Messages

1

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: First big job using FF - for all the FF nay-sayers

« on: February 04, 2013, 12:40:21 PM »

-Rant- And there is no such thing as a FF nay-sayer. Some people think they prefer crop cameras over FF, but they just don't realize that their dinky toy sensors is utter crap in comparison to FF. I know this because I used to be one of them. .. Oh, those lost years.

I agree... I was one too lol.  I don't understand the "reach" arguement.  Your lens is what gives you reach.  A smaller sensor doesn't magnify what's in the frame, it crops.  Even if the cropped image is made up of more megapixels than the same frame cropped from a full frame image, wouldn't the full frame image still be better in terms of IQ, bokeh, etc ?(assuming all else is constant...)

2

Software & Accessories / Re: Stop Using Instagram

« on: December 18, 2012, 12:26:33 PM »

.

3

Contests / Re: Gura Gear Giveaway!

« on: December 07, 2012, 08:25:36 AM »

Id love to have this! 

4

Landscape / Re: Seeking sky advice

« on: December 06, 2012, 10:20:51 AM »

Simply put, you can't correctly expose bright sky over a shaded river on one shot.  You might get close with a gradient ND filter.  I don't use one.. but the top is dark and fades down to clear to darken the sky and try to keep it from getting blown out.

Looks like youre in the market for an HDR tutorial.  Basically that involves merging two (or more) separate shots exposing different elements in the same scene.  So one with the sky exposed correctly where the river will be dark or solid black, and then one like you linked to with the river exposed correctly.

5

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D MkIII instructions - Rant !!

« on: December 06, 2012, 09:02:15 AM »

who cares?
some have more then enough money to buy a 5D MK3 but never touched a DSLR camera.

well i guess you just love to complain.

no manual = bad... manual = bad.... S___ i guess the world is a ugly place for some people.

Health & safety are incredibly important issues for photographers, cabling & electrics in studios are risks to be aware of, and outdoors there are far too many Utube clips of photographers walking backwards to compose shots, and falling down flights of stairs, or into water features, all things we should all be aware of, but the level of these instructions are frankly insulting.

not canons fault.
fat and dumb americans will sue you for everything.

there is no idea stupid enough (or embarrassing) for a lawsuite in america.

I'm always intrigued by arguments like this (if you can call it one).  Who cares?  Apparently you do.. and your comment is equally as negative and preachy as f*** lol.  At least the OP was fueling a conversation--or entertainment at the least.

Good job on citing those sources to support your bitterness toward americans.  Speak of complaining just to complain..

6

Lenses / Re: 100mm macro VS 180mm macro

« on: December 05, 2012, 09:59:26 PM »

I have only used the 100L IS. The reason I chose it is I hand shoot with it and wanted the IS. Also after using the 24-105, I felt most of my shots that were hand held did not need more than 100mm. The 180L is heavier and pricier by about 50%. So that was my reason to buy the 100L IS.

Hope this helps.

That makes sense... IS is definitely a plus

I plan on using whichever lens I get for food/product shots...I'm looking for piece of info that I might have not considered before making a final decision.

I'd really recommend considering the TS-E 90mm f/2.8 for food/product photography - it's really the lens of choice for that application.  The problem with a macro lens is DoF - it's either too thin, or you have to stop down well into apertures narrow enough to soften the image with diffraction.  The tilt feature of a TS-E lens gives you control over DoF, and allows you to get a deeper DoF at wider apertures.

I didn't really get into more expensive gear until recently so I never really researched tilt-shift before...  I read about it just now and it seems perfect actually.  In fact this could probably be the single most useful lens for what I do (stock photos and occasional portraits).  Thanks for the tip!

7

Lenses / 100mm macro VS 180mm macro

« on: December 05, 2012, 07:46:20 PM »

Sorry in advance if this topic already exists, but I can't find it if it does.  I can't seem to find any solid info comparing these lenses.  A lot of opinions I've read online are completely different regarding the two 100mm lenses.  Some say the L version isn't worth it unless you're completely bent on having IS, and that the non-L had equal or possibly better IQ if its on a tripod (for any situation where ultimate IQ is necessary, Id be using a tripod anyway).  Others swear by the L as if the non-L isn't even worth considering.  Am I missing something significant that differentiates the L other than slightly better build quality and weather sealing?

Also, on paper the 180mm doesn't really seem enticing next to the 100mm considering its price difference.  And it seems less available in the used market, so I'm judging their price difference as higher than the difference between their retail prices.  But the few times I've seen it mentioned online, people seem to swear by it.  Is there any benefit of owning the 180 over the 100 other than it's reach (which I probably dont need... necessarily...)?

I plan on using whichever lens I get for food/product shots...  I feel like the non-L 100mm is probably enough for my needs... but as always, I'm tempted by my curse to feel like I need "the best"... the L.  (or 180L?!?!?) 

I'd especially appreciate advice from anyone who has used at least 2 of the 3 I'm considering.  I've read multiple separate reviews on each lens online, and watched the digitalrev 100mm comparison (but I feel like Kai always leans toward the expensive option).

I'm not really looking for votes as much as I'm looking for piece of info that I might have not considered before making a final decision.  Im using a 5DmkIII if that matters.

 

8

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D vs 5Diii today...

« on: December 05, 2012, 08:38:45 AM »

Clearly the 6D. Much cheaper, same picture, lighter, nicer body, plus the wifi and GPS comes in handy.

Same picture in a fully lit studio setting maybe..  It has worse low light, and less advanced AF which [theoretically, anyway..] leads to more grain and blur.  Nicer body if you prefer plastic over magnesium (6D is partially plastic to accomodate the wifi and GPS antennae).  GPS and wifi are cool, but also possible on any camera with external attachments if you don't want to sacrifice build quality.

Just playing devils advocate...

9

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D vs 5Diii today...

« on: December 05, 2012, 08:33:25 AM »

It's not much cheaper.. at least not right now.  Maybe if you're buying from a local shop thats still selling the mkiii for $3500....

Considering youre buying right now, you can get the 5DIII for only $400 more than the 6D... I think it's a clear winner.  If it were still a $1500 price difference and you dont care about the more advanced AF, the answer might be different. 

If youre looking hard enough, you can find the 5DIII for $2500 or slightly more.  Even less if youre willing to buy the kit and resell the 24-105.  I'm surprised how many people seem to be still buying the 6D right now with the smallish price gap

10

Canon General / Re: What real Pros shoot...

« on: December 04, 2012, 10:28:10 AM »

This...

http://blogs.reuters.com/fullfocus/2012/11/30/best-photos-of-the-year-2012/#a=1

Nice one, but I bet the photographer wished he had a D800 for that shot. More DR would have helped!

 

(Obvious flame bait, but it is still true.)

Im not sure you're baiting, it lookes more like trolling. If not, then please provide a serious explanation to your statement. The moment is everything. To capture the moment, a camera with fast AF is essential,  having a 5D3 myself,  I have to say it's quite adequate when it comes to that.

Also, looking at the charts. 82.9% if I recall it correct couldn't have been taken with a D800 to match a 5D3 on ISO. So again, please proove your point.

I would have brought a D800 and left my 5D at home in case I dropped it in a pool or something... maybe thats what he meant

11

Lenses / Re: What's your dream lens

« on: December 04, 2012, 09:59:33 AM »

I own my dream lens, and until they make a mark III it's always going to be the Canon 85mm 1.2L mark II

+1

and a titanium 50mm f0.95 nocticanon IS USM pancake lens would be nice

12

EOS Bodies / Re: Why I'm Asking Santa for a 6D

« on: December 03, 2012, 10:58:45 AM »

I think your reasoning is logical... plus the 6D's new GPS and Wifi might be really handy if its mainly used traveling.  You could sync it to a phone or ipad and family can watch what's on your LV, and it lets you view whats stored on the card and whatnot.  I'm considering whether it would have been the better choice for me over the 5d3 since I dont really require the build quality and low-light or AF of the 5D... but who ever buys the most practical Canon product

Theoretically, even if the 5D mkiii were the same price, the 6D STILL might be the better option because of its smaller size, weight, wifi... and lacks nothing you really need, right

13

EOS Bodies / Re: Downgrade to crop

« on: December 03, 2012, 09:56:32 AM »

If your long shots are at the long end of your current zoom lens and you shoot from a distance, you will miss the reach.

Well, we've had this discussion before.     The reach only matters if your output demands it.  A FF image cropped to the same FoV of an APS-C sensor will have essentially the same IQ - the only thing you're really giving up is megapixels.  So, if 7-8 MP is sufficient (which it is for web, slideshows, and prints up to ~12x18" - and I suspect that covers most people's needs), then a cropped FF shot will do just as well as an uncropped APS-C shot. 

But last time the conversation was comparing a 10D with only 8 megapixels or w/e it has, which made sense.  But cropping the inner APS-c FOV of a 6D wont giver you as big of a difference between the 60D right?  As far as comparing a current APSC to a current full frame, that argument doesn't apply.  If I shot sports or wildlife, I would definitely wait for the 7DII over buying a 6D. 

I do love my 5D3 though... and the low light performance is definitely noticeable over my t2i.  Although I'm also using an 85 1.2L where I used to use a 50mm 1.8, so that definitely contributes.  Personally I dont see the 6D as worth its price...  I'd save a little more to jump to 5DIII with way better AF, low light, build quality... slightly better everything, and you can get it for around $2500.  If you can afford the kit up front and feel comfortable with ebay, you can make guaranteed profit off reselling the kit lens to chip away at the price.

14

Abstract / Re: Goofing around could lead to $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

« on: December 03, 2012, 09:08:46 AM »

The fact that this has been viewed almost 1700 times should be a testament to that concept.  If you had opened the thread by announcing what the photos were, half of this activity wouldnt have existed..

15

Abstract / Re: Goofing around could lead to $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

« on: December 03, 2012, 09:06:58 AM »

What are they?

Or maybe more importantly:  Does it matter?  In fact, the way that you can't tell is what makes you think... and it allows people to interpret it how they want.  It's almost more powerful not knowing what it is.  Because once you do (if youre anything like me), is you're going to overanalyze how it was created and imagine how you could recreate it--and you probably can.  And then it loses value to you.  But would you have thought to create it in the first place?... just some random thoughts

It's ironic to me how many "its not the gear, its the photographer" people there around the internet who ALSO shun anything that isn't a product of accurate exposure and white balance as unartistic...  Technique isnt necessarily correlated with receiving attention.  It's more effective to put aside your pride and appeal to the public as opposed to pixel peeping photogs.  If it's your goal to make photography a career, it couldn't hurt you to embrace that idea.  You don't have to agree with or believe me... but if it helps my point, I upgraded from a t2i to a 5d3 w/ $8000 worth of lenses and lighting gear about year after starting (just doing photography on the side along with other things) and never shot a wedding in my life

But... if it's your goal to become a guru-level contributor on CR or doing gear reviews, youre probably better off ignoring that advice haha