January 31, 2015, 02:21:30 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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 111
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D MkII RAW sample images
« on: October 16, 2014, 12:53:18 AM »
Pushing those sample images out may have been a bit of a mistake by DPR. They don't really tell us anything.

I'll be sitting tight waiting for some properly shot and properly processed 7DII RAW files processed with a shipping version of LR or ACR before making judgements. The 7DII is firmly on my shopping list.


EOS Bodies / 7D MkII RAW sample images
« on: October 15, 2014, 06:45:31 PM »
DP Review has updated the 7D MkII samples gallery after they got hold of an early build of ACR 8.7.
Check it out here:


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 06:37:56 PM »
Neuroanatomist, here's a "pro" microscope for you: http://phys.org/news/2013-01-three-photon-microscopy-biological-imaging.html
Image the full thickness of a live mouse's cortex! But you must have seen this - I put it up here for the entertainment of other geeks.

Cool stuff!

Kinda my point, though...where is it called 'pro'?  I have scopes costing from $1,000 to $800,000 – none of them are called 'pro microscopes'.   ;)

Must be time to trade-up Dr Neuro...


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 07:19:18 AM »
Clearly it has to say "pro" in the name of the camera.
So... canon pro-1 must be the only canon pro camera, right?
Canon Pro-1! Whoa! (Rhymes with Pro...) Now there's a killer of a camera. This is embarrassing, but I had the misfortune to know someone whose neighbors brother-in-law actually had one of the ten or so of these cameras that were sold in this country.


Lighting / Re: Flash equipment for Portraits & Events
« on: October 15, 2014, 01:22:35 AM »
I prefer Canon speedlites, but get whatever suits your budget.
Even though I use Profoto studio flash, I've also been using a Canon 580EX (on camera) for many things. I bounce from walls, ceilings, and walls & ceilings (combined). It gives a very natural look.
You're right, skillfully used bounce flash can look just like available light.
It's simple really, whatever you aim your flash at becomes the light-source.
Most offices have low, white ceilings.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 01:17:15 AM »
I think manufacturers decide which are the pro models, whether it be a set of knives, a camera or laptop (though in the latter they are called business models rather than pro).
Errm, being pedantic for just a moment...I have a Macbook Pro laptop. Must make me a pro! Whoo-hoo!
This is an entertaining thread!  8)   I hope the OP has got something out of it.


Lenses / Re: Is my Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II ok?
« on: October 14, 2014, 11:33:00 PM »
pwp, is your lens also noticeable sharper at the tele end compared to the wide end?
No, not noticeably. With most zooms there will be some variation from the wide to tele extremes.
I'm no pixel peeper, but what I do notice is consistently, usefully sharp shots and happy clients.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 14, 2014, 08:33:41 PM »
It has to have the word "pro" written on it. If those three letters are missing, it is not a "pro" camera.

That's funny!  ;D

Too many folks here are equating a 'pro camera' with a 'pro photographer'. 

That's right. Put me behind the wheel of a professional race car and I'd probably smash it at the first corner. 1DX ownership will make most photographers deliriously happy but it won't turn anyone into a pro.

Ahhh....the minutia of definitions, it's the pixel peeping of language.


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.


Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 111