July 31, 2014, 09:52:39 PM

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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 101
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D a New Benchmark in ISO Performance?
« on: July 03, 2013, 02:44:16 PM »
When do we get to see RAW footage?

Lenses / Re: Canon 24-70 2.8 ll, Thanks BuyDig.com and Canon Rumors
« on: June 25, 2013, 04:02:36 PM »
Anyone has experiences with Big Value Inc? Selling the 24-70ii for $1957...!

Lenses / Re: 24mm options...
« on: June 24, 2013, 12:46:26 PM »
Unless you make money off Architectural shots, I would consider selling the 24-105 and getting the 24-70ii. It replaces the zoom of the 24-105, is razor sharp at 24mm, better vignetting than the 24F1.4wide open, it might have some distortion but that is fixable in PP.

Also... you will not need to carry 2 lenses around.

But... if you need a specialized lens .... then the TSE and the 1.4 would fit the bill for roughly the same cash.

Lenses / Re: Does it make sense to keep my EF 100mm f2.0?
« on: June 24, 2013, 12:36:10 PM »
I don't like the slowpoke AF of the macro, compared to the 100f2. The 100f2 focusses instantly!

Yep - if you shoot indoor sports or the like, the extra stop and faster AF of the 100/2 make it a better choice.

Yes 2x the shutter speed also... albeit at a loss of sharpness. the 100/2 @F2 is not as sharp as the 100L is at 2.8.

But at 2.8 they are close, but it also defeats the advantage of a larger aperture of the 100 F2.

So if you want razor sharp images wide open, the 100L might be a better choice, if shutterspeed and AF speed are important then the duplication of ranges might be acceptable... although that would suggest you can afford a duplication, in which case, I'd suggest get the 135L and sell the 100F2, the 135L betters the 100F2 in almost every parameter.

 I too had the 86 F1.8 which some say is very similar to the 100F2, but it was no where as sharp as the 100L. Also the minimum Focus distance of the 100F2 was a tad disappointing... for me, so I sold them and kept the 100L.

Look at the video example in this article.... 53 secs, told me everything I needed to know:-)


Lenses / Re: Why no lenses like 35-135mm anymore?
« on: June 18, 2013, 01:14:37 PM »
I would prefer a 20-120 f/4 IS. Makes the 17-40 less necessary to get those wider angles.

Or a 20-60mm f4  that is sharp in the corners & without distortion... I'd pay $1200- 1600 for one like this and up to 2000 for a F2.8 version.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: June 17, 2013, 08:29:08 PM »
Not best shot... but I like this. It was taken with a Powershot SX50 HS

@215mm that's a 35mm equivalent of 1200mm ! 


The lack of DR is evident... but I am not complaining for the price. again, great value, this much reach and IS, for less than $500.

Macro / Re: Canon 100mm IS USM L Macro Photos
« on: June 17, 2013, 04:43:15 PM »
Here is a shot I have been working on all day with the 100L

Para todos los Venezolanos 2 by CastilloPhotoDesign, on Flickr

Wonderful...  Always admire your work!

Custom built rig:

Win 7 64bit
i7-960 running at 4.16Ghz  x4/8HT
Samsung 830 256GB SSD
nVidia 460GTX

CS5 runs just fine no issues... LR4 run like a Dog...  I am out of ideas how to speed up LR4 apart from switching off the HT cores.

EOS Bodies / Re: New Sensor Tech
« on: June 12, 2013, 03:34:16 PM »
I can read, I'm sure that it takes photos larger than 200 pixels.

But then you'd be able to spot all the little gremlins at work fixing the shady parts....

EOS Bodies / Re: New Sensor Tech
« on: June 12, 2013, 03:01:36 PM »

compared to the latest sony sensors or a 4 year old CCD from fuji.

You missed out 5 year old CMOS tech from Canon...

I hope Canon can License this stuff from Panuji. 29 stops of DR? There goes the re-sale of the D800...

EOS Bodies / Re: IPad Wireless Tethering
« on: June 11, 2013, 05:05:25 PM »
Been waiting for this for quite some time. Would have preferred it at 50% of the MSRP.. but great to see they finally made something for the iPad.

Landscape / Re: How would you edit this?
« on: June 10, 2013, 12:16:21 AM »
I would do it like this.

Focus is not too bad, there is some motion blur and it is not razor sharp, but certainly usable.

Lenses / Re: Why Does the 100-400L Sell So Well Still ?
« on: June 07, 2013, 10:28:28 AM »
@clostridium - not to be difficile  ;) , but while the 100-400 is slightly better in terms of IQ than the 70-200/2.8L IS II + 2xIII, it's not better enough to be significant in real-world shooting.  (Note this applies to the MkII version of the 70-200 only.)  I have them both, and the difference isn't great enough to warrant taking both white zooms, IMO.

I second that.... having both and tested them. The difference is very minor. The 100-400 had more contrast, but the 70-200mk.ii has newer coatings allowing more shadow detail retrieval. After good PP'ing, it will be hard to choose one over the other.


There have been no upgrade rumors.  Its not a fast selling lens, and is not easy to resell, .

Speaking of which... what do you think is the resale for the similarly priced 300 F2.8 mkII

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 101