July 29, 2014, 05:03:57 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 ... 49
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: An Era of Mergers?
« on: March 02, 2014, 06:59:27 PM »
I have a hard time seeing Samsung as one of the smaller players. Maybe not so big in photography yet, but it'd be foolish to bet against them. They might not go after the pro market, but possibly pretty much everything else. Time will tell.
I think I would generally agree with this.  Right now they're a smaller fish.  But Samsung is willing to manufacture in numerous mature markets.  I would expect their camera market share to gradually grow over time, especially at the entry level in the nearer future.  The recent Canon announcement to exit low end cameras should benefit them.
Yes - I meant that Samsung were currently a smaller player in the camera industry.  Overall, they have a stated goal of becoming the largest manufacturer of retail goods in the world.

....At this point I feel the duty to summarize my learnings from your posts...

That's a good summary.  Overall, it is difficult to argue that crop sensors will produce a better image than a full frame sensor.  But given that we're on page 3 with vocal proponents on each side and the "Full Frame vs Crop Sensor" topic is up to page 13, you could take that to mean that a crop sensor will produce excellent results and that you will probably only notice a difference if comparing two images side by side.  In the real world, where an image stands on its own, a crop sensor produces images that are more than acceptable to everyone.

Canon General / Re: $4 Million Photograph
« on: February 25, 2014, 11:19:05 AM »
Many of his contemporaries and most of the critics disliked Beethoven and his work.  Yet time has an interesting way of identifying quality and greatness.  Perhaps our great-great-great-great-grandchildren will look upon Miley Cyrus in the same way?  But personally, I think that her reputation will pale in comparison to her dad's.  I'm certain "Acky Breaky Heart" will be considered the peak of late 20th century music.

Canon General / Re: $4 Million Photograph
« on: February 25, 2014, 05:27:41 AM »
Because Gursky has taken a deliberate approach to become a collectable photographer.  You have to realise that it has only been in the last 10 years that his photos have sold for significant sums (with massive increases over the last five years).  Prior to that, he was just like many others, trying desperately to get their work exhibited.  But once you have serious galleries highlighting and buying your work on a regular basis, people pay attention.

He has also been smart with limiting the number of prints made.  According to Wikipedia he generally only sells six copies.

And his photos are good.  At least I like them.

I don't know how serious art collectors think, but Rhein II is unlike most of his other work.  Generally, his photos are very busy, with a lot of people, objects, windows, items, activity etc.  The contrast between his better known photos and Rhein II gives it a special significance.  I suspect that this is what makes it a more valuable photo.

Why don't your photos sell for $4m?  The short answer is that they probably could.  You just need to spend the next twenty years dedicating yourself to building up your name and reputation in a very smart, business-like way.

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Pixma Pro 100 vs Pro 10 vs Pro 1
« on: February 23, 2014, 10:14:43 AM »
I've heard that pigmented inks are more likely to clog the print head if you are an infrequent user, which results in a lot of lost ink due to cleaning.  Is that a common problem?   

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Pixma Pro 100 vs Pro 10 vs Pro 1
« on: February 22, 2014, 09:58:09 PM »
Apart from ink longevity, is there a compelling reason to choose the Pixma Pro 10 or Pro 1 over the Pro 100?  I only print a dozen photos per month, with many in B&W if that makes a difference.

(With the recent rebates, there are numerous printers appearing on eBay - buying one for around $200 and paying $140 for postage still works out to be half the price that I'd normally pay for a new one here in Australia.)

You've beat me to it - It makes zero difference.  If an artist is collectable, galleries and investors don't care if it is digital or film.  As mentioned above, the most expensive photograph sold - Gursky's "Rhein II" is a computer manipulated image.

If you are interested in auctions, this document shows the auction turnover of the top 500 selling artists last year.  There are numerous photographers on the list.  (Obviously, auction sales doesn't automatically equate to artist income, but there is a correlation).


Now, how to get onto that list?

EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 19, 2014, 07:21:34 AM »
The 500D is a nice camera, but Canon's crop cameras do lag behind the FF cameras.  You are probably making the right decision to change cameras and a 5Dii is a smart option for many.  But some 1Ds and 1D models are in your price range and they have some positives, too.

But personally, it wasn't really until I got a FF camera that I realised how immaterial the whole APS-C vs FF debate is.  I'm now using a little APS-C Fuji for much of my photography.  It might be technically inferior to my Canon, but the difference isn't that big and it is better suited to what I do. 

So the only real suggestion I have is to sit back, evaluate your photographic goals, work out where your 500D is deficient and then decide which camera is best suited for your needs. 

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: The Sigma SLR Strategy?
« on: February 15, 2014, 10:31:09 PM »
I've read many reviews where people state they love the look of the Sigma images.  Ignoring MP claims, high initial prices etc, I wouldn't knock a company for having a go at the SLR market, especially if they have different ideas and technology to use.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: An Era of Mergers?
« on: February 15, 2014, 10:25:54 PM »
I'd say its unlikely we'll see any mergers.  If anything, we'll get more smaller players (ala GoPro, BlackMagic and Samsung).  You just have to  look at the lens makers to see many people have an interest in doing camera equipment "better", with recent entrants like Samyang, Lomography and Noktor.  Right now, I'd suggest that there must be a few Chinese companies looking closely at getting into the camera industry - not that they'd expect to make huge profits, but a quality camera division gives a company a lot of technical credibility.  Provided they don't lose too much money, it can be a cheap way to raise brand awareness.

Lenses / Re: Where do you sell used lenses
« on: February 13, 2014, 09:31:55 PM »
I sell mine on gumtree (the Australia equivalent of Craigslist).

Yep another strong vote for Gumtree if you are in Australia. eBay is officially on the nose now for private sellers.

Paul Wright

Just had a look at Gumtree for the first time in years and was surprised by the amount of camera gear there.  What's the drama with eBay?  Is it the fees?  I rarely sell things, but eBay has been my way of doing it in the past.

I second that... but even when you sell to a friend and it works pefectly for you... in 6 month... or 2 months maybe the AF motor goes and then suddenly they are ticked at you even though you didn't do anything... still feels easier selling to strangers.

But we'd be able to identify those who: -

Dropped their lens, but it was saved by the UV filter;
Dropped their lens, but it wasn't saved by the UV filter;
Ask if mysterious black dots/hot spots on their sensor are normal;
Dropped their camera in the ocean, river, lake but it still works great due to the great weather sealing;
Ask if their lens looks sharp or wonder if it is de-centred;
Ask if loud grinding noises from the AF are normal;
Are sharing their "awesome pictures from last weekends color run"
etc, etc

And of course, on a more serious note, we'd also be able to identify those who have individual pelican cases for each lens and itemise their detailed cleaning and maintenance efforts to show how well they care for their equipment.

Sports / Re: track and field photography
« on: February 10, 2014, 03:24:12 AM »
Looking good!  I'm a rank amateur myself, so one thing I do occassionally is look at the settings employed by other photographers.  I haven't used a 1Dx, but a quick google search bought up this page (which also largely applies to the 5Diii): -


Of course, you don't have to follow other people's settings exactly.  I find it interesting to see what options other people choose, try to work out why they have made those choices and then decide if those choices are valid for me.  Over time, you learn more about the AF options available to you and you steadily develop the optimal settings for your own use.

Of course, settings are only part of the story.  You need to be in the right place at the right time. This is an interesting read (I assume it's ok to mention a Nikon user?): -


And if you'd like some inspiration to see  how interesting sports photography can be, this bloke picks up a lot of awards (and he's cool - he uses a Canon): -


Photography Technique / Re: Wildlife flash?
« on: February 07, 2014, 06:15:04 AM »
Interesting setup for your photo.  The subjects I shoot are way too timid to have any hopes of positioning flashes, and I don't stage shots or use bait/feeders (just a personal choice) but I use the Better Beamer on my old 430EX sometimes.  I don't take it out unless it's cloudy or I'm in a forest, because of the very high risk of damage from the sun magnification by the fresnel lens.  The 430EX has a nice melt on the AF assist light which is why I use it vs. my newer flashes :).  Here's a shot of a barred owl in the shade that needed some fill to overcome a very bright sky:

I've been thinking of picking up a BetterBeamer.  I'm curious - what "very high risk of damage" is there?  Can it really melt your flash?

Imagine going back in time to the late 1800's / early 1900's.  Few people traveled widely.  Literacy wasn't universal.  How would you describe a car to someone who hasn't seen one?  An aircraft?  The pyramids?  The Statue of Liberty?  A pineapple?  A rhinoceros?  And then along comes photography and the ability to publish images in newspapers and magazines of all the amazing things in the world.  Wow!  What an eye opener it must have been. 

The term "a picture's worth a thousand words" started to evolve around 1900.  Interestingly, a quick search suggests that the first noted usage of the exact phrase was in the title of a 1918 advertisement for "The San Antonio Light's Pictorial Magazine of the War".  As with all wars, I suspect that the returning servicemen struggled to describe the horrors of trench warfare.  How can you adequately describe that?  And many just wanted to forget.  Photographs could help loved ones understand more.

I agree with helpful, above.  These days, the question shouldn't be "who's words?", but simply, which photographs are worth a thousand words?  In the early days days, photography was important.  But now, the world is saturated with photographs.  Our challenge as photographers is to take photos that people care enough about that they will take the time to look closely at the photo, appreciate the uniqueness/beauty/importance of the image, and have a better life because of it.  I know I want to take photos that are worth a thousand words.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Is Sony junk....
« on: January 30, 2014, 11:15:54 PM »
I can't speak for their stock, but the last several Sony products I've bought have been junk.  Two of them died on days 91 and 93 of their 90-day warranty...  They Sony of my childhood seems to no longer exist.

A 90 days warranty seems quite short?  I don't know the source of Sony's financial problems, but I've always had a high opinion of Sony products.  Around my place, we've got a wide collection, including audio recorders, clocks, a tv,  PS3, a blu-ray player and I'm sure there is more.  I've never had a problem with any of it. 

But I understand what you are saying.  When I was younger, Sony had a reputation as being one of the best quality manufacturers - with pricing to match.  I've got a strong recollection of never being able to afford their gear.  Now, their pricing makes them a lot more accessible and cost cutting must have taken its toll.  Still, I'd have no hesitation buying Sony.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 49