March 03, 2015, 07:38:04 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 - roadrunner

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: UPGRADING 7D to FF Please help!!!
« on: December 20, 2012, 01:54:25 AM »
Woah! Thank you all for the wonderful feedback and personal opinions.

It has always been my priority to upgrade lenses before the body but I truly feel that the 7D images
are very usable and I love the camera for various reasons but the time has come to get the bigger brother.

And as for glass, I would of course enjoy the L glasses, however I still have to justify and have sufficient
income in order to purchase them. Unfortunately, I have moved to Brazil and the lens renting community here just blows compared to the US and Canada, therefore, haven't had the best chance to try out new gears and electronics in general. Tax here is just absurd and makes me want to puke.

All in all, I'm very convinced switching to the 5d mk iii and start up with some basic primes.

I'd not feel bad using a 5DmkII for fashion or weddings, but... the 6D is probably better - can't say, have never seen one.  If you have the $$ go for the 5DmkIII, but really.. I'd rather put the money into lighting than camera bodies.

I currently own the 580EX and not very comfortable or well acquainted with flash per say, but does the 600EX make a heck of a difference compared to it's predecessor?

Thank you all once again!

I was in the same boat as you. Went from a 7D to a 5DIII. I've rented the 5DII and 5DIII several times before making my purchase. The 7D is such an amazing camera, with it's only drawback being the sensor, that I knew anything less than the 5DIII would feel like a downgrade. I feel like you may regret your decision if you buy anything less. Then again, I don't know if you are keeping or selling your 7D (I kept mine).

As for the 600RT, it depends on what your goal is. If you know you will be using wireless off camera flash, then it may make sense to get the radio flash. I don't have any experience with it though, as I used my 580 EX IIs and 2 430EX IIs with pocketwizard flex TT5s, and that's a fairly expensive and sometime finicky setup. So it really just depends on how you want to use your flash.

(PS. Wireless off camera flash is the way to go. Just sayin'. Once you start seeing how great your lighting can look with modifiers and the freedom to move your flash wherever you want without tripping over cords, you will soon have a case of lighting equipment upgraditis as well)

Lenses / Re: Buy Canon 24-70l II today or wait for Newer version with IS?
« on: December 20, 2012, 12:35:41 AM »
This is going to come off as rude, but I don't know how else to word it; the rumor stated within the next 18 months. If you can seriously put off a purchase for 18 months, then you don't NEED either of these lenses. Why don't you buy the extremely affordable 24-105L F4 IS lens? A year and a half is far too long for any professional or semi-professional to go without a normal lens. Sell it in a year or two at a minimal loss (Hey, you got to use it for 2 years, right?) and then make your decision. You may decide the cheaper 24-105 is all you actually need, especially if you are just a hobbyist. Like neuro said, it's silly to make purchasing decisions based on rumors, and even sillier when the rumor is 18 months away.

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS Exists as a Working Prototype [CR2]
« on: December 20, 2012, 12:01:26 AM »
I really don't see this being priced too much higher than the current 24-70 2.8. I think Canon would hurt themselves more by pricing it so high. My personal prediction is for this lens to come in around $2499 while the current 24-70 drops to between $1899 and $1999.

Hey, I could be very wrong, but there's not way I'll be picking one up at that price. I'll be waiting a couple years for it to become a bit more reasonable (And even then, I'll probably go with the cheaper non-is version)

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35 f/2 IS Resolution Test
« on: December 15, 2012, 09:15:09 PM »
I like lensrental reviews. It's easy to understand for an ave Joe like me.

I can't believe I'm saying this... the new Sigma looks better than the Canon and now test shows is out perform the big boy....WOW. Where is 50mm f.1ish Sigma?

As for the Sigma 50 1.ish, have you checked out the Sigma 50mm 1.4 EX? Great performing lens at a great price. Used to have major focus issues (Never experienced it myself, but I've only borrowed the lens a handful of times) but apart from that, it may be what you are looking for.

Lenses / Re: Zoom vs Primes?
« on: December 14, 2012, 05:51:07 PM »
RLPhoto, sorry if it was taken out of context. My response was to risc32 though, not you, so I didn't mean to imply that however you are doing things is wrong. Just that I personally prefer to be overpacked rather than underpacked and agree with his post.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Do you miss APS-C?
« on: December 14, 2012, 02:18:32 AM »
I think you will h ave a very long wait for new bodies. If you have $3000 you are willing to spend on a body, you can't go wrong with the 5DIII. If you don't want to spend that much and you don't need the insanely awesome AF features, the 5DII is a bargain right now, especially used.

Lenses / Re: Zoom vs Primes?
« on: December 14, 2012, 12:58:14 AM »
yeah, rlphoto, i haul more a good bit more stuff than that to wedding shoots. My brother works video at weddings all the time, and he says i use WAY more than anyone he's ever seen at a ceremony/formals, then i use way less the rest of the night. probably cause i'm tired! Although i've sworn i'm done carrying my speedotron 2403 and 3 head around. done, totally, never again, i don't care how nice it would be to have that much power, i'm not doing it.........

(yeah, i'll probably do it the next time i think i'll need it. )

This is basically my line of thinking on the wedding day. I have a ThinkTank Airport Security bag stuffed full of lenses, 3 bodies, and 4 flashes, pocket wizards, batteries, filters, etc... Then I carry another bag with 2 light stands, tripod, and umbrellas. I'd rather put up with the slight hassle and have everything I could possibly need than leave something at home because I think it would weigh me down.

Lenses / Re: Ditch 100L for 70-200 L II ?
« on: December 13, 2012, 10:01:01 PM »
You mention the 200L, which is ungodly expensive (Though I know you said you don't want to tie up that much money), so is there any chance of keeping both lenses?

If you are 100% certain you do not need the macro or the much smaller size of the 100L, then by all means, go for the 70-200L. I find I use my 100L 95% of the time as a portrait lens as well, but I would hate to give up the macro capabilities when I need it (Closeup of the rings, flowers, other wedding details, etc...). The 100L is also much more  comfortable to hang around your neck for hours at a time when compared to the 70-200L, but that all depends on how you are using it I suppose.

Lenses / Re: Canon 100mm F2.8L IS
« on: December 13, 2012, 04:03:21 AM »
Mine shows up as 100mm in Aperture, MacOS, etc., with Exiftool, and after upload to Flickr.  Sounds like a bug in LR.

Mine shows up as 100mm in LR3/LR4.0-4.2 with both the 7D and 5DIII, with old and new firmware both. Not saying it isn't a bug in LR4, just that I am not experiencing the same bug.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50 f/1.4 IS in 2013 [CR2]
« on: December 13, 2012, 03:50:51 AM »
shooting at 1.4... just looks amateurish

this is something new to me :o

For video, going super shallow is cool, but so easily overdone, and has become a 'special effect' with DSLR video these days that's often used too much, with no regards to keeping anything particularly in focus to show off bokeh.
I like shallow, but for subject separation or for a nice dreamy feel when needed, but not for an excuse for poor composition, you can't just keep a single point in focus and ignore how the overall image is composed.
If you need 1.4 for the light, then that's certainly great if IS is part of the package too, but one is better off with a fast wide angle for lowlight video anyways

I fail to see how one would be better off with a fast wide angle. They are two completely different lenses. As a wedding photographer, I need fast everything... fast wides, fast portrait, and fast telephoto. Not sure how one replaces the other.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50 f/1.4 IS in 2013 [CR2]
« on: December 12, 2012, 10:22:08 PM »
Sure, that's a possibility too. Basically, as long as they fill that gap, I'm okaywith whatever they do. Though, I would think it would make more sense to use a lens they already designed (The new 1.4) rather than designing an entirely new 1.8 IS. Still, I'm open to whatever route they take. Heck, maybe it will drop the current 1.4 down to about $200 and I'll grab that instead.

Hard to exclude factors such as business and body... so assuming I'm trying to cover all my bases, this is what I would get.

1. 16-35 F2.8 Mark II
2. 24-70mm F2.8L Mark II
3. 70-200mm F2.8L IS Mark II
4. 100mm F2.8L IS Macro
5. 50mm F1.2L

Lenses / Re: 100mm macro L on a 7d
« on: December 12, 2012, 09:15:27 PM »
I know you seem to have already made up your mind, but I feel I must chime in on the 100L.

It's an amazing lens, but you mention you will be doing primarily portraits with macro as a bonus. I used the 100L on the 7D for about 2 years, and while it was a fine lens, it was very often too tight for portraits, and I was very limited in how I could photograph my portraits. Sometimes I just couldn't get that far away from the people.

When I upgraded to the 5DIII, I fell in love with the lens as a portrait lens. It's absolutely amazing.

Finally, as someone else said, I would never, ever sell your 50 1.8. It's such a cheap lens, and it provides you with a low light option when needed. There will inevitably be times you need something wider than 100mm, need more bokeh, or just want something small and light, and I would highly recommend you keep your 50mm. Just my opinion.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50 f/1.4 IS in 2013 [CR2]
« on: December 12, 2012, 09:08:07 PM »
If this comes in at the guesstimated price ($800-$900) then I can't see them killing off the 50 1.4. That's just too much of a price gap in my opinion (And we all know how much Canon values my personal opinion). It would make more sense to me to introduce a 50 1.4 II along with the IS version to fill the gap. If they did that, IS version could be about $300-$400 more than the non-IS counterpart.

I love the idea of IS. It can never hurt to have in case you need it. I just don't know if I would be willing to pay the price premium required for it.

Portrait / Re: Portrait - Trying something new
« on: December 11, 2012, 03:20:01 AM »
To be honest, I can't really find a style that I like. I've tried some clouds with a bluish tint, and I just can't come up with something I love. I feel like I'm wasting too much time on this one picture, when I have about 200 others to edit.

Here's what I've done so far. I basically just used a stronger vignette with some clouds to give the vignette some texture. I also cropped it a bit to improve it a little compositionally. Thoughts?

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5