December 22, 2014, 04:40:14 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 - infared

Pages: 1 ... 33 34 [35] 36 37 ... 68
511
Reviews / Re: The Digital Picture Reviews the Tamron 24-70
« on: May 13, 2013, 07:51:12 PM »
After seeing this:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/09/tamron-24-70-f2-8-vc-issue
How could anyone consider one of these lenses? The company blatantly showed us who they are by bringing these lenses to market.  I spent the money (which was dear), for the Canon and never looked back. Great lens that most likely will last for years. If I see the name Tamron I just turn the page...I would not consider any of their products....I also own non-Canon lenses (Sigma & Zeiss) so my outlook is not just Canon fanboy ism....

512
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III with Continuous RAW Video Recording
« on: May 13, 2013, 08:20:37 AM »
Ahhhh....The embarrassment.....for Canon....

513
Animal Kingdom / Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« on: May 11, 2013, 08:43:33 AM »
I like to leave reality behind..and create something...some like it, some don't...oh well...

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8255/8649648621_3b1df8baf7_b.jpg

If you are a photojournalist, content should stay but you can definitely run image enhancing software on it to give it some snap etc.. as far as I am concerned. I know everyone does not feel that way. MOST images (even Nat. Geo) are heavily worked on...not photo comp. per say...but they are ALL run thru software. I think that probably 90% of "pro" images are today, generally you cannot compete if you just use the "in-camera" image. It's just the reality of the photography industry in 2013.
Whatever that is????
A little bit of ethics can go a long way tho!

514
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM
« on: May 09, 2013, 07:23:28 AM »
Great Lens!

515
PowerShot / Re: A New Large Sensor PowerShot Coming [CR1]
« on: May 08, 2013, 10:37:28 PM »
I pray that this camera has a superior EVF or competition beating viewfinder.

From the admin's original post. "It won’t have an OVF or EVF ..."

Quote
With the mirrorless sector going like gangbusters Canon is soo late to this party I hope they try and improve on what Fuji, Nikon, Ricoh, and the M4/3rds people are offering which is darn good.

You're Canon...it's time for an exciting new camera that is not a DSLR behemoth,

I feel the same. But I would NOT hold my breath  :(

TELL ME ABOUT IT,?.I love my Canon FF kit...it rocks..but when it comes to small POWERFUL cameras MFT has my vote and my money. I have no idea who would pay these absurd prices for the G series camera when you can own a kickass MFT for less than Canon's silly asking price for a small sensor camera with essentially no viewfinder. Arrogance is the only reason I see.
Now they have this new one coming with a larger sensor and are not even making a lame attempt to include a VF. They just eliminate it??? The M release has no VF or option for one and also has antique AF... I think Canon needs to scrap all of the above and introduce one compact meaningful mirrorless product line...They are a mess in this area.

516
Lenses / Re: Cheap fisheye for canon full frame?
« on: May 08, 2013, 07:51:43 AM »
there is the lensbaby fisheye: http://lensbaby.com/optics-fisheye

Rather inexpensive, might buy one myself in time...

Remember...you have to have a Lensbaby Lens to drop that into. Most common is the Composer Pro @$280 Plus $150 for the fisheye =$430 and if you pick up a used sigma or Canon fisheye you are in the same ballpark money-wise with WAY better optics and FF coverage...plus the Lensbaby vignettes intensely on a FF camera...
It does have a certain fun, artistic appeal though!

517
Lenses / Re: Cheap fisheye for canon full frame?
« on: May 08, 2013, 06:41:41 AM »
Well...I am an L-Lens aholic...but not adverse to other manufacturers. (have two Sigmas and a Zeiss)....and I have no real call for circular images on my FF camera. I own the Canon 15mm Fisheye..I bought mine just before they were discontinued (why did Canon make that choice?), to make way for the 8-15mm, and although it is one of the oldest lenses in the Canon lineup I find mine to be small, sharp and a lot of fun. I researched the Sigma, and my readings told me that the Canon was sharper, built better and had no focus issues, better multi coating, and less flare which comes into play a lot with a fisheye...so I bought the Canon. I considered the 8-15mm, but the COST, the size and the slower f/stop and super-exposed front element just deterred me from buying that lens for a field of view I use occasionally when it is just right. (I thought it would be fun to have the circular, "novelty" option but resisted!!! LOL!). The Canon can stays tucked in my bag with its small footprint and can be on the ready when that fleeting opportunity arrises.  Great little lens..I even like the whirring of the non-USM...kind of a cool photo quirk!!!!!  ;D

518
Software & Accessories / Re: arca swiss help please.
« on: May 07, 2013, 10:01:49 PM »
That is the beauty of the Arca-Swiss set up...there are many choices. I mentioned above that I like the Kirk plates and I use Photo Clam ball heads on my two carbon fiber tripods...a Gitzo (light traveler) and a Feisol (more sturdy and larger)...I use these plates, heads and tripods for two camera systems, a FF Canon system and a micro four thirds. MY longest, largest lens is my Canon 70-200mm f/2.8LII w/1.4 Ext....
So the beauty of Arca-Swiss is that I made choices for the camera set-ups that I have and the way that I us them.. Lightweight, Price and portability were my top criteria for choosing my tripods, plates and heads. Since I do not have any really heavy long telephoto lenses..my gear could be (IMHO) lighter weight and less expensive than a photographer using bigger, longer lenses.  I could spend $400-$500 on a tripod (not $1200)..I have found my equipment to be very fluid (does not get I the way of me creating photos, it facilitate it.). Trust me...every time I am around photographers with non-Arca gear...I watch them struggle and fumble and I am glad that I spent the extra money that I did in my Arca-Swiss set-up. For me their is no other choice!

519
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Samyang 24mm f/3.5 ED Tilt-Shift in Stock
« on: May 07, 2013, 08:45:48 AM »
In this case ...the Canon is definitely worth the extra money...

520
Software & Accessories / Re: arca swiss help please.
« on: May 06, 2013, 10:46:53 PM »
I put the custom-fit Kirk plates on my 5DIII and the bracket on my 70-200mm 2.8L IS II. I liked them so much I got custom-fit plates for both my micro 4/3 cameras too. Arca-Swiss "type" setup is the best way to go. (Not necessarily Arca-Swiss actual brand product.)

521
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS
« on: May 06, 2013, 07:30:09 PM »
Good review....with current pricing I can see this is a considerably less expensive option to the 24-70mm 2.8L II....but I think it is a less convincing option to the 24-105mm, no? When comparing tele reach AND price this lens does not stack up unless the IQ is that much better.....
(Did I miss something Justin, or were you actually able to squeeze 73mm out of the lens for the shot of the child in the hat? AMAZING!).  ;D

Thanks, I've never used the 24-105 so purposefully avoided comparisons, I have no doubt somebody on this forum will chime win with some sort of spec/chart comparison to show off exactly how different they are at 37mm f/4.5.

As for the 73mm, that's what the exif read when I "pushed" the lens into Macro mode... not sure how accurate that is, but it *is* at the long end of the zoom range past 70mm on the marker.
Hmm... The 73mm exif data is a bit odd...thanks for clarifying that stat...I should have known that you would have your facts correct!

522
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS
« on: May 06, 2013, 10:29:15 AM »
Good review, I appreciate the style and take. Like others, I think a more direct comparison to the 24-105mm would be useful.

Following Neuro's comment, I've heard repeatedly that IQ is not that much improved by the 24-70mm compared to the older 24-105mm. Anyone care to comment on differences on distortion, particularly on the wide end?

My first thought when I read the announcement for the new 24-70mm was oh no, there will never be a 24-105mm mkii!  I hope I'm wrong on that one, the extra reach has always proved useful to me.

Pensive...yeah... Canon should have just skipped this lens and revamped the 24-105mm.... I just don't really see the need for this lens...especially at this cost.

523
EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 06, 2013, 08:39:22 AM »
....on edge of seat...is the 14-24mm L zoom on that 2013 list??????? huh...huh...huh.... :P

524
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS
« on: May 06, 2013, 07:47:50 AM »
Good review....with current pricing I can see this is a considerably less expensive option to the 24-70mm 2.8L II....but I think it is a less convincing option to the 24-105mm, no? When comparing tele reach AND price this lens does not stack up unless the IQ is that much better.....
(Did I miss something Justin, or were you actually able to squeeze 73mm out of the lens for the shot of the child in the hat? AMAZING!).  ;D

525
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: May 05, 2013, 08:45:44 AM »
Like your images, seems you have a load of great places for this sort of shooting where you live.
I see an image like this I immediately think "Steven King", waiting for the Dummy to leap out of the frame.
[/quote]

Thanks eml!
This one is a little more Dean Koontz.... :-)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8398/8698114638_e6482b2f72_b.jpg

..yeah...no cock fights (that I know of), in Monmouth County, NJ!

Pages: 1 ... 33 34 [35] 36 37 ... 68