November 26, 2014, 02:20:08 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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 53
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 No Longer in Production
« on: August 17, 2014, 01:56:10 AM »
Based on the timing of prior model releases, I suspect 2016 or 2017 is when we're likely to see a 5D4.  I'd be a little surprised if turned up sooner.

Thanks for the suggestions. A few things to check out.

Personally if someone showed up and wanted to run an executable on my computer, they'd be shown the door. 

I find it strange, too.  But it is a compulsory component of a competition I'm entering - "Final output must be as an executable file (.EXE) and burnt to CD/DVD."

The reason that I'm asking for some suggestions is that I downloaded a training video from one of the programs (also in .exe format and I assumed produced on their software).  My antivirus software started flashing red lights about a trojan virus.  Hmmm.

Hi, I need to package a slide show in .exe format.  Does anyone have a suggestion for software to use?  A quick search brings up ProShow Gold and Picturestoexe.  Any recommendations?  Is there anything else to consider?

Business of Photography/Videography / Re: Who owns the photo?
« on: August 08, 2014, 07:12:03 AM »
That's why I think the whole scenario is quite strange.  The EXIF data does contain copyright information.  I think the person who uploaded the photo to Wikimedia was very brave.

Site Information / Re: Critiques
« on: August 06, 2014, 01:07:54 AM »
In theory, it sounds like a good idea.  You could always just post some photos asking for critiques.  A dedicated section on the site might be interesting, but I'm not sure how productive it will be.   The problem with written critiques is that you lose a lot of communication cues from the reviewer. And despite how much you might want honest feedback, most people only like honest feedback if they're saying how awesome your photo is - human nature is such that we perceive a comment which isn't positive as being negative.  And that means that anyone providing a critique really needs to take time to consider the photo and write their thoughts appropriately.  That takes time and might be difficult to maintain if there is a constant stream of photos.

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.

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