Messages

196

Software & Accessories / Re: Need help on neck/Shoulder Strap for camera body...!!!

« on: September 15, 2012, 05:15:46 AM »

I must be a bit slow and I don't think I get it.  When I look at the BlackRapid straps, they just look like regular camera straps.  Ok, I get that the strap can move independently to the shoulder pad and that hanging the camera upside down can allow you to bring it to eye level faster.  I'm cool with that and I appreciate that alone might be enough reason to consider them.  But as far as being a comfortable camera strap to use all day, do they differ significantly to any other camera strap with a lot of shoulder padding?  I've got Tamrac N45's on my cameras.  These have a very nice, suede shoulder pad and I find them very comfortable.  But seeing 90% of people here seem to be using the BlackRapid straps, I'm starting to wonder if I'm missing something.

197

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Specs Leaked?

« on: September 14, 2012, 09:39:39 PM »

.....don’t invest in too much AF-sensors (useless without eye-control), but widespread, accurate cross- or x-type sensors for f/5.6.....

Couldn't agree more.  I've got an older 1Ds Mk ii.  If I decide to pick up something newer, one thing that I will be looking for is a wider array of focus points.  Its a little annoying having 45 focus points crammed into the centre of the frame.  What's the point?  (Although, personally I'm hoping for the ability to focus anywhere via a touchscreen.)

Weathersealed, 4.5fps, small body, wifi and GPS and hopefully a street price well below $1999. What's not to like?  But really, isnt it just a FF 60D for $1250 more?   And with the quality of the APS-C sensors around, isn't everyone just getting tired of the "FF" talk as if it is a compulsory requirement for photography Nirvana?

198

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What to charge for wedding photography?

« on: September 14, 2012, 05:44:33 AM »

Wouldn't be too worried about the online albums etc.  With any business, there are always things that need to be done.  But you can't use it as an excuse not to get underway. FWIW, most of my local photographers charge approx. $AUD2,000 to $AUD3,000.  But some are a lot more.  Probably a totally different market, so as suggested above, check with the local competition.  Attend a few wedding expos and see what the market rates are.

Nishi, I wouldn't be shocked if they went with someone more expensive.  My first thoughts when I see someone offer a low price for a service that I know requires a lot of skill and time is "Do they know what they're doing", "Have they done it before?",  "How reliable are they?".  A lot of people (ok....predominantly younger people) see a wedding as a once in a life time event.  Photos are an integral part of this.  Most people are comfortable (although maybe not happy) with paying a high price for someone they believe will document their big day with proper care.

199

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Photo vendors in five years?

« on: September 12, 2012, 04:59:54 PM »

I can't imagine any big changes.  My trifecta is Canon, Sony then Nikon.  Nikon will still sell a lot of dslrs, but just won't be able to keep up with Sony's overall camera sales.

200

Canon General / Re: Europe trip, 1-2 months

« on: September 12, 2012, 05:02:09 AM »

I assume you're ok with the major cities / attraction.  Some other interesting places that I've come across: -

Glastonbury Tor, UK - while you're there, check out the Abbey (King Arthurs is buried there) and Chalice Well.  If you have a car, Glastonbury is a good base for exploring the region - Stonehenge, Wells, Bath, the coast, Exmoor, Cheddar etc.     

The Red Lion Pub, Avebury - the only pub inside a stone circle

Arbor Low, Peak District, UK - its a stone circle in the middle of some guy's farm.

Nine Ladies Stone Circle, Peak District - very photogenic at sunset.  BTW, if you're heading to the Peak District, spend at least one night at Chatsworth House (ie Cavendish Hotel).  Girls will be very impressed.  In fact, spend a week there - its a good base for exploring the area and there are a lot of interesting and scenic walks, towns etc.

Tintagel, Cornwall, UK - King Arthur used to live there and its got a cool looking post office.

(If you're detecting a King Arthur, Stone circle theme, you're right - I've done several trips searching for the holy grail and my wife is a tarot card reader...) 

The "Jurassic Coast", Uk - just watch out for dinosaurs!

The Abbey at Whitby, UK (and surrounding beaches) - great in the late afternoon.

York - if you like trains, vikings and walled cities, this is the place to be

Take a Boat Cruise on Loch Lomond, Scotland

Glencoe, Scotland

There are a lot of waterfalls in Scotland...

Stirling Castle, Scotland - where you can get a great shot of the Wallace Monument.  The staff are very good - If they don't offer, ask them to take your picture in the King / Queen's seat.

Basilica di San Miniato al Monte, Florence - a bit of a walk out of town, but you get a nice view.

Anywhere in Tuscany

Rome - my favourite place in Europe.  If you're even half considering going to Europe and not visiting Rome, slap yourself a few times until you come to your senses.

201

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony A99 24MP Full Frame Press Release

« on: September 12, 2012, 03:59:00 AM »

Their glass is the main reason I'd ever consider switching to Sony.

202

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: EDIT: A smaller DSLR "replacement" camera? Mirco 4/3erds or different option.

« on: September 10, 2012, 04:25:07 AM »

Can you increase the budget a bit?  If so, have a look at the Sigma DP2 Merrill.  Apart from price, it seems to meet your other criteria.  Its even been suggested that the image quality exceeds most DSLRs (not the Canon ones, of course!). 

203

Animal Kingdom / Re: Need help - photographs on dull days

« on: September 08, 2012, 07:18:28 PM »

Would black and white be acceptable?

204

Canon General / Re: Advice: If you had a month to learn anything about photography what would it be?

« on: September 07, 2012, 03:57:48 AM »

What makes a photograph "art".  What are the visual elements that make up an acclaimed photograph?  Why do some photographs work, and others don't?   

205

EOS Bodies / Re: Pre digital days, please shed some light for me

« on: September 07, 2012, 02:26:11 AM »

It's the sensor.  Could you buy 25,600 speed film back in 1988 and shoot low-light football at 1/2000s at night?  Of course not.  They didn't do it that way.  DSLR's, namely the 1D X, is truly revolutionary.

Delta 3200 pushed 3 stops.  (You set ISO manually at 6400 and then set exposure compensation at -2).

Don't like grain?  Just shoot medium format or larger.

206

EOS Bodies / Re: Pre digital days, please shed some light for me

« on: September 06, 2012, 11:52:01 PM »

.....So what you pay for then is build quality, FPS, and metering etc.

100% right. 

FYI, the last brand new Canon film SLR I bought was an EOS 3000 (as a second body with my 7e).  The 3000 was bottom of the line with virtually no fetaures.  It was around 1999/2000 and cost about $350.  I bought it because it was so cheap - it was on special and was normally $500+.  The top of the line Eos 1 was just over $2000 (and I think it still is).   For the price, you get so much more camera today.

Just like today, 90% of people just bought the cheapest slr.  Even now, I still run into people with 3000's. 

In between the Eos 3000 and 1, you had the 300, 33, 30 and 3 - all differentiated by build quality, weather sealing, FPS, focus points, eye control focus, AI servo speed, encoding of data onto film rolls, electronic recording of shot data, flash synch speed, max shutter speed etc etc.  By the late 1990's, camera had become very sophisticated and (ignoring the change to digital) its not surprising there hasn't be many big improvements to the basic features.

The prior generation used "5"'s instead of "3"'s in the model name.  But like todays, there was never any real consistency with the numbering schemes.  Eg, my first Eos in the early 1990's was 1000FN.

207

Software & Accessories / Re: Is there a good looking camera bag anywhere in the world??

« on: September 05, 2012, 08:19:29 PM »

1 series bodies don't fit into good looking bags.  For some reason, bag manufacturers think you'll want to carry every lens you own everywhere you go.  If you find a small, good looking bag for a 1Dx and a couple of lenses, please tell me!

I've got a National Geographic medium shoulder bag, which looks ok and which will hold everything you want plus more, but its still a bit on the big side.  I'm currently eyeing the Lowepro Flipside Sport 15L as it has a cool looking tripod holder and looks reasonably compact for a backpack (I believe the 1Dx won't fit in the 10L).

208

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Should I stay with Canon or moving to Nikon

« on: September 05, 2012, 05:50:19 AM »

Have you and your mates taken a real world photo of the same object at the same time and compared the Canon shot with the Nikon?  Was one better than the other?  Which one?

At some low ISO's some Nikon bodies have an edge over some Canon ones.  With other settings, Canon has the edge.  The differences are real and noticeable.  But do they matter.  Do they make one photo "better" and does anyone really care?  Only you can answer that one.  Like many people, I can't tell the extraordinarily subtle differences between a Canon photo and a Nikon photo, unless they are side by side and even then I feel the Canon photos are better at least half the time.  Given that Canon has the lenses I want (and which Nikon lacks or wants to charge extremely high prices), I'm happy in the Canon camp.  Your needs may differ.

209

Lenses / Re: A New EF 400 f/5.6L Before Photokina? [CR1]

« on: September 04, 2012, 04:20:07 AM »

I wonder if they can make it a little lighter, shorter, give it the sharpness and AF speed of the f2.8 and make it fully weather sealed without affecting the price too much?  IS is a nice idea, but I'll happily skip it if it means a big price increase.  Like many people, I only venture into 400mm territory when photographing sports and wildlife and IS isn't going to help freeze action much better. 

210

Lenses / Re: Considering the 70-200 f4 is for my next lens

« on: August 29, 2012, 04:03:14 AM »

I've got a 70-200 f/4 IS and its an excellent lens.  However, since picking up a 135 f/2, I rarely use the 70-200.  The 135 is sharp at f/2.  While the zoom is good at f/4, it is much better at f/5.6.  All things being equal, you can use a much faster shutter speed with the 135, whereas a slower shutter speed on the zoom might lead to some motion blur.  The wider aperture of the 135 also allows you to blur backgrounds more if you want (which is a nice look for some portraits).  Also, its not a big white lens - you feel a little less conspicuous carrying it. They're both around the same price - I'd at least give it some thought.