April 20, 2014, 05:17:48 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 - pwp

Pages: 1 ... 69 70 [71] 72 73 ... 95
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Film is still hard to beat
« on: May 20, 2012, 07:39:11 PM »
Drifting further off topic (why not?), for anyone who hasn't heard of him, check out the works of Ernst Haeckel, especially Kunstformen der Natur (Artforms of Nature). I wish I could take macro photos half or even 1/4 as good as his 120-year-old drawings.

Film vs Digital vs Ernst Haeckel. OMG what exquisite work.

Ernst Haeckel could teach most 21st century image makers a thing or two about patient observation & uncompromising technique. Fabulous.

Paul Wright

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Film is still hard to beat
« on: May 20, 2012, 06:50:39 AM »
Yes film certainly does often display lovely subtle differences to carefully processed digital files. I love some of the exquisite Holga and Lomo images that better artists are producing. In a training environment film does have the advantage of forcing a student to really look at the subject and feel very sure before pressing the shutter. There is also a certain motivation  that comes from knowing it will cost a dollar every time you push the shutter.

I started out on a small newspaper where we had to fit four jobs onto a 36 exposure film. There were some narrow advantages in this enforced and necessary system but I know I would have delivered far better shots if I'd gone out with a couple of 32Gb cards.

As someone who has not owned a film camera since 2001 it was in large part a business reality that pushed me away from film. In a good year my annual film/processing bill was $35-45K. The switch to digital was eye-wateringly expensive but almost overnight my film/processing expenses fell to zero and I was sending out bigger invoices as I could value-add, custom prepping the files for exact client needs and delivering to deadline conscious clients in a fraction of the time. It was a business no-brainer.

There are many completely valid dimensions to this discussion, but my decision to dump film signposted a breathtaking leap in the quality and unhindered creativity in the images I was producing. As my first picture editor kept drilling into us, "content is king..."

Paul Wright

Lenses / Re: varying aperture zoom lenses
« on: May 20, 2012, 06:29:00 AM »
I don't have anything critical to say about variable aperture zooms. Generally they offer good value for money in a slightly more compact package. The 70-300L is a good example. As a user of the 17-40 f/4 I certainly wouldn't mind if the new model was a 17-40 f/2.8-4 configuration. Why not? If that does not appeal there's always the 16-35 f/2.8.

Try to take the opposite viewpoint and see the wide end as an advantage rather than seeing the darker end as a negative? That gives you more "whoo-hoo!" moments in your life. As a good friend once told me, it only takes a little bit of imagination to turn a lemon into a lemonade.

Paul Wright

Lenses / Re: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6
« on: May 20, 2012, 06:14:01 AM »
Looking to increase my reach occasionally. Will adding the 1.4x III to my 300 f4 yield as good (or better) results as the 400 f5.6?
I would think much would depend on how important IS is to you. Under perfect conditions I would very much imagine the 400mm would have better IQ, and I would think better AF action.

You don't mention what bodies you'll be running this glass with. But you do say that you'd like to increase your reach occasionally. The +1.4III is going to be a lot lighter on your wallet and a lot lighter in your bag. I had a 300 f/4is which I occasionally used with the +1.4II and from memory the results were perfectly fine. Mind you, I had a stellar copy of the 300 f/4is which I'm sure helped.

Why don't you get the +1.4III and see how you go. If you find that 400 (420mm actually) is a focal length that fits your shooting style and f/5.6 just isn't cutting it, that may be the time to take a deep breath and go for a real 400, the 400 f/2.8is. I would expect reasonable numbers of 400 f/2.8is glass to be finding it's way onto the second hand market as sports and some wildlife/bird shooters trade up to the new 2kg lighter 400 f/2.8II.

A pre-owned 400 f/2.8is is a risk free purchase. If you find you're not using it, re-sell and you'll be unlikely to lose a penny on the deal.

Paul Wright

Are the aftermarket grips made out of magnesium alloy?
I can't find it now, but I seem to recall the the Canon grips have an alloy exoskeleton like the cameras.
No. They're probably all plastic, but hey I suppose you pay partly for quality + partly for the brand.
On an old 5D I wore out the genuine grip, and the paint over the metal lasted just a few months from new before it showed the metal underneath. This camera was worked mercilessly in all sorts of conditions as a second body to a couple of 1-Series bodies. I replaced the grip with a Meike clone. Being made of plastic, it looked as good as the day it was bought when I finally retired the camera. There are benefits.

Paul Wright

I was 100% happy with an eBay clone grip on my old 5D which functioned perfectly for years after the original genuine grip became unusable. The tripod screw completely dislodged from the grip and the clone was cheaper than a repair. Buttons were perfect, fit was like the genuine...no complaints.  I'd go clone again for sure.

Paul Wright

Lighting / Re: looking for my 1st flash
« on: May 18, 2012, 05:05:05 AM »
If you live that part of the world where Odins are not available then Pocket Wizard mini/flexes can do the same.
I am currently driving 8 flashes off mine at the moment for some serious light
At the other end, for walkabout I put a 430EXII and mini on the hotshoe and get hss at full power

Doesn't the Pocket Wizard Mini TT1 http://www.pocketwizard.com/products/transmitter_receiver/minitt1-canon/ have the huge advantage of massive power savings in HSS mode? This is huge if you want to do a continuous burst and need your HSS output to keep up for at least the first few frames of a 10FPS burst.

If you only ever need single frame then I guess the Odins might be OK. But why not travel first class? I'm looking at the PW setup and checking compatibility with 5D3. I know 1D4 compatibility is fine.

Wicked Wombat, thanks for the link to the triple hotshoe adapter. Cool!

Paul Wright

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D II/24-70L II OR 5D III/24-70L
« on: May 17, 2012, 05:56:04 PM »
Remember the old saying "locked on the horns of a dilemma"? That's where you are.

Having just made the upgrade to 5D3 I'm getting a significantly higher percentage of keepers compared to the previous 5D body. It's all about the 61 point AF which seems to match or even surpass my 1D4 AF capabilities.

When you get a camera that has such responsive and accurate AF both in One Shot & AI Servo mode it tends to change the way you shoot because you can attempt shots that would previously been unrealistic.

My recommendation for you is definitely the 5D3. You'll enjoy your photography more and attempt previously impossible scenarios. The 24-70 f/2.8 Mk1 is no slouch. A good copy is stellar. There are a lot of pre-owned  copies on the market at the moment and you should get a brilliant one for a very reasonable price. If it's not to your taste, re-sell and you probably won't lose a single dollar. Why not go for a late build pre-owned 24-70 f/2.8 MkI? You can determine the year of manufacture from the date stamp that the lens will carry.

Here's how to do it. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Lens-Aging.aspx

Paul Wright

EOS Bodies / Re: BG-E11 availability
« on: May 16, 2012, 08:51:47 PM »
I think we all know and acknowledge this is a baffling, highly irritating delay.
But really, just get on with enjoying your 5D3 and be pleasantly surprised when the BG-E11 ships.
It's not worth wasting worry energy on this. Life is too short. Plan a great shoot for this weekend instead!

Paul Wright

I've been checking out the PocketWizard MiniTT1 with the aim of increasing efficiency when using HSS on 580ex & 580exII. Also, does the 600ex-RT do HSS in an efficient way as offered by the PocketWizard MiniTT1?

Yes, the 600EX-RT does HSS.
IF you are considering the PW MiniTT1 and Flex system, you may want to check out the Phottix Odins - I have been hearing a lot of good things about them over at Strobist.com. Here is a review on them:

Interesting, it looks like a good system. But it's the power usage efficiencies that the PocketWizard MiniTT1 promises, with the associated ability to do an HSS burst. Regular HSS using big apertures & higher iso might deliver 2-3 frames in a 10 FPS speed burst. If the PocketWizard MiniTT1 savings could stretch this out by even a couple of frames it's valuable to me.

Paul Wright

I use HSS a lot and depend on it. But DUH...it's taken until today to find out about the PocketWizard MiniTT1 and the power efficiencies it provides when using HSS.  I gather it will work beautifully with my 1D4 but no action with the 5D3. Current speedlights are 580ex & 580exII. Fully prepared to update to 600ex-RT to get optimum HSS performance.

Does the ST-E3 offer the same efficiencies as PocketWizard MiniTT1 in HSS mode when paired with 600ex-RT? Given I'll be working with 1D4, 5D3 & 1DX, what hardware combination is going to deliver the optimum HSS outcomes?

Paul Wright

I've been checking out the PocketWizard MiniTT1 with the aim of increasing efficiency when using HSS on 580ex & 580exII. From what I've read I'll see high compatibility with my 1D MkIV, but zero compatibility with my 5DIII. Does anyone have direct experience with these combinations?

Also, does the 600ex-RT do HSS in an efficient way as offered by the PocketWizard MiniTT1? Or does it do HSS at all?

Paul Wright

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D Mark II Info? [CR2]
« on: May 16, 2012, 04:24:58 AM »
In recent times I have been making a lot more use of high speed sync on the 580ex & 580exII. It really needs a gutsy external battery hooked up to make it truly useful as it sucks power like crazy. I'd like to read other people's HSS strategies.
I use a PW mini for hss - cuts battery usage by a LONG way
Very interesting! How so? Do you have a link to a technical article on this?

Paul Wright

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D Mark II Info? [CR2]
« on: May 16, 2012, 02:27:52 AM »
I hope for faster than 1/250 X-sync, since last generation of pro bodies is step back from older models:
1/200 on 5D mark III is slower than 1/250 of 1Ds or Nikon D800
1/250 on 1D X is slower than 1D/1DIII,1DIV

Oh yes! That should be high on the wishlist for a work-ready 7DII. Faster sync speeds are difficult to achieve on FF due to the greater distance the shutter must travel. Dr Neuro has explained this more eloquently.

I loved the 1/500 sync on the original 1D with the CCD sensor, the last in the line before CMOS took over. I did read the reasons why CMOS characteristics did pull the sync speed back from 1/500 to 1/300 on the 1D MkII MkIII & MkIV but can't recall the details. It was a decade ago.

In recent times I have been making a lot more use of high speed sync on the 580ex & 580exII. It really needs a gutsy external battery hooked up to make it truly useful as it sucks power like crazy. I run a twin output Quantum Turbo T3 which is a big help. It's also useful to keep your aperture big and your iso as high as practical for your project, particularly if you need a few frames burst. With HSS there's no problem if you shoot at 8000/sec at f/2.8 or f/4 at 800 or 1600 iso. I'd like to read other people's HSS strategies.

But back to business, yes Canon, stretch the R&D budget, charge a little more for the 7DII if you must but give us 1/500 sync.

Paul Wright

DPP is a curious program. It has a very pretty GUI but the backend is packed with flaws, glitches and some plain baffling workflow roadblocks. It's fine for a very small project, or just working carefully with a hero image, but when you need to work quickly with a large number of files, LR or ACR functionality make them the RAW converter of choice for most professionals.
Nonsense.  Obviously, you don't know DPP or are biased to your own workflow.  Why do you need LR or ACR to convert RAW?  Just because people say you have to?  DPP can do this handsdown and within DPP you can call PS and edit your master piece if you like.

With respect, I do know DPP a lot more intimately than you might imagine. There is no disputing the fact that DPP is highly capable of delivering beautifully processed files. Some might say unrivaled. For problem skintones it can be a godsend.

You may have misunderstood what I'm referring to as a master file. Different entirely to a masterpiece. It's a term in common usage that refers to a file that has generally had a great deal of work done to it all the way from RAW conversion, complex and often deep, time consuming processing in PS. It might be a multi layered PSD or a flattened TIFF with a lot of PP work behind it. Depending on personal output or client needs, it would be self defeating and unwise to sharpen this master file. My client may need the same image delivered for a billboard, a full page glossy magazine advert and for web. Each output has its unique sharpening requirements.

Most professionals and high output amateurs who choose to process through LR don't do so because they've succumbed to marketing or peer hype. I did complex and time consuming evaluation of every commercial RAW converter on the market. Each of them had unique standout qualities, even Silkypix. Raw Essentials which Adobe bought to build Lightroom V1.0 on was superb. But in a busy studio, a pragmatic choice is essential.  LR is a highly evolved efficient workflow tool that offers a suite of functions, each with neatly integrated controls and choices. If I need to properly process 100-500 RAW files between morning tea and lunchtime I know where I'll get the job done to meet my deadline...LR 4.0.

Paul Wright

Pages: 1 ... 69 70 [71] 72 73 ... 95