February 28, 2015, 02:18:43 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 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 55
376
Lenses / Re: Please explain the need for f2.8 zooms
« on: January 31, 2013, 04:34:59 AM »
Hardly a pro, and a lot of the time I take group photos I often wish I had used a smaller aperture for increased DOF.  So I see where the OP is coming from.  But when I look at a good set of wedding photos, the photographer will generally have a good selection of narrow depth of field photos.  These would tend to be the less formal shots and are often the best / favourite photos of the day.  (Although, many of these are probably taken with a prime with an even wider aperture than f/2.8).

377
Hi Jens, I think everything has been covered, but just wanted to weigh in with my 2c.  First up, as a predominantly film shooter myself, I just wanted to say you're making the right decision to go digital for the trip.  The freedom to take as many photos as you want without worrying about processing costs, xray machines, availability of film, ease of sharing photos etc can't be underestimated.  Plus, you'll probably be surprised how good digital is compared with film these days.  Its no longer a competition.  However, as mentioned above, there are new challenges, including batteries, backup storage, security, should you take a laptop with you, raw vs jpeg...I'm sure you'll have fun figuring out your own solution. 

On to serious matters.  You've inadvertantly stumbled onto the deep, dark secret of the camera industry.  In well lit conditions, a camera phone can take a photo that is as captivating as a full frame camera.  Canon and Nikon jointly fund a PR company to deal with problem people like yourself.  I'd be expecting a knock on the door any moment from someone offering hush money....  So why go full frame with the 5Diii?  Marginally more background blur.  Better image quality at high ISO's (and if you look really closely, better at low ISO's too).  A little bit less "noise" in dark parts of your photo. Comparing your two cameras, the 5D will have better autofocusing and subject tracking abilities (not that the 650D is "bad') and will be less likely to break if you get some rain on it (although, I'd be very surprised if the 650D couldn't withstand a few drops).  The 5Diii is a better camera and at the extremes, you will be able to take photos with it that the 650D will struggle with.  Do these differences matter to you and are they worth the price increase?  Some people say yes.  Many say no.

One of the earlier posters raised a very good point.  If keeping the 5Diii impacts on your ability to fund lenses (or have an enjoyable trip), I know which way I'd lean.  Also, I get the impression that you're a little older than the average Canon Rumors poster.  If that's the case, I'd be really wary about weighing yourself down with a lot of camera gear unless that's the driving focus of the trip.  Anyway, have fun!

378
Hi, I'm reasonably new to time lapse too.  I'm using a JJC Multi Exposure Timer.  Its cheap at $35.  But works well and its pretty easy to figure out.  I picked it up from a company called gadget infinity, who also sell wireless ones.  Do some research.  There are some advantages for going wireless, but a wired solution uses less battery power.  This is important if you want to leave it running for a long time.

379
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Recommendations for a friend
« on: January 29, 2013, 11:42:17 PM »
....any reason not to push her towards a nex or micro 4/3's?

One of the benefits of sticking with Canon would be that she can take advantage of your experience and knowledge and you could lend her a lens or two when needed.  But if we're allowing new options, I'd at least consider the Olympus EPL-5 with kit lens and EVF.  And, although currently out of your price range, the OM-D EM-5 has been discontinued and a new model will be released soon.  There should also be some good deals coming up on this too. 

380
While hogging shelf space (as mentioned above) is probably the driving motive, as long as they are adding new features and capabilities, I say good on them.  For example, the new-ish SX50 HS looks quite interesting.  I'm tempted to pick one up myself.

381
Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?
« on: January 29, 2013, 04:07:01 AM »
My first Canon (AE-1 program) was a gift from my dad.  He was a Pentax shooter, and like most dads, probably wanted better for his children  :)  In hindsight, it seems like a ill conceived idea as it would have made more sense for everyone to be using the same mount.  But at the time, brand snobbery was very big.  My dad always thought his competition entries were at a disadvantage when he listed a Pentax camera with Sigma lens.

That was a long time ago, and I've since owned a number of different systems.  Throughout most of the 90's, I predominantly used a Mamiya RB67 kit.  Recently, I've started playing with an Olympus m43 camera.  I've also owned Yashicas and Minoltas.  I'm constantly wondering if I should switch to Nikon, Sony or [insert brand of the month here].  But no matter how far or how wide I roam, I still call Canon home.  Canon and Nikon are really the only two companies with the complete package.  Once you've bought into one system, there is rarely a compelling reason to switch sides.

382
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Recommendations for a friend
« on: January 28, 2013, 11:35:18 PM »
For what its worth, I've got both the 50 f/1.8 and 40 f/2.8.  Although sharpness is similar, the 40mm is a much nicer and quieter lens to use.  It would be my pick if I had to choose between them.  (Although...the 50mm is a little longer and a nice portrait length on a crop camera).

With the cameras, I'd probably just buy the new t3i given the smallish price difference.
 

383
Technical Support / Re: at what shutter speed you turn IS off?
« on: January 28, 2013, 01:11:29 AM »
IS - one of the topics where it seems like no one has any idea what they're talking about.

I can't even remember the last time I turned IS off.  Yet, I've read numerous times that you should turn it off when not needed.  For example...

http://www.bythom.com/nikon-vr.htm

Maybe Canon's system is better.  Maybe some of my shots would be better without it.  Who knows?

If there are benefits with keeping it off in some cases, maybe there is an argument for a camera setting that allows you to disable IS automatically under certain conditions (eg above a certain shutter speed).

384
I had the nickname hillbilly.  (I assume that was because my surname started with Hill...but you never know.  Maybe it was because of my love of flannelette and my VH V8 SLE). Over time, it morphed in hillsilly.

385
EOS-M / Re: Micro four DoF and lenses
« on: January 24, 2013, 01:35:57 AM »
For subjects at close distance, the primes can produce nice background blur.  The lack of very large aperture lenses is just in keeping with m43 philosophy of small and light.  For a similar reason, there are no large aperture longer lenses.  But overall, it is a good compromise system.  It just needs a few more tweaks of the AF speed and a reasonably priced, high quality 300mm f/2.8.

386
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Up to what ISO are you willing to set?
« on: January 23, 2013, 01:51:58 AM »
No limit as such and I've been known to go all the way to the dizzying heights of 3200 (my 1Ds Mkii's limit).  But 90%+ of the time, I'm at ISO 100 and I rarely go above 400 or 800.  Interestingly, though, I've started playing around with night time timelapse photography and have been pleasantly surprised how well ISO 1600 works for this.

387
If you buy Canon, you are really buying their quality control systems and peace of mind.  It doesn't mean that all of their batteries will be perfect, but you would expect the failure rate to be low.

If you buy third party, they might be as good or better. Or they might not be.  Their soldering, wiring and cells may not be as good and it is more of a risk.  Given that you are plugging them into chargers for hours at a time (and usually in your home), are you happy to take that risk?  Only you can answer.

Here in Australia, an NP-E3 is over $300.  But I can get really good third party batteries that seem to perform as well (in fact, they seem better) for about $40.  Canon charges too much of a price premium and I've gone 100% third party.  Somebody above mentioned that this is a scare tactic.  Given such price differences, I tend to agree.

388
Sports / Re: Q: Would car show shots be appropriate in here?
« on: January 21, 2013, 10:09:18 AM »
Yes.

389
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Kenrockwell comments on Canon 6d
« on: January 20, 2013, 01:53:46 AM »
....Anyone with that self professed knowledge and latest high tech gear at his disposal, should indeed have better results.  His work suffers from lack of any creativity whatsoever, and that alone, for me, destroys his credibility.  That's it.

I can appreciate that.  For more advanced professionals like yourself and most others on this site, what KR discusses is irrelevant.  Your career is driven by your own creative intentions and desires.  Superficial discussions about whether a 6D or 5Diii or 1Dx is better is pointless when you are trying to break new ground by producing photographs that are new, innovative and relevant.  Your need for information on gear and how to put a photo together is based solely on the inspiration that you have and the need to make it a reality. If anything, you'd be looking at advanced lighting and post production techniques - not KR.

OMG, I've written two posts on KR topic.  We need to spice things up with some new 7D2, 400mm f/5.6 IS, FF mirrorless, and high MP 3D rumours.

390
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Kenrockwell comments on Canon 6d
« on: January 19, 2013, 11:04:11 PM »
A very strange thread.  KR says something negative about Canon, we hate him.  He says something positive, we hate him even more.

Personally, I check his site occassionally.  I like it and find it entertaining.  Do I treat it as gospel?  Of course not.  But the reason that he does so well  is that he seems to be an average guy that likes taking photos and talking about camera equipment.  What's there not to like!  His desire is to help people take better photos, which is a message that resonates with a lot of people.  He's also a reasonable writer who can generate a lot of original content.  He has a lot of the ingredients for success working for him.

And...I'm yet to be convinced that any of the general concepts that he advocates are plain wrong.  But as with all general rules, they won't apply in all cases for all people.

Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 55