November 23, 2014, 05:17:27 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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 53
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: August 03, 2014, 08:07:47 AM »
All I can say is that I'm in awe of some people here.  I get involved in print judging, and (annoyingly) most people don't say what type of camera/lens combo was used.  And, obviously, there's no EXIF data to review.  I'll admit it,  I'm just not capable of telling what type of camera or brand was used.  But some people here are so confident that there is a night and day difference.  I'm now worried that I must be missing something.  Some even suggest that my eyesight must be defective if you can't see it (ok, my eyesight is defective and I wear glasses...but I see fine with my glasses on). 

Help me!  When I look at a print, what should I be looking for so that I can determine with high level of consistency and certainty if it was taken with a P&S, M43, crop camera, FF, medium format or large format camera?  If it helps, most prints I see are approx 8x12.  I'd love to get this right so that I don't inadvertently promote an image taken with a crop camera over a FF camera.

Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: August 03, 2014, 04:10:01 AM »
I've got a few dozen filters that never leave the cupboard. 

Photography Technique / Photographing Ghosts / UV Photography?
« on: August 01, 2014, 07:09:09 AM »
When you photograph ghosts, do you use the infrared spectrum or UV?  I'm just about to send a camera out for an IR conversion, and am just trying to decide if there is any benefit to a full spectrum conversion compared with a two spectrum conversion.  Apart from potential ghost hunting, seeing how clean your hotel sheets are, checking if your kids have sunscreen on and making sure you haven't been passed some forged banknotes is there any other benefit to a UV conversion?  What type of photographs do you take?  And if you use the UV spectrum, what type of filter do you recommend?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: July 31, 2014, 05:48:40 AM »
When Zack implies that shooting APS-C is a good as Nikon full frame, that doesn't automatically apply to Canon APS-C sensors.  We're lagging behind.  But when you look at other modern sensors (such as Fuji) that are being put into camera systems in which quality lenses are being specifically designed for APS-C sensors (such as Fuji), you'd be surprised at the high image quality.  Modern APS-C sensors are excellent.  Rather than being defensive and negative, we should become proactive and demand Canon pick up their game. 

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 27, 2014, 12:27:42 AM »
Despite all of the negativity, I've yet to be convinced that the "vibe" of their scores is noticeably wrong.  Even in the example above, sure, the Canon lens would seem to be the better lens and might deserve a better ranking than the Nikon lens.  But I think that's largely irrelevant.  All I would want to find out is their view on the Canon lens - and they think it is pretty good.  If I was in the market to buy one, their good testing results would be a positive factor in that decision.

Putting all petty Canon vs Nikon squabbling aside, can anyone actually point to a Canon camera sensor or lens that we all consider is excellent, but which DxO trashes?  I struggle to find one.

Photography Technique / Re: Getting photos home from overseas
« on: July 27, 2014, 12:10:54 AM »
Bad things do happen, so its good that you're giving this serious thought.  My approach is to take a small external Hard Drive, and back up to that regularly from a laptop.  I keep the Hard Drive in my hire car, wife's purse, nappy change bag etc so that we're less likely to lose both the laptop and hard drive at the same time. 

Lenses / Re: Ditching the Primes - Advice/Opinions Needed
« on: July 25, 2014, 03:55:37 AM »
If you're ok with their price, size, weight and max aperture, then go for it - They're great lenses.  I don't recall ever seeing a serious complaint about either lens.  Personally, I prefer a smaller 40mm + 135mm combo instead with a 4yo, 3yo and 2 month old.   

I'd find it a little annoying, but if it was an optional feature, then great.

A "find my phone" via GPS/Wi-Fi feature that can be remotely triggered even with the camera turned off would also be pretty cool.  You could go and bust some bad girls.

Lenses / Re: Camera setup for dental clinic
« on: July 16, 2014, 08:28:21 AM »
They used the older 100mm macros, original or USM.  They are fine for his purpose, but slow to focus at short distances.

I've got the original 100mm macro (ie non USM).  It is a good sharp lens.  But focusing at close distances is very, very painful - it likes to leisurely hunt and hunt and hunt.   I typically keep mine on manual focus.  But if you can pick a good one up cheap and don't need snappy focusing speed, you won't be disappointed with the image quality.

EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR ? - thinking out loud ....
« on: July 15, 2014, 05:17:21 AM »
In the longer term (at least, for Nikon ;)), the answer to increasing camera sales is 300cm 8k tvs.  With 33.2mp resolution, I'd suspect you'll start seeing some IQ differences between phones and cameras and there'll be another surge in camera purchases.

EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR ? - thinking out loud ....
« on: July 12, 2014, 06:33:00 AM »
I'm hoping Canon drops the Eos-M and pulls out of the mirrorless market entirely.  That way, they can focus their R&D activities on improving and enhancing their DSLRs, camera features, sensors and lenses.

Why?  We, as camera users, all benefit.  We have the likes of Sony, Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic all developing interesting cameras with new features hoping to entice us over to their side.  In the medium to long term, to keep its dominant share of serious camera users, Canon will need to fight back with their new camera improvements - whether that be better connectivity, improved sensors, better AF, better build quality, more affordable sports and wildlife lenses etc etc, it is all good. 

Canon General / Re: Seeing Rebels....
« on: July 08, 2014, 07:34:11 AM »
There was a photo recently on this site of photographers at the world cup wearing Sony vests, yet virtually everyone was shooting Canon.  It wasn't the high percentage of Canon users that surprised me.  It was that they were all using the standard Canon strap.

Canon General / Re: Seeing Rebels....
« on: July 07, 2014, 07:11:00 PM »
I'm in Australia and at sporting events, its almost all Canon.  This is especially noticeable at rally car races, where virtually everyone is carrying a Canon DSLR.   But otherwise, I think Australia is rapidly become mirrorless central.  In particular, I'm noticing a lot more Sony Nex and Olympus cameras.

EOS Bodies / Re: Comes the next Canon's with a New X-Trans Sensor?
« on: June 26, 2014, 11:06:29 PM »
As I mentioned LR & PS above, I might clarify my opinion.  RAW files in LR & PS are fine.  Certainly as good as a Canon RAW file.  However, there are a few programs that seem to be able to get even more detail out of Fuji files.  If you do a search, you'll find a number of comparison pages.  But as with Canon, most people use Adobe programs without complaint.  So its not that they are bad.  It's just that some other programs seem to process some x-trans sensors images better.  Personally, I use LR & PS and Nik.

(Although in most blind tests, most people can't tell the difference and think it is all much of a muchness).

(In the early days, LR & PS sometimes generated some "smearing" (for want of a better word) in some images , but in recent updates, that problem has been largely reduced/gone).

As above, most of my photos are shot with a Fuji camera.  I also doubt if I'll be making a significant Canon purchase in the foreseeable future.  But all the Fuji forums are so dull.  99% of the posts are from people saying "I just sold all my Canon (or Nikon) gear and have never been happier".  So apart from having a number of camera bodies and lenses and a foot in both camps, CanonRumors is so much more interesting.

EOS Bodies / Re: Comes the next Canon's with a New X-Trans Sensor?
« on: June 26, 2014, 08:03:00 PM »
I hope you're being sarcastic....and not actually worried about DXO and how they may or may not rate the new sensor.  You're 'nervous'....really??? 

Yes, given the general antipathy towards the DxO Mark around here, I thought most people would pick up on the sarcasm. 

Personally, I shoot Fuji and love the IQ.  I'd have no problems if Canon moved in that direction.  But their images are different to Canon.  They come out less vibrant.  This is fine for many things (especially portraits), but something that dedicated Canon landscape photographers might not appreciate.  Some interesting comments above about Fuji RAW files.  I've never noticed anything wrong with them and have always been impressed with the detail they contain.  There are some known issues with RAW converters (such as in LightRoom and PhotoShop).  But I'd assume that given Canon's market dominance, if they were to start using an X-Trans sensor, the software makers would dedicate the necessary resources to support the sensor properly.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 53