I also fear it may give me G.A.S for more prime lenses.

Should have mentioned this earlier, my top budget is £700, the UltranoteII is about £620 (about $1000 if my maths is right?) which I am much more comfortable with paying, I'd only go to £700 if it was a high end Macbook Pro sort of spec, which I know won't happen hence my looking to spend a bit less.

dhr90, based on the situation that you describe, save a little money and just get a refurbished Lenovo Thinkpad T420 or T430.  The T420 is a little older but probably one of the best laptops Lenovo ever made.  The T430 (slightly more expensive due to being a bit newer) will lose you the classic style IBM keyboard but gain you integrated USB3 and one gen newer CPU/graphics.  But you could add USB3 to the T420 with an inexpensive PCIe card.  Add a mSATA 240GB SSD drive and then you will have a spot for a large internal secondary SATA hard drive.  Don't worry so much about which generation the i5 CPU is.  In your situation, it won't make much of a difference for the amount of money it will cost.  You could get a high quality enterprise level laptop and SSD drive for less than $1000 easily.  And both have DisplayPort digital external monitor connectors and support a variety of docks if you want to make it easy to use it at the table with the better display, mouse, etc.  If you want more info on this, feel free to PM me.  I set these up for folks all the time at a fraction of the cost of new ones.

And if you want a true powerhouse, get a W520.  It has a 15" IPS high resolution display with i7 CPU and supports up to 32GB of DDR3 RAM with 4 modules + USB3.  After the same 240GB mSATA SSD drive you will probably still slightly less than $1000.

I'm intrigued by those thinkpads, and the w520. But I am VERY hesitant about preowned, even if they are refurbished. The workstation part thought for use with an external screen does sound good, my plan had been to just have them side by side and to use a proper mouse for editing work. I'll think about refurbished and get back to you. Thanks for the offer though!  :)

I dislike how Windows 8 looks, unless that has some big advantages I've missed, they're the same price so I'm happy to be converted to the newer OS.

I stuck with Win 7 for my desktop for similar reasons.  There are some minor advantages to 8, but in my opinion they're not significant.  The biggest reason I considered 8 was that the base version can go over 16 gigs of RAM, but that's not going to be an issue on your laptop.  Win 8 can start up a bit faster, but I find Win 7 with an SSD to be plenty fast enough.  Win 8 claims to have minor performance gains, but I can't imagine it's significant, otherwise there'd be a lot more hoopla over it.

I intend to add another 8GB of RAM in a year or so, prices will hopefully have fallen, and it spreads the cost out.

If you're putting your own RAM in it shouldn't be that expensive.  But you can get by with 8 for awhile (but make sure you have the 240 gb for scratch).

As for SSD, I'm going to and fro between 120GB and 240GB, again for price.

I would save until I could afford the 240.  I just can't imagine dealing with a 120.  Just your OS, programs, and some music, photos, and a few movies can fill that up pretty quick.  And that doesn't leave any room for Scratch or work in progress.

Sold on Win7 and 240GB SSD after mulling it over at work.

I just got my kid an office-grade desktop (SSD, i7, 32GB RAM) and Windows 8.1 takes a LOT of getting used to; it's frustrating because I can set up a Win7 box so an XP user can find everything in 20 minutes.

Agreed, but the key word there is office grade.  Windows still dominates the work place, and will most likely continue to do so.  So unless Microsoft gives up on the new interface style, or decides to maintain two styles, one for personal/tablets and one for professional use, you're going to have to learn it sooner or later.
Microsoft is getting ready to roll out Windows 10 later on this year... reviews from Beta testers are quite favorable... If you can wait a few months, I would...

P.S. I have windows 8.1 on my laptop. The day Windows 10 comes out is the day it gets wiped and a new OS put in place. My plan is to install a new OS on a new HD.

Having waited this long, I can wait a bit longer to see what Windows 10 is like. I just don't understand why they would put a touch screen looking interface, on an OS going on non touch screen machines  :o

Thank you for everyones advice, I look forward to using a machine which I can use within a minute or two of turning on. Currently I switch this machine on and then go to make and eat dinner before this one is ready to use  ;D

While there will be a variety of opinions, my IT experience wants to make these points....

-  If you are on a budget, why are you trying to purchase a laptop for image/video editing?  You can get a lot more bang for your buck and true performance with a desktop PC and high quality display.  Trying to edit images/video on a laptop is ALWAYS a compromise and ALWAYS more expensive to get the compromise.
-  With regard to the video systems you reference, it's a laptop.  They are all in the same league as far as performance.  And the video card performance is a moot point when editing images, it's just not the most important factor.  RAM, CPU, even Drive Speed is more important.  And since these are all laptop mobile chipsets, they are all going to be fairly limited on color space, etc so it's a really a moot point.  I would be more concerned with stability and driver compatibility.  And with that in mind, the Intel chipset will likely be the most trouble free with regard to drivers and maturity.  (At least that is usually the case.)  And I would definitely avoid an AMD CPU/Chipset which is what might be coming with the Nvidia graphics.

Get all the RAM you can without killing your budget (16GB should be enough) and at least a 240GB SSD for the OS, apps and scratch/working disk area.  This applies to both a desktop or a laptop.

- Space. I simply haven't the space for my own desktop while living with my parents (mine is boxed up and just goes on the dining table when I really need it). I currently use their desktop which is a decade old (it was cheap at the time, so a low spec and mine isn't much better), has a full HDD (no content is mine) thus forcing me to import and edit photos on an external drive via USB2.0. Plus the option to use a laptop from the sofa for general surfing etc would be nice. As for a screen, I have my own 23" monitor with a high resolution which is good enough for my needs for serious editing.

I'm looking at a 4th gen i5 4220M 2.6GHz with 1x 8GB RAM and windows 7 64bit.
I dislike how Windows 8 looks, unless that has some big advantages I've missed, they're the same price so I'm happy to be converted to the newer OS.
I intend to add another 8GB of RAM in a year or so, prices will hopefully have fallen, and it spreads the cost out.

As for SSD, I'm going to and fro between 120GB and 240GB, again for price. 240GB would be nice and I could keep 80% of my general files and music on it, with photos on 2 or 3 external drives once processed etc. The laptops I'm looking at have the option of replacing the disc drive with a second HDD caddy which is tempting given the OS is pre installed for me.

I have almost no experience with video, but for stills it doesn't matter - assuming you have a modern CPU with integrated GPU.  I use the integrated GPU (Intel 4770k) in my desktop and it runs Photoshop CS6 and Lightroom smooth as butter.  Based on the research I did at the time I built my PC, unless you get a really high end video card, it doesn't make a difference for stills editing.  Even then, the difference was that the high end GPU would run such and such a filter 0.2 seconds faster than the integrated card.  That kind of stuff doesn't bother me, so long as it can edit large documents smoothly without stutter and quickly select through photos.

And +1 to everything Rusty said above about the desktop vs. laptop.  If you have no choice but to choose a laptop, then deal with what you can get.  But as far as value, a laptop can't come close to competing with a desktop.  And a desktop is much easier to upgrade down the line.   I have to use my laptop, and I make it work.  But when I have a lot of editing to do I wait until I'm at my desktop.

Thanks. Just the sort of advice I was looking for about the GPU.

Rather than start yet another which laptop thread, I thought it might be better to revive this one. How important is a graphics card for use with lightroom, maybe elements in the future and potentially a small amount of video editing? The cards below are the two I am looking at.

I've narrowed my choice down to two laptops, the PCSPECIALIST Ultranote II or CosmosII (both I have specced with a full HD IPS screen.
One has an Intel HD Graphics Media Accelerator 4600 graphics card, which I believe is built in graphics rather than separate?
The second has a choice of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 840M 2.0GB DDR3 Video RAM - DirectX11, or the 850M.
Otherwise the specs are identical between the two choices, but the second laptop will be more than £150 extra.

I've had a play with some Macbook Pro's, and whilst very nice, any with a retina screen and even approach the spec I desire completely smash my budget and are utterly unaffordable for me  :(

Finally, has anyone had experience of PCSPECIALIST? Slightly wary of it as I haven't heard of it before, but they seem to be well received on the internet, and one of their machines is available from Curry's so should be legit (without the IPS screen or SSD and at a greatly increased price).

Canon General / Re: What Canon stuff did you get for Christmas
« on: December 26, 2014, 06:27:20 AM »
No Canon gear for me either. Did get a Rocket Blower though which has provided quite a bit of entertainment  ;D

Getting a bonus from work at the end of the month which will go towards either a photo editing laptop or a 7DII. The laptop is verging on a need. the 7DII is just a want, despite my current 7DI being more than adequate for my needs.

Wedding Photography / Re: Tough LARGE group photo
« on: December 17, 2014, 03:28:28 PM »
pabst photo? that's my beer!(and the beer of hipsters, but i don't hold that against them, or the fact that they jsut sold out to russians)

I find myself doing this from time to time, and it sounds like you told the client what i always tell them with these things. You did very well, and i'd certainly be pleased with that result. I second what Mt Spokane says, but of course there almost always seems to be room for improvement with such things. I monday morning quaterback the hell out of my work sometimes.
  As for the guy talking about pano, i would have done it, but then i would have taken some single exposure stuff as a safety net. you would think that the people would know how important it is try and make it work for the photo guy, and extension the client(your friend) but people just don't behave. i don't have much faith that people can even post for a shot like this without giving me the finger, or some other sly move. maybe even pull a "Teen Wolf" type of background thing(it's a thing, google it). i wouldn't put it past many.
  anyway, good work, i'm sure they will be pleased.

Back when I was at uni, we had quite a few group shots over the years, one guy on the course enjoyed whipping a testicle out to see if it would get noticed afterwards. One may have ended up enlarged on the wall in the department during open days for prospective students...

To the OP, you did very well given the circumstances. Did you ask the bride and groom to crouch or did they just automatically do that?

Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM Pancake
« on: December 15, 2014, 04:03:50 PM »
Just curious for people who put a big tele on the camera and have the pancake in the pocket. When you switch the pancake on to the camera where do you put the tele lens now? It won't fit it the pocket would it  :o?

Mine hands from a Sunsniper strap attached to the tripod collar.

Nice to note that the Digital Picture review mentions the preposterous pricing in Europe and the UK. Here we pay £179 - the equivalent of $280 including tax. It's worth it, but it isn't the bargain that it is in the USA!
£179? Yikes!  :o :o :o
Man, thats mean.
German retailers sell it right now for 160 to 170 € including tax. See here:
I don't need it right now, but I want it. I feel pretty much tempted to buy but maybe I can wait if the next cashback includes this tiny one (The actual winter promotion doesn't).

Maybe you should order from the continent...
It's too late for me and the 24mm - I already bought it. But my next lens purchase will be the 100-400mm mk II and 1.4x mk III - and that's a big investment and it looks like I could save a couple of hundred pounds by buying from Germany or elsewhere in Europe. Of course I could buy from a grey importer but I think I'd rather have the reassurance of Canon UK warranty support for a lens like the 100-400.
Interestingly my local dealer is Calumet. Calumet UK charge £179 for the 24mm pancake. Calumet Deutschland charge €179...

The 24mm pancake is now available as a grey import for £129, which is about $202. Just a few £'s more than the 40mm. The difference in pricing is tempting me...

Reviews / Re: reviewed EF-S 24/2.8 STM
« on: November 28, 2014, 02:34:58 PM »
Any way, the EF-S 24 has a limited market. Basically it really only makes sense on SL1/100D, if one wants really compact size ... and lowest possible price - for an optically very decent lens.

I think that a 'normal' lens that fits easily in one's pocket makes a lot of sense.  I certainly find the 40/2.8 useful for just that reason – when I'm primarily shooting with a telephoto lens, I don't have to carry another lens in a bag/case.

I echo this. For me as a crop shooter the 40 is just a focal length I don't really tend to use. The 24 however will be a perfect pocket lens (if image quality is good and I can get it for a reasonable price here in the UK) to take to airshows and motorsport events if I don't want to take a general zoom or will mainly have a telephoto equipped.

Landscape / Re: Flowers and other Flora
« on: November 26, 2014, 05:12:13 PM »

Untitled by Matt Roberts101, on Flickr

Untitled by Matt Roberts101, on Flickr

Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: November 26, 2014, 05:10:49 PM »

Sunset by Matt Roberts101, on Flickr

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9