September 19, 2014, 06:19:53 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 ... 51
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.

I only stick with Canon because I'm heavily invested in lenses.  If the cheque arrived, I'd probably just buy a 7D or 5D3, a 135mm, a used 300/2.8 and a 1.4 extender.  I'd spend the rest on Fuji gear.

Canon General / Re: Let's confess our disgusting perversions
« on: May 26, 2014, 05:38:19 AM »
My camera (1Ds Mkii) was made in 2005.  I don't think IQ at low ISOs has improved much since then and have never considered upgrading.

I also have a filter fetish.  I've got over 50 at home.  But I only ever use three or four.

And boobs.

Lenses / Re: Traveling to the UK/Ireland
« on: May 26, 2014, 04:09:28 AM »
I was thinking about bringing the 24-105 and the 50, but I wanted to get someone else's opinion since I have never traveled out of the US before.
The 24-105 + 50 combo would work very well and would cover most things you're likely to come across.

If you're getting a hire car and aren't too concerned about taking more gear, I'd also consider the 70-300, too.  When I've visited the UK, most of my photos are taken at the wider end.  But, I've always taken a 70-200 and am generally glad I did.

8) I am about to head off to the UK and France very soon, I take a lot of photos of churches, buildings, landscapes in fact the only thing I can think of that I rarely do is take portrait photos.
Given your subjects, you'd probably prefer the wider 15-85mm.  Re 50 vs 40, I'm conflicted.  The wider aperture of the 50mm in theory makes it better suited for interior shots.  But I do like my 40mm much more.  Personally, I'd go with the 40mm.

Lenses / Re: The Next \
« on: May 21, 2014, 04:31:37 AM »
With the announcement of the Tamron 150-600 and generally positive reviews, I wonder how much interest there really is in a Canon 100-400 if it came with a serious price jump?  Ok, sure it avoids long term compatibility concerns, will likely focus faster, be better built and hopefully will offer better image quality.  All of that definitely demands a premium over a third party lens.  But how much?  I know  my main use would be at the longer end and apparently the Tamron does ok up to around 500mm.  I'm not sure if the Canon lens would be on many people's radar if it stayed at 400mm and was priced at $2500+ as some are hypothesising.

If you like critique, I like your image a lot.  As part of your collection from the day, I think it would work very well.  But if you gave it to me as "THE" image that encapsulates the qualities and dedication of the volunteers, then I'd side with the organiser.  My attention is drawn to the athlete, not the volunteers.  Its a good supporting image, but wouldn't fit my criteria for being the best image. 

Anyway, good to know its not just me that has differences of opinion with clients.  ALL my clients know so much more about what I do and how I should do it that I wonder why I even bother turning up to work. 

BTW, bit surprised about some of the comments from others about volunteers.  Nearly every event relies upon volunteers, and I don't see any problem in giving them a lot of credit for taking part.  Even if they are the local business people trying to show how civic minded they are for a bit of self promotion - great!  We should be encouraging more of it.   Across the world, there is a steady decline in volunteers, and that's a bit sad.  No volunteers = no events (or ridiculously high entry fees).  If the solution is as simple as few good photos, let's get out there and do it.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 51