April 21, 2014, 03:51:32 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 - K-amps

Pages: 1 ... 87 88 [89] 90 91 ... 99
1321
Canon General / Re: Is anyone awake in Canon HQ?
« on: November 11, 2011, 10:50:06 AM »
Save the "pixel quality" and "sensor noise" arguments for the summer BBQ parties.

How about the shallower DoF that's possibly with a FF sensor and not an APS-C sensor argument?  What's the longest focal length I can get in an f/2.8 lens for my A77?

I don't think OP is saying Sony or the A77 is better, I suspect he wants a 5D3 to be released now at less than $2k... he is like the rest of us  :P

1322
Canon General / Re: Price increase
« on: November 11, 2011, 10:45:33 AM »
The minimum wage component in the final price is miniscule. It should be dwarfed by other factors like currency exchange parity, Canon / Dealer margins etc.

1323
EOS Bodies / Re: World's pricient Photograph... bland
« on: November 10, 2011, 05:16:29 PM »
Did some research... he shoots Film, so the prints are one of a kind... I get it a bit now... ???

1324
EOS Bodies / World's priciest Photograph... bland
« on: November 10, 2011, 04:35:27 PM »
Why did anyone pay $4.3m for this...? it's nice... but whats so great about it.

Experts... please make me see the light.

http://gizmodo.com/5858107/worlds-priciest-picture-is-as-bland-as-it-is-expensive



1325
Amazon price back up to $3178.

1326
EOS Bodies / Re: T2i vs. 60D vs. 5dMKII
« on: November 03, 2011, 03:54:19 PM »
As the saying goes 'invest in the glass, not the bodies' - and I would have to agree with it. You will probably switch your body every 3 to 4 years, whereas good lenses should last 15 years +.

---edited----

Also, since you want to do docs and lots of interviews you are going to need approx $2K for the audio gear you need although pro most sound guys would even scoff at that number saying that's what they pay for 1 mic. I in no way mean to get preachy, but most people new to video greatly underestimate the importance of getting good sound.

+1 on both counts especially on Audio.

I was an audio guy before I got into the photography thing.... you can get kilobuck mics and gear, but a $250 budget can land you decent gear... the point still stands for anyone who grew-up in the mp3 era... never skimp on the audio, if someone does not like your video, they can look elsewhere, but if your audio is crappy, they have nowhere to hide.

1327
EOS Bodies / Re: T2i vs. 60D vs. 5dMKII
« on: November 03, 2011, 09:42:42 AM »
All of us weighed the options and made a choice based on what we needed and what we could afford.  Eash of us made the decision that was right for us, and people will give you their preference, and why they think its a good choice.

The fact is, they are all good camera bodies, putting more money into a good lens will give you something that will outlast several camera bodies, so plan on getting a upgraded lens and T2i as opposed to a 7D and beginner lens. 

The choice of lens, is a whole different question.  A t2i along with a 15-85mm lens is a good start,add a 50mm f/1.8 lens for low light, and you will cover most common usages.  If you need a telephoto lens, I'd get a 70-200mm f/4 non IS for a low cost high quality lens.

+1: Nailed it.

If budget allows, upgrade the T2i to a 60D which is a bit better for video.

1328
Canon General / Re: Filters: Cokin P Series "Equivalent" quandary
« on: November 02, 2011, 05:04:40 PM »
The Cokin P filter holder has three slots.  If you don't mind having only two slots, here's what you do: take a sharp utility knife and cut off the outer slot from the filter holder.  Voila, no more vignetting.  This 5 minute fix has served me well.

Good idea! ... however would like to know how wide can you go with 1 slot cut off (2 left) i.e. is 24mm ok?

I should have mentioned that I fixed my Cokin P filter holder for my Sigma 10-20 in this way.  So I can't tell you exactly how it's going to pan out for a 24-105 on a 5D.  However I can tell you there's quite a bit of gain in FOV.

Do u have a FF or APS-C?

1329
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs 7Dii (FF vs APS-C)
« on: November 02, 2011, 04:03:34 PM »

I'm no neuro but I can take a shot to rephrase it into less technical terms....  we'll see if I have this right!
........ 

Perfect response Meh .... really dumbed down for me!   ;)

You get a gold star!

1330
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs 7Dii (FF vs APS-C)
« on: November 02, 2011, 04:02:19 PM »

Practically speaking, shallower DoF with FF.  Meh nailed it.  But to give an example: ...Hope that makes sense.

Sure does, thanks,   :D

1331
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs 7Dii (FF vs APS-C)
« on: November 02, 2011, 02:49:37 PM »
@Meh - Exactly, it's the iris diaphragm that matters. Practically, since you have to actually do simple math (eek!) to determine that from the focal length and f/number, it's more practical to use those values to determine DoF.

LL's experiment with the gremlin is approximately correct. In fact, at the distances involved it's actually not the best approximation. I don't agree that the degree of unsharpness is identical - but it's close, good enough for approximation. I've tried an equivalent experiment, as a post hoc test, with my AFMA testing. Since I use 25x the focal length for all lenses, and the LensAlign fills the same proportion of the frame (i.e. distance and focal length are equal and opposite).  With an actual distance scale on the ruler, it's apparent that f/2.8 at 16mm (16-35/2.8L II) and at 200mm f/2.8 (70-200mm f/2.8L IS II), the measured DoF is the same, when distance and focal length are reciprocal.

Actually, the reduction of DoF to dependence only on magnification holds at macro distances (and for microscopy, although we usually call it axial resolution not DoF, and use numerical apertures vs. f/numbers).

I thought I had this figured out till I read HillSilly's post...

Neuro or any other Savior : Please dumb this down for me... (you have done this many times  :) ) : Bokeh notwithstanding.... do I get more or less OOF blur (Quantity) is APC-S or with FF.

Ok so let say i use a 50mm f1.8 on both a 5d and 7d, subject is 10 feet away from both cameras. After capture and 100% crop (lets say we frame 1 feet on all sides of the head of the subject (to get some background) in the crop )... basically like this frame for a  passport picture

With image will show more blurring of the background?

1332
Canon General / Re: Buy one of these
« on: November 02, 2011, 02:29:59 PM »
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/628301-REG/Cokin_CBPW400_BPW400_Wide_Angle_Filter.html

I use it with a 17-35 on a 5D and it works well although, as I recall, not all the way down to 17mm.


Another great idea... I wonder if this will be compatible with the adapter ring I already have (it's not a Cokin... but Cokin compatible I think...)

1333
Canon General / Re: Filters: Cokin P Series "Equivalent" quandary
« on: November 02, 2011, 02:25:13 PM »
The Cokin P filter holder has three slots.  If you don't mind having only two slots, here's what you do: take a sharp utility knife and cut off the outer slot from the filter holder.  Voila, no more vignetting.  This 5 minute fix has served me well.

Good idea! ... however would like to know how wide can you go with 1 slot cut off (2 left) i.e. is 24mm ok?

1334
Canon General / Re: Filters: Cokin P Series "Equivalent" quandary
« on: November 02, 2011, 10:04:47 AM »
neuro, BTW, what ND filters do YOU use (if any), I think I've read somewhere on the forum from you about it and it's just now that I get interested too.

Go ahead John, Splurge.. OP is ok with digression in this regard  ;)

1335
Canon General / Re: Filters: Cokin P Series "Equivalent" quandary
« on: November 01, 2011, 05:32:15 PM »
It is possible to get special adaptor rings for wideangle lenses (although I'm not sure about for the Cokin system), but there comes a point where the field of view is just too great. If you try the 17-40 on full frame, you'll get the holder in frame as well :p. The only alternative is to use a 100mm system, such as Lee or Cokin Z, but even then, at 17mm, you have to position the filter holders carefully and stacking becomes an issue.

Looks like I need to hand hold the filters sans the holder  :P

Pages: 1 ... 87 88 [89] 90 91 ... 99