December 19, 2014, 03:48:36 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 ... 65 66 [67] 68 69 ... 109
991
EOS Bodies / Re: 5d Mk III dilemma
« on: August 29, 2012, 05:47:31 AM »
Well done and congratulations on your purchase. You'll have years of fun and creative sessions with it.
And BTW, nice work with those shots around your home. I want to live where you live!

-PW

992
Lenses / Re: Canon 24-70/2.8L II is official delayed - again
« on: August 29, 2012, 05:38:49 AM »
So it's October now for the Canon 24-70/2.8L II.
That's not that far away. How fast did the last month go? I'd prefer they get it right.

BTW this is a great time to off-load your Canon 24-70/2.8L I. On Gumtree I sold mine for $1450 two hours after I posted the advert. It was the last of four far less than stellar copies over the years.

October? Meh! No problem. After the erratic QC of the MkI this new one just has to nail it. Take your time Canon.

-PW

993
Software & Accessories / Re: Sreen protector???
« on: August 29, 2012, 03:13:34 AM »
Personally I have never worried about protectors. The glass Canon uses is spectacularly tough. The only thing to watch out for is the possibility of the camera banging against a belt buckle for extended periods. Even this may wear through a protector in quick time.

But in general use, working my cameras pretty heavily on a daily basis, I've never scratched a screen. I smashed one on a 1Ds many years ago which CPS was kind enough to fix for free while I waited.

Don't sweat the small stuff...just enjoying your camera without wrapping the whole thing in cotton wool. They're tougher than you'd think.

-PW

994
Landscape / Re: 17-40 f4 for lower light vs 16-35 f2.8
« on: August 29, 2012, 03:06:30 AM »
This very recent thread may help you.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=8879.msg160935#msg160935
It directly discusses the 17-40 vs 16-35 scenario.

-PW

995
Lenses / Re: Considering the 70-200 f4 is for my next lens
« on: August 29, 2012, 03:01:39 AM »
There's absolutely no doubt the 70-200 f/4, particularly the non-IS version represents extraordinary value for money. It's compact, light and has IQ to match it with the best. But the suggestions of the far newer L70-300IS also present a fairly compelling option. That extra 100mm....! Matched with your 5D3 the slower apertures shouldn't be a problem because of your ever present option to ramp up the iso and see very little image degradation. The L70-300IS understandably has a lot of fans.

But if it's candids of your kids that you most want to do, then rocket fast AF and premium bokeh would make me tend to suggest the legendary L135 f/2.

-PW

996
Lenses / Re: 85mm f/1.2 ii or 135mm f/2
« on: August 28, 2012, 07:30:29 PM »
I'm in a similar situation to the OP, 135 f/2 vs 85 f/1.2II or Sigma 85 f/1.4.

For the way I shoot the slow AF would probably knock out the Canon 85 f/1.2II, in spite of the unique look this lens can deliver. Is the AF on the Sigma 85 f/1.4 also sluggish like the Canon, or is it as snappy and quick as the 135 f/2?

FWIW the 70-200 f/2.8isII is far and away my most used lens. What a gem!

-PW

997
EOS Bodies / Re: 5d Mk III dilemma
« on: August 27, 2012, 10:23:53 PM »
+1 on no 24-70 II/5DIII kit.  There is going to be so much demand for that lens there is no way Canon will be compelled to discount it.

Right, it'll be years before there is meaningful discounting on the 24-70II. After a number of disappointing 24-70 Mk1 lenses I bought a 24-105 a couple of years ago to see me through until the new lens ships. Surprise surprise! The 24-105 leaves all four of my 24-70 lenses gasping for respectability. It's a 10/10 keeper. Most people are highly satisfied with the 24-105. Just dig around on this list for positive feedback.

As TrumpetPower suggested, go straight out and pick up a kit 5D3 and 24-105 today. You'll love it. And if in the unlikely event the 24-105 turns out to be unsuitable, you'll barely lose a penny on it if you on-sell. Great lenses like this hold their value.

-PW

998
Third Party Manufacturers / World's most expensive lens
« on: August 27, 2012, 08:56:26 PM »
Don't sweat it over the cost of the 400 f/2.8isII. This one checks out at over $2 million.
http://www.petapixel.com/2012/08/27/the-worlds-most-expensive-camera-lens/#more-70978
Of course, it's a Leica...

-PW

999
Abstract / Re: Light Painting!
« on: August 27, 2012, 08:45:48 PM »
Want to see highly evolved torchwork?
http://www.illuminated-landscape.com/

-PW

1000
Lenses / Re: All street photographers share your gear here!
« on: August 26, 2012, 08:21:54 PM »
For my style of street work, the 5D3 & 1D Mk4 stay at home and the S100 comes out. People have a lot of significance on a "big" dslr and you may not get as much agreement with the bigger pro-looking gear. It's all about perception. In a legally suppressive and paranoid city like London for example, you definitely leave your DSLR back at the hotel! You just have to be a bit smart and be appropriately informed about the local culture, laws and attitudes towards shooting in public depending where on the planet you are shooting.

There is no denying the IQ is way below dslr level when shooting with the little S100, but I come from the school where a prime consideration is that Content is King and this does apply completely to my style and interpretation of street photography. I'd rather a brilliantly caught moment done with an iPhone to a relatively dead, though technically perfect, mistimed shot done on a 5D3 with premium L glass. Content is King.

When the new mirrorless Canons ship, and then evolve a little further, you'll be looking at a street kit that even the street photography "God" Cartier Bresson would show interest in.

Street photography is an entirely different experience to how it was even just a decade or so ago. We're in the post 9/11 world. Suspicion, and the attitude that photographers are child snatching bestial terrorist operatives, plus the long arm of the law have diminished what could be described as one of the purest forms of photography. Remember, if you plan to use any street images commercially or plan to show them as fine art, protect yourself by carrying a dozen or so model release forms in your pocket or bag. If you can't get agreement, don't use those shots for anything beyond personal use.

You may see this as convoluted and confronting, but it sure as hell improves your personal communication skills!

-PW


1001
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX IQ
« on: August 26, 2012, 06:35:15 AM »
Well I'm gonig through some shots from tonight's Ashland U. vs. Wooster soccer match, and this is pretty cool.  I was shooting with a 300 f/2.8L I IS lens .

This is good! How was AF consistency compared to previously used 1-Series bodies eg 1D4 & 1D3?

-PW

1002
the stars only happen at narrow apertures
its pretty easy to stop getting them simply shoot at an wider aperture less than f8 say f4 even wider if you feel like it.

How about that! You learn something new every day. In close to 1000 years as a photographer I was not aware of this useful fact. Thanks!

-PW

1003
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MK III Focus Hiccup
« on: August 26, 2012, 06:27:32 AM »
I bought my 5D MK III in early June. I haven't shot a ton of stuff yet - maybe about 2000 frames over 7 or 8 sessions.  But in 3 or 4 of those sessions, AF just quit.  Anyone else seeing this anomaly?

Is this phenomenon happening with just one lens? Or across different lenses? It may not be the body at all.
I have a 20K plus actuations 5D3 with no AF problems so far. Mind you I did have the shutter replaced at around 2K actuations but this is irrelevant to the AF matter you have described.

-PW

1004
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 300 f/4L IS II
« on: August 26, 2012, 05:12:53 AM »
I traded my 300 f/4is on a 300 f/2.8is. The 2.8 is absolutely brilliant, but I often wish I'd hung onto the f/4 as well. It was pin sharp wide open, was completely hand holdable & weighed next to nothing compared to the 300 f/2.8 which meant I took it with me far more often. And it focuses much closer than the f/2.8. I shot a lot of food with the 300 f/4is. It looked brilliant.

IMO it's one of the true performance bargains in the Canon L lens lineup and would be difficult to improve on, especially for the price. The current lens has a lot of fans.

I doubt we'll see this lens updated for quite some time.

-PW

1005
Lenses / Re: 70-200mm f/2.8 took a bad fall... Any advice?
« on: August 26, 2012, 05:02:13 AM »
It depends on how it's performing after the drop. It's an incredibly solid lens. If it all checks out OK then don't lose any sleep over it.

A few years ago I dropped a 1D Mk2 with a 70-200 f/2.8is attached from hip height onto a carpeted floor. The body was a write-off but the lens was repaired. But after the repair it was never quite as good as before. My business relies on consistently high IQ so I traded it on a new 70-200 f/2.8ISII. Happy days.

-PW

Pages: 1 ... 65 66 [67] 68 69 ... 109