January 31, 2015, 07:39:16 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 - Hector1970

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
Lenses / Re: Canon Tilt Shift Lens Question
« on: January 30, 2015, 08:42:32 AM »
Thanks for the replies.
I actually didn't understand the height of the ground factor.
I guess I am always using it at the same height off the ground.

I probably need to adjust height with this lens to change perspective.
It's certainly made me think.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D2 + 100-400 markii review
« on: January 30, 2015, 07:49:27 AM »
Nice review Kent. You went to alot of trouble.
You are talking some nice shots
Personally I have found the Canon 100-400 works better on a 5D Mark III.
Not to do with the lens but the fact the picture quality on the 5D Mark III is much better than the 7D II.
The 7D II might be good for an APS-C but when you work with Full Frame it seems to be hard to accept the quality of current APS-C sensors

Kind Regards

EOS Bodies / Review: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: January 30, 2015, 07:42:45 AM »
My First Impressions

10 FPS is great fun (even if you produce way to many photographs)
Layout is great if you are used to a 5D Mark III.
ISO performance is disappointing. I can't compare it to a 7D but alot poorer than a 5D Mark III.
Maybe I am expecting too much from an APS-C camera but I've found it disappointing.
I could be spoilt by the 5D Mark III.
I find cropability of picture is much less than a 5D Mark III. Pixels seem to break up faster.
Again here maybe an unfair comparison but it's the first camera I've bought that is lesser than the previous.
I wouldn't see a huge difference in picture quality from a 500D to a 7D Mark II.
Whereas there was a huge difference between a 500D to a 5D Mark III.

Focusing is very strong on the camera. It's snappy and accurate.

So in summary it is a good camera for an APS-C.
I'd be surprised if it is king of the APS-C. If so they are not progressing much in the last few years.
It's not a great leap forward.
It's main positive is 10 FPS.
I would see that as the only reason to buy it over a 5D Mark III.
I don't you'd actually get better reach using it over a 5D Mark III.
A crop on a 5D Mark III would give a better result.

Lenses / Canon Tilt Shift Lens Question
« on: January 26, 2015, 10:58:43 AM »
I was wondering if anyone here has alot of experience with a Canon T-SE lens.
Specifically maybe the 24mm which I have.

I am wondering what degree of Tilt is required to get the maximum depth of field in a landscape shot.
My understanding it's typically not even one notch (1 degree) down.

I know you should focus on the distance and then tilt until something near is in focus.

I am wondering what do people do when they are taking a landscape shot and they want the maximum depth of field in focus. Do they set it to 1 degree down or would they attempt to put it somewhere between 0 and 1 (which because the notches are so small tiny adjustments).

Kind Regards

Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: January 18, 2015, 06:20:30 AM »
Eventually got my copy.
It's a great lens. I've probably been using it under fairly ideal conditions but it's performing great.
Autofocus is fast and slick.
I love the feel of the photos out of it .
The 70-200mm II is in  danger of becoming my second favourite.
Has worked very well with both the 5D Mark III and 7D Mark II .
10FPS is a nice experience with it (the downside being the number of similar photos you get. Lots of post deleting required).
An expensive lens but undoubted quality.
I'm looking forward to taking more great photos with it.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms Development of High Megapixel Camera
« on: December 26, 2014, 04:50:59 AM »
There was a mention earlier that Leaf Shutters had jumped the shark. I have the Fuji X100s and the best thing about it is it's Leaf Shutter. It's a big advantage for strobist work.
I'll be interested how this camera works out. Resolving power is what would interest me. The 5D Mark III is a great all rounder but I still crave more resolved detail.

Lenses / Re: buying advice: canon 85mm f1.2 II or f1.8?
« on: December 15, 2014, 06:18:54 AM »
I agree you'd only buy the 85mm 1.2 if you want to shoot at F1.2
It produces a pretty special photograph.
It's focussing is relatively slow and hunting for focus can be an issue.
It's very sharp stopped down. Bitingly sharp (not flattering at times , shows up every wrinkle, blemish and tooth decay ). It's given me a fright a few times.
It's very expensive for a limited use lens.
You ideally need you object stationary. f1.2 has such shallow depth of field that it's very easy to have nose in focus but eyes out of focus.
I've never used the F1.8 but my friend has it and really likes it. It's way cheaper and easier to manage .
So it's all about F1.2.
Is the creamy bokeh worth the price.
It's hard to live without once you first experience it.

Lenses / Re: Sigma or Canon (50mm 1.4)
« on: November 01, 2014, 08:24:17 PM »
I like the Canon 50 1.4
It's not the sharpest but it makes pleasant photos.
I've never thought of it as fragile. I don't mind mine too carefully and it's fine.
The 50 1.8 is a good lens too.
That definitely doesn't bounce.
A friend of mine dropped my one .
It was interesting to see the inner workings of it afterwards

Lenses / Re: Why don't Canon make lenses for other mounts?
« on: November 01, 2014, 08:19:36 PM »
I'm sure it's because Canon want to lock users into buying their cameras.
A lot of users probably never go beyond the basic camera and kit lens.
But you've got to wonder that there is a huge market out there for Canon lenses.
I can only think of one Nikon lens that's desired by Canon users (the 14-24mm).
Nikon users would buy Canon lens. Especially D800 D810 users.
Maybe Canon feel the engineering involved isn't worth it for the volumes.
I'll be interested too to find out the real reason.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 150-600mm Preorder?
« on: October 16, 2014, 06:49:23 AM »
I have a Sigma 150-500mm for a few years. It was one of the early models. I was never particularily happy with it's sharpness. It was later recalled (the early made ones - mine was amongst them). I didn't bother in the end because I'd been a bit disappointed with it and didn't feel like going to the hassle of shipping it off.
I think you are taking a risk taking an early model of a new lens. They probably don't have all the issues ironed out on it. But maybe things have improved significantly with Sigma. Hopefully you get a great lens and that it's far superior to the 150-500mm

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Woe and Pathos in the Sigma 50 Art?
« on: October 16, 2014, 06:43:47 AM »
Maybe I need to get my eyes checked. The last time they were checked the results were excellent but maybe they are starting to go wonky.
Even full size the picture look sharp. I'm amazed as to how sharp people expect a lens to be.
These photographs are shooting a swaying object focused on an eye which much be moving back and forth a few mm/cm all the time.
There is a very good article in here somewhere about lens and camera tolerances.
Sometimes you have a camera +3 and and lens +3 so it's out +6
other times you have a camera -3 and and a lens +3 and you have a perfect combination.
People blame the lens when there is nothing wrong with the lens (as in its within acceptable tolerances). Its the combination of lens and camera that's at fault.
Maybe I should be more demanding of my lenses. The Canon 50 1.4 wouldn't be as sharp as that.
I'm not sure more sharpness would add in any way to the photos.
But as you say you are a bit of fanatic about sharpness.
I thought I was a bit too but it actually looks like I actually expect too little.
Do the AFMA, hopefully you'll find sharpness and happiness and contentment with what looks like a pretty exciting lens. I should consider it myself.

Photography Technique / Re: Noise in 5D III - Concern or my fault?
« on: October 14, 2014, 11:48:37 AM »
Maybe I'm going blind but it looks more of a camera shake problem than an noise problem.
I have a gorilla pod and have never been impressed with its stability.
It never grips something perfectly stable (at least the biggest version one of them doesn't).
Still from the distance the photos don't look so bad. The two shots are reasonably good fireworks shots.
Since the vast majority of photos go no further than Facebook or Flickr I wouldn't be too worried.
If you want good fireworks shot the most essential item is a sturdy tripod not a more expensive camera.
The 5D III isn't a miracle worker but it's a good solid and consistent camera.
Noise control is good enough. I've taken alot of night shots at reasonably high ISO's and been very happy with the results. I pixel peep too and would love better noise control and dynamic range but really its a crutch. What I need to do is improve my composition and find better locations. That would be a major improvement well beyond what a new camera could provide.
I think your 5D III is fine and you will grow to love it.

Lenses / Re: Which Tilt/Shift lens to choose?
« on: September 18, 2014, 10:59:43 AM »
If you are buying the Tilt-Shift for creative blur or the "Tilt" effect you'd be better of doing it in Adobe CS6 or CC.
It's probably more effective.
I have the 24 TS-E II and I love it. I use it quite a bit and it makes me feel like a real photographer but I probably get better shots from my 17-40mm.
I think the camera is better at autofocus than an eye is at manual focus - just my opinion that may be factually incorrect  ::). I have excellent eye-sight and it's easy to have an out of focus shot on a manual lens.
If you over tighten the screws on a tilt shift you could head for big trouble.
If you don't tight enough the lens will drop and go out of focus.

The advanage of manual is it slows you right down and makes you think.
A TSE is a difficult lens to manage correctly.
It's not self explanatory.
Generally very little tilt is required to get that big depth of field look.

I opted for the 24 mm because I could add Lee Filters.
No regrets. I think Extreme Shift left to extreme shift right is approx the equivalent of 19mm (again could be technically incorrect  :-[- its pretty wide anyway)

It looks great as an lens.
Bulbous lens of the 17mm make me more nervous for some reason.

Photography Technique / Re: Clouds
« on: September 10, 2014, 05:55:32 PM »
If you mean getting more out of clouds in software I find Google (Nik) Viveza 2 to be very useful in this regard.
Silver Efex Pro if its black and white. The structure slider is the one you'd want

Photography Technique / Timelapse
« on: September 10, 2014, 04:28:26 PM »
Hi All,
Does anyone know of any website site or guide on timelapsing?
I've only taken static ones so for but I'd like to take rotating or moving timelapses and was looking for tips and tricks.
Here's a sample of what I've done


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8