March 01, 2015, 03:34:23 AM

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 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 55
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Photos of film's demise
« on: November 12, 2012, 08:36:15 PM »
Ironically, Kodak has started to steal customers back from Fuji after putting some R & D money into their films.  It started with 100vs and more recently Ektar 100 and Portra 400.  I understand Kodak are still making Ektar and Portra.  With Black and White film, there are still several small players continuing on.  Admittedly, a very small niche in the photographic world.

One of the annoying things about the film market is that it is almost impossible to buy quality and/or medium format film in a retail shop without paying excessively high prices. Instead, it is largely internet based.  On the positive side, by having a handful of larger suppliers, I'm hoping that this makes distribution easier for manufacturers and will help keep them in business longer.  Plus there are also some smaller suppliers out there trying to keep things alive.  Blanco Negro Supplies in Sydney come to mind with their Foma products.

Landscape / Re: Shooting a moonrise - Need advice
« on: November 09, 2012, 06:41:15 AM »
You'll get the best outcome when the moon is very low.  Typically within an hour or so of moon rise.  If you're there when the moon starts rising, you can't go wrong.  One standard classic shot has the moon half risen on the horizon.

This is a useful program for working out where the moon will appear...

Google Sky is also very useful, too.  Along with another app - Sundroid.

Its good that you're taking the flash.  As mentioned, the moon is surprisingly bright.  The shutter / aperture combination that you'll need to keep detail in the moon won't give you enough exposure for rocks and waves and well lit reflections.  But if you bracket a few exposures, then you can always manipulate the images later.

Lenses / Re: Prime Lens Focal Lengths
« on: November 09, 2012, 06:25:49 AM »
On a full frame camera, 24mm is noticeably wider than 28mm whereas 100mm and 105mm would appear fairly similar.  On a 7D, differences won't be quite as apparent.

There are some comparison photos for 24 vs 28mm here: -

Just note that the comparison photos shown are for a full frame body.

Landscape / Re: Solar Eclipse Next Week - Any Suggestions?
« on: November 08, 2012, 11:09:24 PM »
Thanks. When I googled solar eclipse photos, yours is the sort of photo that comes up.  Now I know that a solar filter is the key.

Landscape / Solar Eclipse Next Week - Any Suggestions?
« on: November 08, 2012, 09:05:37 PM »
We've got a total solar eclipse next Wednesday morning (14th November) in Northern Australia.  Does anyone have any good suggestions for photographing one?  Any special filters or preferred lenses that you'd suggest? 

Lenses / Re: do image stabilisers decrease image quality?
« on: November 07, 2012, 11:52:02 PM »
Is there ever an advantage in turning IS off?  (Ignoring tripod mounted cameras and assuming a sufficently fast shutter speed for a sharp photo.)  I often see it stated that it results in sharper images, but my experiences have been inconclusive.  Any thoughts?

Lenses / Re: Canon Announces New Lens Caps!
« on: November 06, 2012, 01:44:23 AM »
Maybe they're using transparent aluminium.

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS
« on: November 05, 2012, 07:01:55 AM »
I would have a traded a bit of the long end for some more reach.  But, hey, 24-70 is much better geared if using a crop body and probably a good overall consensus sweet spot.  Can't wait to see how it compares at 24mm and 70mm.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Free and Inexpensive Video Editors
« on: November 04, 2012, 10:57:27 PM »
I don't do many videos.  As such, I just use Windows Movie Maker.  (I think this differs to the Live version?).  Anyway, its free and should do all that you want.

Canon General / Re: EOS-M kicking butt in Japan
« on: November 04, 2012, 12:02:50 AM »
They’re not perfect for everyone, but they fit the bill for a lot of people.  It offers a reasonable level of capabilities and image quality.  It is significantly better than phones and most point and shoots.  In that price range, excluding DSLRs, it is difficult to say that anything else is “better”. And, if you already have some Canon lenses, it would be the logical choice for a small camera.  But personally, I’m holding off until version 2 with the EVF, improved battery life and bundled EF to EF-M adapter.

I noticed that someone said they were designed for women.  Well, they do make up half of the population.  But what's next - a camera designed for left handers?  The whole camera universe would implode. 

Lenses / Re: Guess what Canon's next wide angle zoom will be
« on: November 01, 2012, 09:20:33 PM »
Another vote for the 17-40 f/4 IS.  Unless it came with a significant price increase, I think it would be a winner.  I assume it would replace the current 17-40.  As such, it would be a lens with wide market appeal and would find a home in a lot of amateur photographer's bags. 

Lenses / Re: "Affordable" telephoto lens for wildlife
« on: October 31, 2012, 09:55:32 PM »
Being a rumors site, I'll just mention that a Tamron 150-600 was discussed recently.  If it becomes reality, I'll be keen to hear confirmation, reviews and pricing on that.  There are also persistent rumors of the Canon 400 f/5.6 being upgraded to include IS.  Personally, the only long lens that I've used is the 400 f/5.6.  Its a good lens at an ok price.  But you give up the flexibility of a zoom and the IS of the 100-400. During early morning and late afternoon, when you're likely to get great photos, IS can be handy (although, obviously is doesn't stop subject movement).

Lately, I've gone a different path.  Realising that I can't really justify what I really want (or need?) - a 500mm or 600mm - I'm using smaller lenses and trying to get in closer or having more background to portray wildlife in their natural environment.  While its no good for birds in flight, it is much better on the back and wallet. Alternatively, for a small outlay, you can hook a Panasonic 100-300 on to a Micro Four Thirds body.  This gives you an image stabilised 200-600 equivalent.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D for a 1DS mk2 ??
« on: October 31, 2012, 09:02:09 AM »
old nickle metal hydride type they dont hold charge well and will likely drive you nuts

With constant heavy use, you might only get a few years out of a battery.  But I think in the US, genuine batteries are only about $100.  And there are also a lot of cheaper 3rd party batteries out there as well.  I can typically get around 1500 shots per battery with mine - when they're working properly, they're usually pretty good.  (But the battery charge indicator is useless.  You need to keep a mental tally of shots taken or just recharge it regularly).  Also the battery charger has a "refresh" feature that helps keep the battery in good condition. 

BTW - Make sure you get the battery charger as they are expensive

Bear in mind the 1Ds Mk ii is a much bigger and heavier camera.  You notice the weight when carrying it all day.  It also draws a bit of attention.

I've never used a 5D Classic, to compare, but I love the image quality of the 1Ds Mk ii at 100 ISO.  Noise becomes apparent reasonably quickly and is obvious at 400 ISO and over.  But it still captures nice images all the way through its range.  I've read some articles that suggest that it is less sharp than a 5Dii.  Personally, I don't think that's the case.

On the plus side, it is fast and responsive.  Apart from the size and weight, it is a pleasure to use.  The downside? lacks video.  Also, you need firewire to connect directly to the camera for tethered shooting etc and later versions of Canon DPP don't seem to support this.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS M or ...???
« on: October 30, 2012, 12:29:21 AM »
Any reason that you're looking at the "G" bodies?  The S110 should have similar performance in a smaller, lighter, lower cost body.  A pocketable camera is a good supplement to a DSLR when travelling.

When you look at the price of the EOS-M and G1X, I just feel there is better value options out there with other brands. 

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Projection question
« on: October 29, 2012, 09:59:28 AM »
Brand B is spot on.  At best, you'll have HD resolution (2mp).  With older facilities, resolution will likely be less.  And then you have to deal with lighting and focus issues.  You won't notice the minimal differences in sharpness, colour accuracy, tonality, noise between cameras.  A new camera won't give you any noticeable improvements for most photos.  Differences in background blur will still be noticeable ( much as any APS-C vs FF comparison).  Also, photos at very high ISOs from the 5Diii will probably look better projected, assuming you are in a completely dark room.  Therefore, for nearly everything, any differences will be negligible.  At the very extremes, under ideal projection conditions, the 5Diii should give better results.

Given that used slide projectors are very cheap, have you considered shooting slide film and bringing your own?  Projected film looks good, plus, there is no such thing as "Post Production".  Once the slide is developed, that's it.  It's either a good shot or its not.  No more time spent in front of computers.  (Although I note your EF-S lenses....) 

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 55