Messages

16

Lighting / Re: Should I buy a Speedlite?

« on: April 28, 2013, 02:54:31 AM »

I suggest avoiding on-camera flash like the plague, unless there's a white ceiling or wall off which to bounce that flash.  For pics of two people, a fast lens isn't as helpful as you'd think - yes, you can keep ISO down with f/1.4 or f/1.8, but DoF will be thin, and prom couples would prefer to both be in focus, I expect.  Of the two options, I'd get the 430EX II, but get it off-camera with a light stand, umbrella, and 'dumb' wireless triggers.

But I'd recommend neither.  A one-Speedlite portrait isn't going to make many people happy. My advice - rent.  Lensrentals.com has a two-monolight kit (with stands, wireless triggers, one softbox and one umbrella, for $133 + $35 shipping for a 5-day rental.

I decided the mono lights will be better for me. Now, one more question for you sir. As you may know the 6D has no sync port.. so would you suggest a hot shoe adapter with an extra PC sync port so I could use a moonlight with no triggers? Or another better alternative?

See if your local shops can rent you a profoto D1 air kit and you wont need the sync port. One local shop has them here for $100/day.

17

Software & Accessories / Re: How to achieve this amazing editing effect ?

« on: April 22, 2013, 11:01:12 PM »

I'm actually doing a Workshop end this month with Pak Rarindra here in Jkt, dropped a 2 week Dive Trip so I could attend a 4 Day Private Workshop, My skills as a Landscape Photographer hopefully will be improved.

I should've sought this guy out during my trip to Jakarta last month. 

18

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon USA Rebates Starting April 14, 2013 [CR3]

« on: April 13, 2013, 10:29:48 AM »

You guys are lucky, just have to wait.

Rebates don't happen here, I bet most stores don't even know what rebate means, SE Asian markets.. 

Singapore has the best deals on Canon Lenses. I could've got a 70-200 II for under 1900

19

Lenses / Re: Which Lens Canon 85mm 1.8 or 135 L

« on: April 13, 2013, 10:19:26 AM »

If you are in studio and have limited space then I would go with the 85 first. Even on FF, 135 is a long for indoor tight studio, in less you are doing head shots. Now if it was outside then it be a tougher decision. I still use my 85 but after the 135...it tends to stay in the bag more times than not. Although when I need 85 then it is more than welcomed.

I guess I should further clarify, I don't only want it for studio shots, but I do want a better and sharper portrait lens than the 24-105.
I like to do outdoor shots and the f/4 has no bokeh at all, so im avoiding lenses with that aperture.

Shot with the 135 and 85 L's at a photo show and loved both of those out of all the lenses i tried. 

I rented a 70-200 once and it was pretty sweet as well.

20

Lenses / Re: Which Lens Canon 85mm 1.8 or 135 L

« on: April 12, 2013, 09:23:25 PM »

I replaced my 70-200 f2.8 IS II with a standard zoom and decided to buy the 85 f1.8 to have something in the telephoto range. I wasn't impressed: there was CA, non-rounded bokeh when not wide open, and it wasn't even close to as sharp as the 70-200. Of course, that's comparing a $350 lens with a $2000 one, but still, I wasn't impressed. I returned the 85.

My vote goes to the superior 135L. Or, if money is no object, just get the 70-200 f2.8 IS II.

Money is definitely an object or I would've gotten the 24-70 70-200 f/2.8 combo and called it a day.

21

Lenses / Re: Which Lens Canon 85mm 1.8 or 135 L

« on: April 12, 2013, 09:22:11 PM »

I kinda want to build up an L collection so you guys haven't made this easy on my pockets 

22

Lenses / Re: Which Lens Canon 85mm 1.8 or 135 L

« on: April 12, 2013, 03:27:33 PM »

Forgot to mention I shoot with a 6D.

I've shot with the Sigma and wasn't that impressed, but then again I was comparing it to the Canon. I don't want to pay that high of a price if similar image quality can be had with the Canon 1.8 at half the cost.

23

Lenses / Which Lens Canon 85mm 1.8 or 135 L

« on: April 12, 2013, 02:24:33 PM »

Situation is I have a tight studio, reach on the 135 might be tight, but the optics are probably superior.

Want an 85 1.2 but can't really afford it. The 1.8 might be a good compromise based on price, smaller reach for tighter spaces, I kind of think 440 might be much when the 50 1.8 is $100.

24

Software & Accessories / Re: Nik Software worth it?

« on: March 25, 2013, 04:53:45 PM »

Where did you get it for $129?

Where you able to get the full suite thats compatible with Photoshop, Lightroom and Aperture?

25

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon ever move into the Medium Format space?

« on: February 22, 2013, 11:47:52 PM »

Bigger sensors always offer bigger advantages.  135mm format is much larger than 35mm format.  This will typically result in a lot more resolution and clarity when working with the files.  Not to mention a lot more detail.  Imagine a file of 60 MP's vs 18 MP's.  I've noticed less grain/noise as well in a lot of MF files.  A 20x24 print remains incredible in MF, while that size of print remains subjective on whether it's acceptable or not for 35mm format.

Thanks, thats good to know. If I ever get rich I'll look into getting a MF camera.

26

EOS Bodies / Re: got a 6d yipee!

« on: February 22, 2013, 11:35:29 PM »

I own the camera as well and it's been great. Enjoy.

27

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon ever move into the Medium Format space?

« on: February 22, 2013, 11:34:52 PM »

The answer is no.  They have absolutely no reason to enter such a small, and I mean very small, market compared to a huge market that they currently dominate.  No business sense in doing so.

Do MF sensors offer advantages over FF

28

EOS Bodies / Will Canon ever move into the Medium Format space?

« on: February 22, 2013, 11:26:35 PM »

with canons scale surely they could make MF affordable.

29

Lenses / Re: Why aren't zoom lenses faster than 2.8?

« on: February 21, 2013, 09:06:57 PM »

Zooms are supposed to be allround lenses, easy to carry and ready for all situations (kind of). Having a bigger aperture would make the lenses big and  bulky and not comfortable to carry around. For example if  you want 2.0 at 200mm the lens would have to be 10cm diameter. 70mm would require a 50mm diameter for f/1.4.

That's the simple way of looking at it, but look at the reality of what already exists in terms of zooms and primes - the situation is even worse than you predict, so we end up with something that is all but impossible to afford, carry, or use.

Take the 70-200/2.8L (non IS) vs the 200/2.8L II - when fully zoomed, the 70-200 offers the same unstabilised 200/2.8 as the prime. A 200/2.8 theoretically needs a 71.4mm aperture, and the prime indeed has a 72mm filter thread, and is 136mm length, weighing in at 765g. The zoom has a 77mm filter, 194mm long, and weighs 1310g.

Taking those increases over an existing 200/2.8 and applying them to the 200/2 IS lens to end up with a theoretical 70-200/2.0 IS lens, and you get a 136mm diameter, 296mm length, 4.3kg lens. And then there's the price factor between the prime and zoom too. It would cost (years after the introduction price tax disappears, like it has on the 200/2.8, 70-200/2.8 and 200/2) something in the region of £7000 - so lets call it comfortably more than £10,000 at introduction. There clearly wouldn't be a market for something like that.

However, a very limited zoom range around the 50mm mark would be simpler to make faster - 50mm after all does seem to be the easiest focal length to make fast (think of the 50/1.0 L, and also how small the current 50/1.4 is), so a 40-60/2.0 probably isn't pushing the boundaries of what's possible. But with such a small zoom range, why not just get a much cheaper, smaller and optically better 50 instead?

Having said that, smaller imaging circle lenses exist faster than f2.8 - take the Olympus m4/3 35-100/2.0 lens. But that is an equivalent of a 70-200/4.0 FF lens. And that Canon 25-100/1.8 is a 16mm lens (crop factor of 3.4), so in FF terms its a 85-340/6.1 lens.

Thanks for the knowledge, fascinating post.

30

Lenses / Re: Why aren't zoom lenses faster than 2.8?

« on: February 20, 2013, 11:07:45 PM »

Canon used to make a 25-100 F/1.8
http://www.visualproducts.com/storeProductDetail02.asp?productID=152&Cat=3&Cat2=49