December 20, 2014, 07:51:17 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 - neuroanatomist

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 1005
61
My simple point is, you either hold the lens stable, or you use IS, or not. If you don't, your GOING to experience the effects of camera shake no matter how big your pixels or your sensor.

Sure...you'll just experience those effects more with smaller pixels.   :)

62
Lenses / Re: 24-70 2.8L mark II image quality
« on: December 13, 2014, 06:40:12 PM »
My 24-70/2.8L II rivals my 35L, 85L II, and 100L for sharpness, although it has more distortion (but less vignetting).

Btw: Don't let yourself detained from inserting paragraphs in posts, it does improve the readability :->

So,


you


don't


like


a


wall


of


words


?


 ;)

63
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: December 13, 2014, 08:31:09 AM »
And apparently, the target market for the 7DII is those who don't care about image quality. Interesting rationalization.

I think it's fair comment when people are reduced to excusing away low ISO noise and DR quality.

If that's a fair comment, then evidently you don't care about image quality.  If you did, you wouldn't be using a camera with such poor low ISO DR.   ::)

64
You maximize the potential of the system in hand. The amount of effort you put in is high regardless of whether your shooting APS-C or FF. So, personally, I don't really believe the notion that bigger pixels mitigate issues from camera shake or anything like that...

Your belief or lack thereof doesn't change the underlying geometry that determines the relationship between pixel size and the effect of angular motion.


I don't put less effort in to keep my lens stable when using FF than when using APS-C...I put in the maximum effort either way.

I'm sure that's true, but it's irrelevant...what matters is the results.  You can put in your maximum effort in running as fast as possible on a 5% grade hill either way, but you'll go much faster if you're running down that hill than up.   

65
I'm in the process of purchasing a 1DX. $5000 ish.

They're less than that brand new (gray market) on eBay right now...

66
Software & Accessories / Re: Easy-access photo backpack?
« on: December 12, 2014, 11:43:50 AM »

neuroanatomist, if you don't mind I have a question for you on your backpack.  I normally am hiking with the 300 2.8 II on my camera with the 70-200 along in case and typical other stuff.  Would the 300 alone fit comfortably in your pack.  I'm guessing it couldn't be attached to a camera and be in there??

Lowepro says the Flipside 300 takes a mounted 300/2.8.   I think it does...but not with the hood (reversed), so that's a non-starter for me.  The 400 AW would take the mounted 300/2.8 with hood reversed, with other lenses – not sure a 70-200/2.8 would also fit, but I think a 70-200/4 would.

Thanks neuro.  I generally have either the 300 2.8 or the 70-200 2.8 or 24-70 F4 on the 6D in my hands at all times.  A second body will soon be added, possibly the 7DII but not too likely the 1Dx.  So in my case it's possible that I'd want the 300 or the 70-200 both in the bag sometimes but not mounted on the camera.  In that scenario I guess the Flipside 400 (not 300) wouldn't handle it??  Since hikes typically but not always, include my wife, she would carry the second camera, likely with the 24-70, which relieves some of the demands on the backpack.  Any thoughts on this scenario?

I think the Flipside 400 would hold both white lenses unmounted.  Just to give an example of a 'full load', I've had a gripped body, two big white zooms (70-200/2.8, 100-400, or 28-300, one mounted), three 'normal' lenses (24-105L, 16-35/2.8L II, 100L, etc.).  With the 300/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 not mounted, I'm not sure if the body with a mounted small lens would fit, or you'd need to just have a body cap on it (FYI, I often use a 40/2.8 pancake as a more functional 'body cap').

67
Another thing I came to realize pretty quickly...

The expensive stuff sells with a lot less hassle.  For example:  The used 60D I have had listed for almost two months still hasn't sold even after lowering the price.  I've had more scam offers, low-ball offers and waste of time wafflers on that camera than anything else I have listed.  In contrast, while I still get a few low-ballers, the 6D, 5D3 and 7D2 in general sold fairly quickly to actual photographers who simply wanted to meet, inspect and buy with cash.  I usually enjoyed a nice conversation over coffee about photography or whatever topic came up.

Might be a geographical thing?  I've had no trouble selling low value stuff.  My T1i sold quickly, back in 2010.  I recently sold a pair of B+W 77mm UV filters, a while back a Lumiquest Softbox III.  I also recently sold a PocketWizard PowerMC2, a pretty specialized item in that it only works with the PCB Einstein monolight and you need to already have (or buy) a PW trigger (I'd already sold off my set of PW transceivers, the buyer had no need for the MC2).  But likewise, no trouble selling higher end stuff (gripped 5DII, 100-400L, 16-35L II, etc.).


I am possibly being naive about how folks use CL.  I assume when folks want something they do a search, find some deals and contact the seller about purchase.  I didn't realize (and I'm not sure I believe) that there is a whole "CL community" that spends their time browsing CL and "policing" or "flagging" numerous listings for mistakes or other minor things.  Major spam/scam listings, sure.  But again, maybe I'm just not tuned in to the true CL reality.

I suspect that's most of it.  But there's one guy on my local board that actively replies to items that are overpriced (near or even over retail pricing), and calls out apparent scammers.

68
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 150-600@600.....at distance
« on: December 12, 2014, 08:57:32 AM »
Bryan Carnathan did his measurement at one rather short distance.  Other reviewers, including I think lens rentals gave it the full 600.

If it's a 600mm lens, it's going to be 600mm when focused at infinity, with allowances for rounding.  For example, a 600mm f/6.3 lens would have a 95.2 mm front element, so 95mm filters would be too small.  Since the Tamron 150-600mm takes 95mm filters, it's either slightly shorter than 600mm (e.g. 595mm), slightly slower (e.g. f/6.42) or more likely both. 

I do find it useful to know what the apparent FoV is at 'normal' distances as opposed to infinity, to get an idea of how much the lens focus breathes.  Compared to some other lenses (like the ones I listed above), the focus breathing on the Tamron 150-600 is minor.

69
Lighting / Re: Best way of setting up the lighting
« on: December 12, 2014, 08:47:15 AM »
When I use multiple lights, I like to set each one up separately to make sure that each light is doing what I need it...

Each light needs to have a purpose and can, usually, be evaluated for that purpose individually.  Of course you also have to look at how all the lights working together at the same time make or break the scene.

+1

Here's an example from a 4-light 'corporate headshot' setup.  Key and fill are each a 600EX-RT in a Lastolite 24" Ezybox, both on Manfrotto 1051BAC stands.  The key has a round mask diffuser panel (for catchlight shape), and the fill is gridded.  The hair light is a 600EX-RT with a Honl 1/8" Speed Grid on a Manfrotto 420B Combi Boom.  Background light is an Buff Einstein 640 with a white shovel background reflector, on a Manfrotto 012B backlight stand.  The backdrops are Backdrop Alley muslin on a Manfrotto 1314B background support system.  Speedlites were radio triggered with an ST-E3-RT and the monolight was optically slaved. 

70
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 150-600@600.....at distance
« on: December 12, 2014, 08:04:48 AM »
I know some lenses it changes by upto like 10% from near to infinity. 

It can change by a lot more than that.  The Canon EF-S 18-200mm is ~155mm at the long end near the MFD, a drop of >20%.  The Nikon 70-200/2.8 VR II is around 135mm at the long end near the MFD, a drop of >30%.  It's not just zooms, the Canon 100L Macro is ~68mm at 1:1, also a drop of >30%.

71
Lighting / Re: Best way of setting up the lighting
« on: December 12, 2014, 07:19:30 AM »
The best way is to ensure that type of light you want (soft vs. hard, feathered, etc.) falls on the subject and background where you want the light to fall, and that light does not spill where you want shadow. 

If you want more details than that, you need to provide specifics about lights you have or budget to buy them, space you'll have, subjects you'll shoot, etc. 

Honestly, it sounds like you need to do more research to figure out what questions you need to ask. 

72
Software & Accessories / Re: Easy-access photo backpack?
« on: December 12, 2014, 06:47:14 AM »
neuroanatomist, if you don't mind I have a question for you on your backpack.  I normally am hiking with the 300 2.8 II on my camera with the 70-200 along in case and typical other stuff.  Would the 300 alone fit comfortably in your pack.  I'm guessing it couldn't be attached to a camera and be in there??

Lowepro says the Flipside 300 takes a mounted 300/2.8.   I think it does...but not with the hood (reversed), so that's a non-starter for me.  The 400 AW would take the mounted 300/2.8 with hood reversed, with other lenses – not sure a 70-200/2.8 would also fit, but I think a 70-200/4 would.

73
Bummer...  I had the 'ghosting' thing happen a couple of times, but I noticed that was when I actually logged into my account then posted.  I went back to posting without logging in first (then clicking the link in the autosent email), and haven't had the issue since.  I assume it was a technical thing, since redoing the same listing the latter way an hour later posted normally.

Other than that and the normal 'I've just moved so I'll wire the money to a secure account in your name' scam, I've not had any issues buying and selling on CL. I've bought and sold dozens of pieces of camera gear, more sell than buy.  When selling, I price appropriately, include product shots (white 'infinity' background, which for small items can even be a piece of copy paper), and I usually only need to list once (I've had to repost only a few times).

74
Software & Accessories / Re: Easy-access photo backpack?
« on: December 11, 2014, 11:18:04 PM »
Me, again.   ;)  I've used two side-access backpacks.

I've had a Lowepro Primus AW (bought it, used it for one trip, sold it).   The access opening on the side of the Primus was simply too small – I was using a gripped 7D, the grip was a non-starter but even with it removed it required a good tug to get the 7D + 17-55/2.8 out, and putting it back was such a struggle that it was easier to just take off the pack and lay it down.

I currently have a Lowepro DSLR Video Fastpack 250 AW.  It's a decent design – the side access is also the main access, a vertical nylon strap limits the zipper flap from opening too far with side access, which can be unbuckled to allow the flap to open fully for complete access.  So, basically side access works great for the body with the mounted lens.  However, changing the lens is another matter.  An opening wide enough to allow access to extra lenses is wide enough to let them tumble out.

One thing I like about the Flipside is that it not only allows access to the other lenses, it serves as a platform for a lens change.

75
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF-M 70-400 f/4.5-7.2 STM
« on: December 11, 2014, 12:43:55 PM »
I just noticed B&H has the EF-M adapter kit discontinued and that they are selling the adapter alone on sale in a white box only. I've seen subtler signs of a big change!

 Various flavors of EOS M kits have been discontinued and then relisted at B&H for a couple of years now.

A while back, Amazon UK had the 6D listed as discontinued. 

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 1005