October 22, 2014, 06:37:02 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 - thepancakeman

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 31
16
Lenses / Re: Best short telephoto?
« on: July 04, 2014, 02:05:47 AM »
Yeah but concert hall have those rules for IP reasons mostly, this is a sport event...as long as he doesn't bring a broacasting unit he should be fine :D

Actually, I mis-spoke, it's not the venue itself but the people putting on the event, and they have a reputation for being quite strict on this and litigious about photographs.  I just want them for my own purposes, so I'm not worried about that but from what I hear it's unlikely that I'll get anything oversized in, and would actually be asked to leave if I snuck it in.

17
Lenses / Best short telephoto?
« on: July 03, 2014, 10:45:09 PM »
Here's a bit of a strange question:

I'm soon going to be attending a sporting event that the venue restrictions disallow "lenses longer than 5 inches".  So what are the best options for getting as much reach as possible, but staying under that threshold?  I'm open to lenses or superzooms or whatever is going to get me results.

Thanks!

18
Lenses / Re: The sharpness curse!
« on: June 22, 2014, 05:17:09 PM »
I can whole-heartedly agree.  In terms of vision, sharpness is generally targeted for 20/20.  After my lasics surgery, my vision was 15/20 (i.e. really sharp.) 

However, if I had to do it all over again, I'm not sure I would do it because the loss in contrast and dynamic range, the halo's on lights, etc. are a pretty big sacrifice just to get "sharpness".

19
Lenses / Re: New EF-S Ultrawide Coming? [CR1]
« on: May 05, 2014, 04:32:05 PM »
Stupid rumor. Sorry I cannot believe it.

C'mon man, it is the year of the lens; this might be THE lens!  :D

20
Thanks for the work you put in! 

However, I think a better use of these photos (or a new set!) would be a "pick which lens" in which we are not told which image was from which lens and see how consistent the "oversaturated" and "better bokeh" type comments are to each lens.   ???

EDIT:  Probably have to strip off the EXIF too to avoid cheaters.   ;)
That would just be cruel!  I think it would be tough to tell them apart with the exception of the LED shots.  Home Theater Magazine did this years ago (a double-blind test) comparing high end ($1,000) speaker cable vs. zip cord (cheap hardware store electrical wiring) and no one, audiophile or not, could tell the difference.  It was pretty funny.

I have done stuff like that with comparative lenses, and formats, people can never see what they believe they will be able to see. Even the most strident.

Yup, that was kind of my point--people will see what they want to see.


21
Thanks for the work you put in! 

However, I think a better use of these photos (or a new set!) would be a "pick which lens" in which we are not told which image was from which lens and see how consistent the "oversaturated" and "better bokeh" type comments are to each lens.   ???

EDIT:  Probably have to strip off the EXIF too to avoid cheaters.   ;)

22
Sports / Re: Cycling
« on: April 30, 2014, 11:34:19 PM »
Nice shots!  I can't wait until it warms up enough around here (Minnesota) to catch some races and see guys not looking like Michelin Man because they're wearing 13 layers!
Voila, some photos from Minnesota.  EOS-M, 22mm pancake, sports mode, selective desaturation with Photoshop.

Haha--I recognize several of those ladies.  Is that the State Fair grounds? 

My season (of cycling photography) officially starts next Tuesday at the Tuesday Night Time trials.  Sounds like it might actually be above 40 degrees, too.

23
Sports / Re: Cycling
« on: April 28, 2014, 08:25:30 PM »
Nice shots!  I can't wait until it warms up enough around here (Minnesota) to catch some races and see guys not looking like Michelin Man because they're wearing 13 layers!

24
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: April 24, 2014, 03:00:53 PM »
I got an answer back from Zeiss, which seems to be an honest one.

Apparently onion rings are normally indicators for aspherical elements, showing the structures of the manufacturing process. They also say that visibility and intensity of these structures depend on various factors in the scenery, such as the intensity of the light source compared to the surroundings, the exposure, the spectral built-up, the amount of "unsharpness" and many other factors. They also mention that some bright light sources in the out-of-focus areas may be clean, due to light intensity (saturating the sensor).

So, without starting a new series of unfocused shots of all the various light sources I have available at home  ::) I think it is fair to conclude that this has to do with the lens. But! I made lots of shots where I deliberately used very fast shutter speeds at low ISO, to make sure I didnĀ“t saturate the sensor. And in the cases where I had a clean light source, being a candle, a halogen point source or a gas filled bulb, I did NOT get onion rings.

So, I am still puzzled.  :-\

Yes, it's very strange.  To quote one of my favorite songs, "the problem with mysteries is they're so mysterious."

25
Canon General / Re: $10,000
« on: April 24, 2014, 11:40:10 AM »
This is funny. A lot of people would get a sh*t load of cr*p & only a few would rather focus on quality. Quality over quantity any day!

10k:

5D3 x2
35 mm prime
85 mm prime

That's about it and pretty much 10k spent and a perfect set acquired for general shooting.

As long as "general" excludes wildlife, sports, macro, or weddings, you may be right.   ::)

26
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens
« on: April 22, 2014, 03:48:13 PM »
Is there a lens out there that never has occasional AF inconsistency?

Does a 40% miss rate really constitute occasional inconsistency?  I think not...

Compare this to Zeiss missing 100% of AF shots  ;)

This comparison is as pointless as comparing a Audi with (automatic) transmission problems to a stick-shift Ferrari.

Only if the Audi has comparable performance to the Ferrari and works fine in manual mode.

27
Canon General / Re: $10,000
« on: April 22, 2014, 02:24:39 PM »
I have really...I mean....REALLY...expensive hobbies....  :o

Look at it this way, cheaper than collecting cars or yacht racing.   Or are those your other hobbies?   :o

Well, let me fill in a few holes. Here is my "other" hobby (still photography...just a much more complex form: astrophotography). My ideal rig would be:

10Micron GM2000HPS: $20,850
PlaneWave 20" CDK: $32,500
FLI Proline 16801 Mono CCD - 65mm, Grade 1: $27,000

Then you have all the various accessories....robotic filter wheels, robotic focusers, robotic field rotators, off-axis guiders, etc. To use all this equipment, you need to build an observatory for it (it is not portable.) That's anywhere from $30,000 to $50,000, and if you want it out under consistently dark, clear skies, you gotta buy the land for it, too! :P

Die-hard astrophotography is probably about as expensive as fixing up old muscle cars or yacht racing in the end.

Okay, you're right.  You're just nuts.   ;D

28
Canon General / Re: $10,000
« on: April 22, 2014, 01:46:34 PM »
Hmm, from scratch you say?

5D mk III - 3500
24-70 mk II - 2300
70-200 IS mk II - 2500

and maybeee Sony RX1 or some fast prime probably sigma 35mm or sigma 50mm

Yup, and if I can stretch the budget just a bit, I'd add the Tamron 150-600 and the new Sigma Art 50 1.4.

29
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens
« on: April 22, 2014, 01:38:13 PM »
Is there a lens out there that never has occasional AF inconsistency?

Does a 40% miss rate really constitute occasional inconsistency?  I think not...

Compare this to Zeiss missing 100% of AF shots  ;)

My thoughts exactly!  Hey, at under a grand, this lens offers most of the performance of the Zeiss, but it sucks because the AF is inconsistent while the Zeiss with no AF and 4x the cost is awesome?   :o

30
Canon General / Re: $10,000
« on: April 22, 2014, 01:21:42 PM »
I have really...I mean....REALLY...expensive hobbies....  :o

Look at it this way, cheaper than collecting cars or yacht racing.   Or are those your other hobbies?   :o

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 31