October 23, 2014, 04:47:02 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 - pwp

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 108
Lenses / Re: Is my Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II ok?
« on: October 14, 2014, 08:17:21 PM »
I agree, you need to get the shutter speeds up for meaningful test results. At the very least, test with the camera on a good tripod and use a cable release.

FWIW my copy of the 24-70 f/2.8II is so good I've sold my 24 f/1.4II, my 35 f/2 and my Sigma 50 f/1.4. It comfortably outperforms these three primes.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 14, 2014, 06:32:25 PM »
OK, I'll come back to this one. While "the person holding it" is the first and extremely accurate answer, for the OP it's a fairly glib answer too.

I look to a pro-grade camera to be well enough made and have adequate performance benchmarks and ergonomics to not get in the way of the process of achieving great images. And that will vary according to the sort of projects you're likely to take on. When I'm working well, the camera almost disappears from my consciousness and I'm just getting the images.

So while a 5D3 will deliver in spades for an events projects or most commercial projects, it's not necessarily going to suit a sports shooter or news shooter who will look to a 1DX class of camera, one that will hack the daily grind in often robust conditions and in any weather. Some advertising, high-end art and landscape shooters genuinely need medium format. For some the perfect working camera will be a high megapixel Nikon with a tilt-shift lens.

I saw a piece on TV about a news shooter working in Afghanistan who carried four or five iPhones, swapping over the sim card to the next iPhone as the battery ran flat. He could be highly unobtrusive, almost invisible. He could do a quick edit sitting in a car or truck and send images to his news-service instantly, all from the iPhone. So the iPhone is the perfect "pro" camera for him.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 14, 2014, 06:14:14 PM »
The person holding it.
+1  Hah! These were the exact four words that formed quickly for me as soon as I saw the thread subject line.


EOS Bodies / Re: \
« on: October 13, 2014, 06:37:10 PM »
I would use a Camranger or a DSLR controller along with a tablet if dual pixes is introduced on the next full frame. That screen is still too small, and touching the camera may introduce additional shake (unless you don't care).
This is why I am not screaming about the lack of touch screen and swivel. I wouldn't use them if I had them; just like pop-up flash.

Yep, Camrangers are a great shooting companion for just about any sort of project. Every home should have one!

I felt much the same as you about small touchscreens until I started shooting with the Panasonic GH4. This camera completely changed my viewpoint on touch screens. When it's as well implemented as the GH4 screen, you'd never ever go back.

Much of the time I shoot the GH4 on a rig with a lightweight HDMI external 7 inch monitor. I'm watching the external monitor while making changes on the touchscreen. When you're on a tripod, with a subtle touch, the touchscreen is sensitive enough to not introduce shake. Mostly I use the touch screen between shots to make quick adjustments.


EOS Bodies / Re: \
« on: October 13, 2014, 06:24:38 PM »
The ability to customize focus speed is a nice feature, which they have crippled by not having a touch screen.  Or swivel screen for that matter.
Very odd indeed. They improve one parameter, but then take away the critical touch screen to control it all and force you to stop AF and move a joystick around which shakes the video.  ???  Maybe on a Hollywood level video rig it will resist any shaking but....

The lamented, missing touchscreen couldn't have added more than a few dollars. I shoot video now with the Panasonic GH4 and the efficient operation of that camera would be hugely reduced were it not for the excellent touchscreen. If it were a toss-up between touch-screen and flip-out screen, I'd have touch screen every single time. My other touch-screen camera is the cool little SL1/100D. The touch screen functionality is brilliant, not as classy as the Panasonic, but brilliant nevertheless.

In spite of this curious missed opportunity by Canon, I'll still be one of the first in line for a 7DII, primarily as a replacement for my over-worked 1D MkIV.

Back on topic, the cello video is an interesting glimpse of the 7DII's potential.


As a photographer who was never as good as I wanted to be tracking action with pre-AF cameras & lenses (mostly Nikon) I was hungry for more keepers shooting dynamic situations, not just sports. Static just isn't in my working vocabulary.  The then awesome Canon EOS1n film camera with good AF lenses was a game changer for me. The AF worked! Subsequent improvements in AF have meant pushing the possibilities of creative "risk" delivering shots that would previously been impossible for me to capture.

In my earlier career it was not just better AF that would have delivered the goods, we used to think 800iso was fast and used the miraculous Fuji 800 neg film to achieve shots that were unthinkable previously.

With new gear vs old, I'm valuing AF performance and high iso capacity above other factors. The one other thing would be cheap, high capacity CF cards. As a heavy shooter who loves to explore, build and develop a shot, the freedom to shoot as much as I like, free from the very real consideration that it cost a dollar every time you pressed the shutter (with film...).

I have no doubt the work I did in the 1990's would have looked very different if I had the gear I use now. But it was the same for everyone. Look at sports shots from 25 years ago that got a big splash in news pages or on magazine covers. They mostly look pretty weak now. But that's progress. Fast forward to 2035 and we won't know ourselves. I'm loving it.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: EOS6D or 7DMKII ?
« on: October 09, 2014, 08:05:15 PM »
For the sort of projects you've described, plus the lenses you already have, I'd say go for the 6D. Why not wait until the 7DII actually ships, rent both for a weekend and make a properly informed call.


Lenses / Re: recommendation: canon 24mm f1.4 or 85mm f1.2 for wedding?
« on: October 09, 2014, 07:52:12 AM »
I'd get a 24-70 to put on one camera, and your 70-200 on another body.  Leave the rest home. 
Exactly. Remember the KISS principal? Weddings are fast moving events. The greatest moments can unfold before your eyes in a heartbeat and be gone the next. You're expected to deliver the magic. Two bodies & two zooms and you're never stuck with the wrong focal length. Peak moments never repeat.


Lenses / Re: recommendation: canon 24mm f1.4 or 85mm f1.2 for wedding?
« on: October 08, 2014, 07:27:00 AM »
You're perfectly set up already. Buy a new suit!


Reviews / Re: Scott Kelby 7D Mark II Real World
« on: October 08, 2014, 03:50:07 AM »
I looked at the video and I had cramps in my stomach. I just cannot take this guy seriously. I'm not even sure he knew which DSLR he is talking about (24MP), then he was like "we dared shooting at ISO800, even at ISO1000 and OH MY GOD, *jizz in his pants* OH MY GOD YOU GAIS, it's unbelievable!!". I would like to see some badly lit sports at ISO3200-ISO6400.
Sure he posted, again "OH MY GOD YOU GAIS, 16.000 ISO of nipples", but at fast moving subjects in poorly lit conditions.. this is where it all comes down to what it can do.
So it wasn't just me...Scott Kelby is generally gushingly enthusiastic, but he was in other-worldly overdrive in this vid. He's exhausting! Hungry for any 7DII info, I skimmed through it.


Reviews / Re: Scott Kelby 7D Mark II Real World
« on: October 08, 2014, 12:06:20 AM »
Good God you guys are dumb sometimes.
Download the full sized images, a couple have small crops but two are 5472x3648 for 19,961,856 px, a 20MP camera.
Jeez, talk about speculate rather than just think!
Awww be nice. We're not all maths geniuses!


Reviews / Re: Scott Kelby 7D Mark II Real World
« on: October 07, 2014, 11:27:54 PM »
Yeah I heard him say 24MP twice also. I was extremely disappointed, given the fact that the released camera will have only 20. I honestly believe canon made it 24MP but decided to use the 20mp in this body so they could keep the camera cheap and sell more.  >:(

I think you are right. The early talk was that several prototypes including a 24mp sensor body were being tested. Maybe the one he was using is one of those? That or he just mixed up the specs with an earlier prototype.

If it was genuinely a 24mp prototype, we may see even more improved high iso noise in the 20mp version. There are a lot of comments posted on Scott Kelby's blog. Only George asks about the 24mp blooper, and it's unanswered by Kelby.

Anyway, we'll see soon enough. Personally I'd prefer a lower noise, faster clearing 20mp 7DII.


Lenses / Re: Is FoCal worth ~$150?
« on: October 07, 2014, 11:13:57 PM »
Where is the $150 price coming from? I'm seeing FoCal Pro at the Reikan website for £69.95. http://www.reikan.co.uk/focalweb/index.php/versions/focal-pro/

Converted to USD https://www.google.com.au/#q=70+pounds+to+dollars I'm seeing $112.48

Am I missing something here?


Lighting / Re: POLL: What flash modes do you use?
« on: October 07, 2014, 07:56:06 PM »
Flash tubes have a remarkably short full power rated lifespan. We all generally get hugely more out of them than the ratings but that doesn't change the actual manufacturers specs.
Interesting read. Thanks for that. It completely contradicts my own no-doubt narrow though long experience, but maybe I've just been just plain lucky.

To quote the Strobist article....And it might surprise you to know that 5,000 pops is an expected life span for some flash tubes. Disappointed? I was, too. And it gets worse: some tubes are rated at 1,000 pops.

No manufacturer could survive on these figures, every sale would result in a warranty replacement. On a big day I'd easily expect 1000+ pops from 580 exII & 600 ex-rt, and sometimes 3000+ from the Einsteins in a big studio session. Comments in the Strobist post are also completely at odds with the claims.

I'd love to see some real manufacturers numbers on this, unsubstantiated Strobist editorial content doesn't necessarily establish stable facts. Like contemporary Japanese cars, I'm constantly amazed at the durability and reliability of products sold by Canon, Panasonic, Apple, Paul C Buff (US) and so on.

But flash tubes? The future looks very bright.


Lighting / Re: POLL: What flash modes do you use?
« on: October 07, 2014, 06:55:09 PM »
I do know however that I fried my 600rt flash a couple of months ago, the flash head was replaced under warranty.
Ouch! That's unfortunate. I'm glad you still had warranty cover.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 108