October 25, 2014, 07:35:28 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 - Axilrod

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 92
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announces the Cinema EOS C100 Mark II
« on: October 22, 2014, 01:38:07 AM »
So they pretty much decided to sell the C100 with AF standard and call it a Mark II? And they had the nerve to include the term "innovation" in the press release? What a joke.

And for everyone saying "no one needs 4K" blah blah blah has obviously never worked with 4K footage and seen the tremendous benefits it allows in post. 4K mastered in 1080p still looks better than 1080p. And the adoption rate of 4K is going to increase exponentially over the next few years. I'd suggest anyone looking to get a 4K camera wait until NAB, I'm sure 90% of the new cameras will be 4K.

2
Business of Photography/Videography / Re: 4K, 5K, 6K and Up Video
« on: October 09, 2014, 06:40:13 PM »
I can't believe people are saying you can "barely see the difference" between 4K and 1080p. The difference is huge and immediately noticeable, even on a 1080p monitor.

3
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 05, 2014, 09:29:40 PM »
ahhh damn it, i was sure they where going to announce the 5d4 was going to use Sony's sensor.

That's just wishful thinking. No way a 5D4 would just come out of nowhere without a single mention of it on here.

4
Video & Movie / Re: My latest Cooking Video
« on: August 18, 2014, 01:33:31 PM »
Nice work, you've improved quite a bit since the last video I saw. Intro is very cool. I still think using Resolve on DSLR footage is incredibly unnecessary, especially if it's giving you issues and not coming out right. You can only do so much with compressed 8-bit 4:2:0 footage and I think doing it with FCP would de-clutter and speed up your workflow. But hey whatever works for you, keep up the good work!

5
Lenses / Re: How many years before we see a 50L II
« on: July 24, 2014, 01:31:50 PM »
many years.
there is nothing wrong with the 50L.

it's a people lens. it's plenty sharp.
it's f/1.2 - so if you're not nailing focus, you need to work on your technique.

Can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not...

6
EOS Bodies / Re: When Does the Year of the Lens Start?
« on: May 02, 2014, 09:49:38 AM »
14-24 por favor

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Just discovered on swiss canon web page EOS 1200D
« on: April 30, 2014, 06:03:27 PM »
http://de.canon.ch/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/Digital_SLR/EOS_1200D/discover/index.aspx?WT.ac=SS_1200D_EOS_SwitzerlandDE

Canon cameras get different branding depending on the country, like Neuro said, this is the Rebel T5 in the US. I guess the Swiss probably don't know what a "rebel" is.

8
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Quick start videoing on 5Diii
« on: April 30, 2014, 06:01:10 PM »
I'll do my post-production in instagram for that film effect

You're joking right? You have to be joking.

9
The 17-120 is nice... And will outlast any camera that they could have announced.

Haha yeah it's nice for the video industry but I doubt many people on here have $33k lying around to buy one. Prosumers got the shaft that's all there is to it.

10
Eldar this is great and I'd love to see the comparison, but I think you're one of a very small group that is fortunate enough to own the OTUS, and probably the only person on the board that owns both of these lenses. But I'd love to see your comparison shots and hear your opinion!

11
Lenses / Re: Canon CN-E50mm T1.3L F
« on: April 30, 2014, 05:52:45 PM »
I'd hope it's better than the 50L, but I know with Zeiss their CP.2's are pretty much the ZE's in cinema housings. The cinema lenses have more aperture blades, so you get a rounder bokeh even stopped down a bit. But most of the money you're spending on cinema lenses is paying for the housing, so that added cost isn't really going towards improved image quality, and no way it's going to perform as well as the OTUS. Not to mention buying a cine lens for shooting stills is ridiculous, they dont have AF and are way too big and bulky and are designed to be put on rigs, not for shooting handheld.


12
Lenses / Re: 135L v 85 1.8
« on: April 30, 2014, 05:47:23 PM »
I've owned the 135L and 85 1.8, there isn't really a comparison between the two. I think the 85 1.8 is a great value but the 135 outperforms it in every way. Get it, you won't be sorry. But honestly if you're shooting weddings you might be better off selling your 70-200 and 85 and picking up the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II. I'd say the 70-200 II is just as sharp as the 135 and is a hell of a lot more versatile.

13
Lenses / Re: Canon's f/1.2's: What is really going on?
« on: April 30, 2014, 05:45:07 PM »
I had a the 50L for a while and really enjoyed it, but it definitely has it's flaws. I traded it a few years ago for a Zeiss 50mm Makro and haven't regretted it for a second. Although I think I may pick up the Sigma if it's as good as everyone says it is.

14
Man who would have thought the answer was "not a damn thing."

15
Canon General / Re: Gear envy
« on: February 10, 2014, 09:41:56 AM »
I think that list is wrong... I don't think that Canon has a 14mm fisheye. 14mm rectilinear, yes.

And I can't believe they don't have at least 1 200-400 w/1.4x lens. Hmmm...well, ok. They'll be shooting from more known locations & distances, so I guess you can go with all primes like they have.

You're right, the 14mm is rectilinear. But the list says there are 7 200-400's.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 92