August 20, 2014, 03:18:27 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 - Hillsilly

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 49
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: ND Filter in software
« on: June 18, 2014, 10:39:54 AM »
We just need an ISO 25, 12, 6, 3, 1, 0.5, 0.25, 0.125 and 0.06.  With ISO 50, that gives the same as a Big Stopper without the colour cast.  Problem solved.

Other cameras (such as the Fuji x100) have an inbuilt ND filter.

In all of the major sporting events I have been to, this would not be possible. 
Hockey people are very easy going.  And while the World Cup is big, it's not THAT big of an event.   I'd give it a highly possible. 

BTW, how did you find it?  Looked pretty good on TV (but did not spot any 7Dmkii's in the crowd....).  Australia are playing Netherlands again in Soccer tonight.  I suspect Netherlands will reverse the Men's final result.

EOS Bodies / Re: Ye Olde Film Photography
« on: June 16, 2014, 04:20:09 AM »
Don't worry, you're not missing anything.  A fully digital workflow has numerous advantages over film capture.  And it is so much easier and faster to learn using digital cameras than film cameras.  You just have to look at the quality of images produced these days by serious amateurs.  They'd easily eclipse the work of most professionals 20 years ago.  Still, I still shoot the occasional roll of film and love the results I'm getting from some of the more recent films like Kodak Portra. 

On a less serious note, shooting film is also good for your ego, as you just know that you are superior to the billions of people shooting digital.  You can actually afford a Leica (or a Hassleblad or any number of other great cameras).  And girls think of you as an artist, and not some computer geek who can only talk about DR or whether DXO is biased.  You'll stop worrying about noise at high ISOs....because there aren't any high ISOs.  And you'll no longer wish for a Canon FF mirrorless camera once you pick up a Canonet QL17 GIII.

Animal Kingdom / Re: A new take on BIF
« on: June 14, 2014, 07:37:55 AM »
Based on the actual offset of the shadow, it was moving at a vector of about 120° the shadow is not directly behind, it's offset to a about a -35° angle. That seems a little odd...but, eh.
And then, of course, you have camera shake, wings flapping etc etc.  Another one without any shadows...

Animal Kingdom / Re: A new take on BIF
« on: June 13, 2014, 10:30:44 PM »
It was shot at 1/160s with rear shutter curtain synch.  The rear drop shadow is the movement of the flying fox before the flash kicked in.  But that's the sort of problems I'm trying to work around.  If I shoot at faster speeds, I can avoid this, but then I lose detail in the sky and if I shoot faster that 1/250s then I'm also stuck with HSS, and the bats are too far away for this to work effectively with the gear that I have.  To counter that, I can increase ISO and decrease flash power, but increasing ISO results in more noise.  Its hard to get the balance right.

EOS-M / Re: Got my new IR eos-m!
« on: June 12, 2014, 10:39:57 AM »
Cool!  You're in Australia, aren't you?  Any problems with the whole process?  I see there are a couple of cheaper places in Sydney advertising on eBay.  You weren't tempted by one of these?

Animal Kingdom / Re: A new take on BIF
« on: June 12, 2014, 04:16:24 AM »
One of my better attempts.  Taken with a 1Ds Mkii, ISO 400, with a 135/2 lens and flash.  My camera isn't ideal for this.  It focuses fine, but struggles with noise at higher ISOs.

Software & Accessories / Re: 1-Hour Photo iPhone App - Why?
« on: June 11, 2014, 10:08:54 PM »
My 1000FN has a window in the back to see the film, don't tell me they left it off the pro cameras?
Cheers Graham.
I love how my 1000FN plays music during delayed shutter release.  Very entertaining!  And another great feature noticeably missing from pro cameras.

Re the app - live for the moment.  Take the photo now, but don't waste time reviewing it, facebooking it, twitter it etc. You can do that later.

Lenses / Re: What was your first L lens?
« on: June 11, 2014, 04:17:14 AM »
My first was a 400/5.6, followed shortly after by a 17-40 and a 70-200/4.  The 135 is my only other L lens.

Lenses / Re: This thing's gotta go!
« on: June 11, 2014, 04:09:50 AM »
I've got the worlds biggest collection of undesirable Canon lenses, including numerous 35-80/35-105/28-105 kit lens variations.  I've got the 100-300 (with micromotor). There's a 400/5.6 with fungus problems.  A 100mm macro on which all of the buttons have fallen off.  A 50/1.8 that's not getting much love since I purchased a 40mm.  A 17-40 that's had no use since I purchased a Fuji 14mm.  A 70-200 that gets minimal use since I purchased a 135/2.  Then there's my entire Minolta collection.  At least 40 filters.  Throw in some bags, tripods, ye olde high voltage flashes, 2 enlargers, all the darkroom equipment, chemicals and papers you can imagine and a model left over from a photo shoot, and I'm starting to think it is time for a garage sale.

It would be a nice and fun camera to own,  but you'd have to wonder if it would add much to your photography.  I'd agree with the above about scanning at home - it can get very frustrating very quickly.  But if it is possible to scan the negatives at the time of development, you might be pleasantly surprised by the results.  (Of course, you can always print nice images from the negatives.)

Personally, I'm waiting for something like a Linhof Technorama 617 to come into that price bracket. 

Portrait / Re: Mobile studio portraits - am I doing this properly?
« on: June 03, 2014, 08:58:04 AM »
I think your lighting is ok.  If it was me, I'd play around a little more with the B&W conversion, and perhaps add some more contrast.  I don't know what the final objective of the photos are, but a few different poses might work well - perhaps it could be a little more masculine?

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the SL1.   It's well priced and well specc'd.  I know the OP doesn't like rebels, but it is a "cool" rebel and unless you're really into sports and/or wildlife or have some other special need,  I don't see much point in spending money on anything else.  After the rebate, you can get it for $447 with a Pixma Pro 100.  Seriously, you'd go a second hand camera over that?

But if it was a choice of 50D vs 60D vs 7D, they're all fairly similar.  I'd go the 60D and save some money.

As a film shooter, I've read DanG_UE's comments with interest.  But, I wouldn't be so quick to write off current digital sensors.  While sensors can certainly be improved, when I go looking for it, I'm always surprised by the amount of detail that is hidden in highlights and shadows. 

Rather than discussing the DR of the eye (as fascinating as that is), a more interesting experiment would be for the OP (or anyone) to upload a RAW image from a current Canon DSLR shot at ISO 100 where lack of DR is perceived to be a problem - ie an image that appears to have a similar amount of blown highlights and dark shadows and where exposure was set somewhere near the middle  (is that a correct understanding of the problem?).  We can all then take turns to see if these images can be fixed or whether there is a major problem with the current state of sensors.  Getting a few people's input on this could also highlight which programs and post processing techniques work best for this.

Lenses / Re: Traveling to the UK/Ireland
« on: May 26, 2014, 07:43:47 AM »
I've only been to France once (in fact, it was only just Paris).  I had a 10-22mm with me and found a lot of uses for the 10mm end and at the time I wished for something wider.  But these days, I'm much better at panoramic stitching.  Don't forget that it is a great technique if you can't fit it all in.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 49