March 06, 2015, 06:34:29 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 ... 62 63 [64] 65 66 ... 112
Just got delivery of the Joe Demb diffuser.
Specifically the Flash Diffuser Pro

And thanks to the poster carlc who recommended it.

Some quick testing reveals this as an uncommonly flexible and well thought out product. Quick recycle times suggest good energy efficiency. +1 Go Joe!!

The non-adjustable Gary Fong is excellent in many situations, but falls flat elsewhere. And because it sprays light in every direction, power usage is high. I'll be using the Joe Demb at a job later today. But straight up, this looks like a winner. I'll almost certainly get another one.


Software & Accessories / Re: Lightroom 4.2 update
« on: October 04, 2012, 08:59:41 PM »
I'll be grateful for any speed gains from LR V4.2. LR3 ran like a dream on my quad core 16Gb memory PC (SSD LR cache & catalog). LR4 was a dog and to a lesser extent 4.1. I loved the LR4 .x functionality but talk about glacial performance!

But an interesting thing which may be useful to some users, and help explain why some photographers have absolutely no speed issues and others do. The Wacom Intuos4 tablet turns out to be a culprit, specifically when using local adjustments. Brush was so bad I just never use it. The havoc it caused was so deep that it took three or four complete shutdown/restart cycles to restore acceptable performance.

So Wacom & Adobe need to talk to each other. If you use a Wacom and have LR speed issues, unhook it and taste the difference.


Canon General / Re: Why you should take your camera to family Weddings
« on: October 03, 2012, 08:41:39 AM »
I think a lot of professionals think in terms of a card becoming corrupt and less to lose on a smaller capacity card. There are also some that think larger capacity cards are less reliable. There was probably a time when that may have been true, but I think it is less so now. Many pros aren't all that tech savvy though, they just want to shoot with tools that do the job.

Let's do a quick timeline here on this subject. Early this century when we were all shooting with 256Mb or 512Mb CF cards, the new HUGE 1Gb cards started shipping. Cautious photographers said, " Oh no...we'll stick with the smaller cards and spread the risk. You can't put all your eggs in one basket". Exactly the same conversation happened on forums when 2Gb, 4Gb, 8Gb etc CF cards started shipping.

Ten years ago I got caught with a too small card on my first job with the 1Ds, a massive 11.4 Mp camera. I've never been caught short again; glad to have a pocket full of fast high quality 32Gb cards. And in 12 years shooting digital, touch wood, I've never had a card failure. All my CF cards get retired after 18 months maximum. They are always top-end Sandisk or Lexar. They're never dropped, and always formatted in camera. They get a deep full format in the computer 2-3 times a year. This all may be complete overkill, but face it, the reliability runs are on the board. Against the possibility of messing up a job or even losing a client, CF cards are cheap.

In this day and age, it's inexcusable for any professional shooter to run short of space at the wrong moment. Part of your professionalism is to anticipate, and up to a point, predict the (near) future.

OP, I'm glad you brought your camera to the wedding. And you got the shot!


Canon General / Re: Why you should take your camera to family Weddings
« on: October 03, 2012, 03:59:22 AM »
Inexcusable!!! I shot a wedding last weekend. Just before the ceremony, my 5D3 was reporting I still had 160 frames of open capacity on my 8GB card.

Professional event photographers still shoot with 8Gb cards? Phew! That's not a lot of shots on a 5D3 unless you are a JPEG shooter.
I'm still frequently surprised how fast a 32Gb card fills on the 5D3.


Software & Accessories / Re: Who uses a handheld light meter?
« on: October 02, 2012, 07:56:06 AM »
I still use a Sekonic flash meter, but more for quickly getting ratios correct in multi light setups.
But if I inadvertently leave the Sekonic in the studio when I do a location shoot, I don't particularly miss it.


Lenses / Re: About to buy the 135L, and then saw this....
« on: October 01, 2012, 08:56:49 PM »
The DXO reviews tend to look through a very narrow highly technical prism which is useful to know, but often the real world experience is contradictory to their findings. I stopped reading their reviews a long time ago. Give me the solid opinion of working photographers any day.


Lenses / Re: Sigma 300mm
« on: October 01, 2012, 08:51:00 PM »
Interesting question. Here's a review of the still current 120-300, an update has been announced and will ship when Sigma decides to get on with it.

And 300 f/2.8 reviews:

I don't think the fixed 300 has had a refresh in a while, and I believe still lacks OS. I'd hang out for the updated 120-300 zoom.


Lenses / Re: Broken 24-105...what should I do??
« on: October 01, 2012, 01:30:15 AM »
It's too bad there is not rice in India.
Ummm, please tell us you're not serious. India? Rice? (cough cough) :P
No pasta in Italy? No sashimi in Japan? No coconuts in Tahiti? No haggis in Scotland? No cheese on the moon?

But yes, dry rice is helpful. I've also used the larger packs of silica gel successfully with a very damp point & shoot.


Lenses / Re: Broken 24-105...what should I do??
« on: September 30, 2012, 07:34:01 PM »
Tough! Put it down to experience, make the 24-105 mug and get another one.


Lenses / Re: To IS or not?
« on: September 29, 2012, 11:51:31 PM »
I'd leave it on.  It doesn't hurt image quality.  It'll steady your viewfinder which is easier on the eyes.  Also, a steady viewfinder improves AF in my experience.

Yep, leave it on. Gives AF an advantage for sure, particularly at the longest focal lengths.
Try both ways and check the % of keepers. Then you'll leave it on.


Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Why Hasselblad?
« on: September 28, 2012, 03:49:12 AM »
A colleague uses Hasselblad. I thought the IQ from my 5D3 was awesome but the Hassy just blows it out of the water. Dynamic range is in another class. Ability to crop is enviable. There is that unique look.

For an analogy with film-era arguments, it's almost like comparing drum scanned 35mm Velvia with 4x5 sheet film. Even so, if your shooting style is dynamic and involves any kind of action, give me a Canon DSLR any day. IQ is one thing, but content is king.


Lenses / Re: Wide Angle Zooms (non Canon)
« on: September 27, 2012, 06:38:57 PM »
I've had the Sigma 12-24 for years which I use 100% on FF. It's definitely not a day to day lens, but there are plenty of occasions where the 12mm wide end absolutely saves the day. Provided I shoot at f/11 this lens delivers. Forget it wide open, it's a mushy mess. Provided you don't expect the world of this lens, it represents great value. Around a year ago Sigma gave this lens a refresh and I believe the QC & IQ have improved somewhat.

For APS-C, the gold standard wide zoom would have to be the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5.


Lenses / Re: No compact 'standard' L zoom?
« on: September 27, 2012, 06:30:50 PM »
To the OP, the L24-105 f/4is is the answer. It weighs a lot less than the 24-70 f/2.8MkI and there are a pages of good reasons why this is one of the most highly and often recommended lenses in the Canon L range. It's light for what it does, it's sharp wide open, has IS and is just darn useful! Mine is way better overall than any of the four 24-70 f/2.8 MkI zooms I've had.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 5Dc as an entry for FF? yay or nay?
« on: September 26, 2012, 08:19:10 PM »
The 5DC is a brilliant camera and great value pre-owned. You should have plenty of choice as photographers make the upgrade to 5D3. Look out for a low mileage example. FWIW I used my 5DC with it's original shutter up to around 400,000 shutter actautions. I gave it to an assistant who still gives it pretty solid use. However if your budget can stretch to a 5D2, that will always be the better choice.


Any advice is appreciated.  If the 200mm prime is incredibly sharp wide open... or isn't head and shoulders better than the 70-200mm... I'll stick with the zoom.  But I also don't want to use the 135-200mm range and be so disappointed that I never bother to use the lens.

Keep the zoom. No question. The 135-200 range will not disappoint you. If there is any variation at that range, maybe it slips from stellar to merely awesome.


Pages: 1 ... 62 63 [64] 65 66 ... 112