Messages

1

Software & Accessories / Re: Horror has a face -- new Flickr

« on: May 20, 2013, 11:23:19 PM »

Let's try to be objective here.  ANYTHING would be better than flickr's current interface.  If I were to design a photo web application in 1999 with nothing but frontpage extensions I could still have done better than what flickr's been offering since yahoo pillaged bought them.

Just because it's different doesn't mean it's better.

Though the 1TB of free storage is nice.  I might have to give it a test drive if the REST/JSON API isn't terrible.

But if I were already a pro user... ouch.

2

Software & Accessories / Re: Flickr is now 1 Terabytes!! For everyone!!

« on: May 20, 2013, 11:17:07 PM »

1TB = Free
1TB + No Ads = $50/year
2TB = $500/year... ?

I'd be bitter if I were a pro user too.

That's some odd math by the yahoo folk.  Glad I wrote my own photo app.

3

Canon General / Re: Beach Vacation in a month... & I'm scared for my gear.

« on: May 19, 2013, 12:23:10 PM »

I wouldn't worry too much.  Just use common sense for the most part and you should be fine.  When I went to the Caribbean last year, I had my 5Dm3, 24-70 (mk1), 70-200, 100mm, and a few other lenses.

The vast majority of my pictures were taken on the beach, including some where my camera was almost sitting on the sand trying to get angle shots.  I would never change lenses on the beach -- I'd head back up towards the beach hotel we stayed at if I wanted to swap.  I'd only set my camera down on my camera bag while I was on the beach, but even that was only a few times.  And I never took my camera (and myself) into the water -- though I wouldn't worry about going waist deep if the waves weren't too much.

The best piece of advice I can offer is to watch the humidity.  Our hotel room was air conditioned (thank god), and being on an island the humidity was usually close to 90%.  With the temperature and humidity differential between our hotel room and the exterior, my camera and lenses would immediately fog up and be unusable for ~10 minutes once I walked outside, which would make it real difficult to run out and grab a shot if I saw something interesting.

So I would bring several large ziplock bags, put your gear in them before you plan on heading out, and let them sit outside (we had a secure porch area) so that your gear can get acclimated to the temperature.  The bags will prevent some fogging, but will it will take longer for your gear to become acclimated.

4

Lenses / Re: Canon 70 - 200 f2.8L version 2

« on: May 18, 2013, 09:21:39 PM »

I own the 85 1.2/L, 135 f/2L and 70-200 f/2.8L IS II.  I probably use the 135 the most, followed by the 85 -- but I'm on a big prime kick.

If I travel, it's the 24-70 II and 70-200, hands down. Can't beat the versatility.  But it's all a matter of preference.

5

Lenses / Re: How do you determine the focal length you use most often?

« on: May 16, 2013, 10:38:30 AM »

This doesn't apply to the OP's question, but some other nerds out there might find it useful.

I have a script which traverses my photography directories and indexes every photo.  I use exiftool to extra the photo metadata, imagemagick to create various sizes of the photo (two thumbnails, two web resolution images), mysql to store the metadata and statistics on the photo, and perl to tie it all together.

Probably not an ideal solution for most, but it's likely the most customizable!  :-)

6

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Fuji x100(s) to Supplement an SLR

« on: May 15, 2013, 01:30:11 PM »

Exactly my thoughts on the TS-E 24mm.  I love shooting architecture -- which is the bread and butter of any tilt shift lens -- but with my son being born a couple weeks ago, I fear my architecture shooting days may be few and far between now.

I was also hesitant about purchasing such an expensive camera with a fixed prime lens.  However, since my son was born I'm yet to break any zoom lens out of my bag.  I've been exclusively using my 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 100mm, and 135mm.  I've been using my 85mm the most, as I really like the bokeh that lens produces as well as the the frame you get with the 85.  BUT if I had to pick only one of these lenses and discard the rest, I would likely go with the 35mm for its versatility.  So that made my decision on the x100s a little easier.

Congratulations on your baby! Is it your first? My life changed for the better, but with less time for self indulgence

Thanks!  Yes, my first.  And life has certainly changed, and also for the better.  I'm definitely taking more pictures (my 5Dm3 with a prime lens is always sitting on the kitchen table) and losing a lot of sleep, but no surprise with either of those.

When my wife and I found out we were expecting, I went on a prime lens buying spree.  Literally picked up the Sigma 35mm f/1.4, Sigma 50mm f/1.4, Canon 85mm f/1.2L II, and Canon 135mm f/2L within the span of four months, and also threw the 24-70mm f/2.8L II in there for good measure.

So far I'm immensely happy with my decision to invest in primes, and also glad I have the 24-70mm ii for when my kid gets a little more mobile and I'll need some more versatility.

And also why I'm very happy with my decision to order the x100s over the weekend.  A bulky SLR and primes are great for when we're around the house and I want to get some photos, but once we start traveling more with the baby, having something a little more mobile and easy to carry will be great.  :-)

7

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Fuji x100(s) to Supplement an SLR

« on: May 15, 2013, 09:18:57 AM »

I've had my X100s since release as a compliment to my 5DIII. I'll list my current setup and usage.

Gear:
5DIII, Canon 50L, Canon 85L II, Tamron 24-70 VC, & Canon 70-200 IS II
and... Fuji X100s.

What gets more use? The Fuji X100s by far.

Usage
Daily Shooter: Fuji X100s - It is small enough that I keep it in a small case and toss it in my bag every day.

Street shooting: Fuji X100s - Small, discreet, silent

Portrait Shoots: 5DIII, 50L, & 85L II with Fuji X100s as a compliment

Event Work/Photojournalism: Tamron 24-70 & Canon 70-200. Although, I did shoot an event last night with the 5dIII + Fuji X100s for an 85mm + 35mm prime combo and it worked out pretty well! For paid gigs though, I'll stick with my zooms.

Low Light Work (low action): 5DIII and Fuji X100s (the Fuji actually handles noise "slightly" better than the 5DIII).

Low Light Work (action): 5DIII - Fuji AF is too slow in low light for action shots for my tastes.


Additional Points:
To answer someone's question earlier about one-handed shooting with Fuji X100s - Yes for shooting, not for changing many settings. With one hand I can grab the camera, turn it on, swap between OVF and EVF, and take a shot. (worst case scenario, with a neck strap and X100s pressed against your body, you can change shutter speed, aperture, etc).

AF - I have found the Fuji X100s AF "good enough" for me probably 90% of the time in good lighting (phase detect AF only engages in good light. in low light, it uses the slower contrast AF which is the same as the original X100)

Usage percentage - I'd say I use my X100s 75% of the time, if not more. I end up bringing it for most professional work too, so it gets used a lot. It is also the most fun camera I have ever used, so that helps.


Limitations & Quirks -
*The X100s is still not a "perfect" camera, and does still face some limitations. The AF is nowhere near 5DIII/OM-D levels. In low light, it gets worse as mentioned above.

*Fixed 35mm lens - Great as a second camera, but I would never own it as my only camera.

*Still room for improvement - The focus peaking in MF could be better; Exposure compensation dial doesn't work in Manual mode; no customizable Q menu, etc. Basically, there are a few small things that could be better but Fuji is in my opinion, the BEST at offering users frequent software updates and listening to user feedback.

*Image Quality - Pretty amazing for APS-C. It is the best IQ I have seen come out of any APS-C sensor camera and is mostly indistinguishable from the comparison shots I have seen with a 5DIII + Canon 35L and the Fuji X100s. My 5DIII + 85L II on the other hand, well... nothing short of a $10,000 kit can top that combo.

JPG vs. RAW - Both are great. The Fuji has one of the best JPG engines of any camera in my opinion. However, I still mainly shoot in RAW. You may read things about issues with the X-Trans sensor and Adobe, but rest assured that these issues have been resolved to the satisfaction of 95% of Fuji users (there will always be the remaining 5% pixel peepers).

Overall I've never owned a Fuji before the original X100, but I am smitten. I'm biased because I love it so much. I can't wait for the X-pro 2 to come out (which will hopefully be an interchangeable lens X100s).

This is a fantastic review and comparison.  Thanks for sharing!

8

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Fuji x100(s) to Supplement an SLR

« on: May 15, 2013, 09:18:00 AM »

Life is crazy and fun I am actually contemplating selling my 17 TSE to finance the x100s and its various filters, flashes for it, and stuff. I was very ambitious when buying the TS lens, but with two small children I have not had time to really learn how to use the tilt and shift. Given my other lenses, I feel that I have much covered so I will not be to hard on my day to day photography.

Exactly my thoughts on the TS-E 24mm.  I love shooting architecture -- which is the bread and butter of any tilt shift lens -- but with my son being born a couple weeks ago, I fear my architecture shooting days may be few and far between now.

I was also hesitant about purchasing such an expensive camera with a fixed prime lens.  However, since my son was born I'm yet to break any zoom lens out of my bag.  I've been exclusively using my 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 100mm, and 135mm.  I've been using my 85mm the most, as I really like the bokeh that lens produces as well as the the frame you get with the 85.  BUT if I had to pick only one of these lenses and discard the rest, I would likely go with the 35mm for its versatility.  So that made my decision on the x100s a little easier.

9

Landscape / Re: Sunset landscape

« on: May 14, 2013, 09:12:50 AM »

Great composition. The rock makes the image.

Agreed.  The rocks and the silky look of the water really make the picture.

I also agree with JBeckwith, a longer exposure to soften the water might have also looked real nice.  But that certainly doesn't take away from the photo you got.

10

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Fuji x100(s) to Supplement an SLR

« on: May 13, 2013, 04:58:49 PM »

Thanks for the responses, everyone!

I wound put pulling the proverbial trigger on the x100s Saturday night.  It's backordered from B&H, but hopefully I'll have it in the next week or two.  While I really wanted to grab the TS-E 24mm, I ultimately decided to go with the x100s because I feel I'll get more use out of it.  And I started a 365 project a couple weeks ago, and I think I'm more likely to do well at it if I have a smaller camera with me instead of having to go out of my way to ensure I have my 5Dm3 with the appropriate lens on hand.

But I'd love to get more feedback on the x100s or sample pictures.  :-)

11

Lenses / Re: Canon Tele lenses vs Nikon tele lenses ( both with converters )

« on: May 10, 2013, 06:01:15 PM »

Two words: Better glass.

Both for the lenses themselves and the teleconverters.

Better glass?
in what way?

Canon glass has much better contrast and resolution when shooting black BBQ grills.

12

Third Party Manufacturers / Fuji x100(s) to Supplement an SLR

« on: May 10, 2013, 02:51:40 PM »

Hello All,
So I'm seriously considering purchasing the new Fuji x100s.  I love my 5Dm3 and my variety of EF lenses, but the entire kit can seem a bit obnoxious at times... particularly for street photography or simply for a camera to casually carry around.  I have a point and shoot (S90), but rarely use it as I don't like shooting with an LCD.  So I'm looking to get some advice from members who have purchased the x100s or a similar camera.  Which do you find yourself using more?  Are you glad to have purchased a secondary mirrorless camera to supplement your SLR?

And the other half of this question is a bit more pointed; I'm also considering getting the TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II.  However, I've come to the conclusion that I likely wouldn't use a TS lens nearly as often as a more compact mirrorless camera.

Thoughts?  Thanks!

13

Portrait / Re: my first new born baby photos :)

« on: May 09, 2013, 10:14:27 AM »

Also, just some friendly criticism.  I really like the second and third photos, but the chandelier in the first photo is very distracting -- I'd crop the photo to include only the baby and father.  It would be a tight crop, but better than including the light fixture.

And the last photo is nice composition wise, but the focus is on the tip of the baby's nose... leaving the eyes OOF.  I would either stop down to ensure the baby's entire face is in focus, or focus on the eyes and let the nose/mouth fall slightly OOF.  I've been using my center AF point only to ensure I'm focusing on my son's eyes.  If I want more in focus, I'll stop down to f/4.5 or lower.

But overall very nice shots!  :-)

14

Portrait / Re: my first new born baby photos :)

« on: May 09, 2013, 10:04:00 AM »

Nice shots.  I actually had a baby a week and a half ago and have been filling up memory cards ever since.  Here are a few suggestions that I've been applying to the pictures I've been taking the past 10 days:

1) My most used slider in ACR is clarity.  I reduce the clarity in almost every baby photo I take to create that creamier look.
2) Babies have soft skin, but our cameras/lenses are often too sharp and the baby's skin comes out looking flakey or rough.  Try using layer masks and blurring (surface or gaussian blur) to soften the skin.  Surface blur is great for keeping edges intact, and masks for ensuring the eyes, nose, and mouth remain sharp while the rest of the skin can have that soft look to it.
3) Overexpose.  Even if my shots were coming out great on the histogram, I wound up punching the exposure or highlights to achieve a brighter image.

Hope these help!

15

Portrait / Re: The official: Portrait Humor Thread....

« on: May 09, 2013, 09:49:12 AM »

What's wrong with the first picture?  I think it's great whenever you can catch a shot of a baby mid-dream with a smile on his/her face.  Well done.  :-)

The last picture is great... and been around awhile.  I photoshopped a friend's face over the guy and then the same face on the shirt over the dog and redid the text to say "World's Best Mullet" around five years ago.  Yeah, the friend had a mullet.  ;-)