August 01, 2014, 06:59:14 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 - thepancakeman

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 30
EOS Bodies / Re: Latest Canon disappoints wants me to switch over to Nikon.
« on: February 09, 2012, 05:59:58 PM »
No, you make a fantastic point.  Canon should invest millions of dollars into engineering a lens for the 15 people that shoot under those conditions. 

I will say this though, that post was more about frustration than arrogance.  The whole backlash against Canon over this lens and no 5D3 (currently) is quite widespread, and based completely in ignorance.  Seeing
it over and over again everywhere... and now an entire thread devoted to this stupidity, it's like road rage.
So, if it came off as arrogance, I apologize, only for that.  The tone was of frustration, but it does not change
the content of my posting, which is based completely in logic. 

And being "based completely in logic" isn't arrogant?  Your logic is complete and infallible?  I want to be just like you when I get to be 15 too!   :-X

Sorry to the rest of you--I seem to have a small/non-existant tolerance today for people who know everything (except of course for Neuro, who actually DOES know everything!   ;D )

PowerShot / Can't wait for D20
« on: February 09, 2012, 05:17:09 PM »
Our cycling team's spring training trip is at the end of March, which means it precedes the D20 release.

I need (aka want) something that I can just throw in my jersey pocket to have along for the ride.  Although I think it would be good to have waterproof/dropproof, is it really necessary?  How durable is the S100--would it be at risk in a cycling jersey pocket?  What about the D10--is it any good or would it feel pretty outdated?  Any other thoughts suggestions?

EOS Bodies / Re: How does Canon respond to the D800?
« on: February 09, 2012, 04:36:02 PM »
My role (unpaid as I am now an amateur) is just to deliver the processed images.

Well charge them, and then you're a pro!   ;D

EOS Bodies / Re: How does Canon respond to the D800?
« on: February 09, 2012, 02:34:47 PM »
I'd have thought that the biggest issue in that situation is the initial sorting/culling of the files - you're not going to need, use (sell?) all 3,000.

How many images in that scenario will you eventually end up using? Less than 100? Less than 50?

"Using"= making available to the athletes for personal purchase, so all 3000--which is the culled list out of likely 5000+ shots.

Brain, yup, single sport event with a couple hundred athletes have a whole lot more "breathing" time, but 2 hours to get CD to organize--YIKES!?  I try to get a top hundred shots posted by end of the day, but takes the rest of the week to get thru them all.  What race are you shooting?

EOS Bodies / Re: How does Canon respond to the D800?
« on: February 09, 2012, 01:44:08 PM »
If it's 3000 images, a "little bit of extra time" adds up pretty quickly.   ;)

Can you really name me a circumstance where the need for great IQ (specifically, high levels of detail and low noise), a tight timescale and 3000 images all collide?

It isn't in wedding photography - stellar IQ really isn't a deal-breaker there (I suppose it might be if two photographers were getting married!) and it isn't photojournalism, so what Real World situations exist where my kind of workflow isn't an option?

Bear in mind that at low ISOs, and depending on the intended use of the files, none of that "extra" work might actually be necessary.

750 triathletes each swimming, biking, running, and crossing the finish line.   :D

You could argue the need/definition for great IQ, but as you yourself said, if it's worth doing, do it right.  So if there are options that are comparable without PP, that's a big time saver for a better result.   ;)

1Dx MkII doesnt follow the new scheme.

Its got to be the 1DxX!

(beaten enough?)

I hate the specs on the 1DXX, I'm switching to the Nikon D5!

EOS Bodies / Re: How does Canon respond to the D800?
« on: February 09, 2012, 01:30:16 PM »

But perhaps I'm missing part of what you mean?

I'm saying that - with just a little bit of care and effort on a user's part - it's possible to make images that match the D700 in terms of IQ: perhaps with a D700 it might be easier (although as I suggest, that depends on things like what you're shooting and whether you're focal-length limited), but it's still easy with the 7D.

If the little bit of extra time my PP involves is too much trouble for some people, that's their problem. I take the view that if it's worth doing, it's worth doing properly - I realise that I may be a minority voice there...

If it's 3000 images, a "little bit of extra time" adds up pretty quickly.   ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: Latest Canon disappoints wants me to switch over to Nikon.
« on: February 09, 2012, 01:25:21 PM »
My first post in these forums will be in the form of a rant. Apologies ahead of time :)

This "I'm going to switch because so and so created a better camera..." line frustrates me every time I read it. Do you really have a need for a 36 megapixel camera, or is that just for bragging rights? I think the majority of people who say things like this have invested very little into photography, lenses and learning their current system. My 5DII & 7D have more than enough megapixels, excellent low light capabilities,are easy to use cameras that help me get the photos I want. Hell, I still use a 6 megapixel Pentax K110D which produces great results. And get this, I often shoot with a 50 year old Voigtlander which also does a great job. And complaining that there is no IS on the 24-70 is ridiculous. Why do you need it at a relatively short zoom range? It is not needed in my opinion. I've also read from so many that Canon should put IS on all primes! That is laughable.

Granted, there are plenty of people with knee jerk reactions and too much $ to spend.  However, I get really frustrated by people who use the logic of "my camera works great for me, so why should you need anything different?"

I was reading up on the D800 this morning and have to admit I'm tempted.  I think it would show a concrete improvement to my (albiet limited) photography income.  But this is due to my style, my subjects, and my clients.  I don't expect everyone (or anyone, for that matter) to have the same needs as me, so if other bodies or lenses are what they need, great, I'm not going to put them down or question their intellect.

Of course switching to "the dark side" would mean I no longer have use of my wife's $10k lens collection, so I'm going to have to consider pretty carefully!   >:(

EOS Bodies / Re: How does Canon respond to the D800?
« on: February 09, 2012, 01:08:20 PM »
it would seem to favor the D700: press button="good picture", vs. press button, download to <software>, make x+y+z manipulations="good picture". 

Unbelievable this kind of comments.
And this is a photography forum....sure...

Not quite sure what you're saying.  I'm talking about comparing outputs, not "set up lighting, adjust exposure compensation, set focus, set aperature, set WB, get subjects to smile...etc, etc."  Yes there is a lot that goes into taking a decent picture, but it didn't seem too much of a stretch that if you're comparing 2 bodies that the same effort in setting up and actually taking the photo would be applied to both.

Maybe you would prefer that I name specific software packages and highlight all of the thousands of PP tweaks that can be made?  And how exactly is your comment contributing to the conversation??

EOS Bodies / Re: How does Canon respond to the D800?
« on: February 09, 2012, 12:57:43 PM »
My friend has 2 D700's and I can tell you that they knock the socks of the 7D
That's not remotely true if you're cropping, if you have a well-sorted 7D conversion/pp workflow sorted out (I have) and if you appreciate/want/need lots of detail.

I've done umpteen IQ comparisons between my 7D and D700 files, and - at the image level - the 7D lacks for very little, if anything, assuming an effective workflow.

I'm afraid that I have little time in any walk of life for people who assume that because they can't do something, it can't be done - the 7D seems to attract a lot of folk like that.

Trying to understand exactly what you're saying.  Does "effective workflow" mean that there are certain "pre-set" post-processing things that need to be done to illicit this result?  If indeed that's what you're saying, it would seem to favor the D700: press button="good picture", vs. press button, download to <software>, make x+y+z manipulations="good picture".  But perhaps I'm missing part of what you mean?   ???

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II
« on: February 08, 2012, 03:39:53 PM »
I know many folks are disappointed at the 24-70 II which does not have IS... but got me thinking.

This is a beast of a lens... and looking at the MTF graphs... looks to be a huge performer.

Does the lens come before the cart so to speak...

Would make sense to me, especially if Canon has a beast of a MP body on the forefront that there will need to be better glass to really take advantage of a more dense sensor.
Something tells me Canon is fine with what is going on and a flanking maneuver may be under foot

When you consider the 24 and 28 that just came out, I think this is sound logic. 

Let's think of it a different way--how many of you pros out there are going to make MORE money because you have the mk II of this lens?  (This is an honest question, not rhetorical.)  I think iff the answer is "not very many" that leads credence to the argument that there is a body coming that can better use the capabilities of the new lens(es).

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D800 - Sample Photos
« on: February 07, 2012, 12:10:08 PM »
I think there is a lot of lighting help in making those photos look good.  Great lighting can make even poor photographers look skilled. 

lol given that photography is all about lighting your comment makes no sense.

what makes a photographer really good if not his lighting skills?
choosing the right iso, gently pressing the button?

Yeah, sure.  Go shoot some sports and let me know how much time you spend working on the lighting.   ???

Canon General / Re: Truth in photography
« on: February 02, 2012, 03:35:54 PM »
I have no problem with someone who drives a Ferrari body on a Fiero chasis and engine.  Many people will ooh and aah and let it go--that's fine.  However, if the driver in question tells people it is an actual Ferrari or worse yet tries to sell it as such it's called fraud.  And there's a reason we have laws against that.

EOS Bodies / Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« on: February 02, 2012, 03:21:21 PM »
If this is what one goes through to get an exceptional photo, I can only guess how Moses' post-climb writeup would have read, after he had seen the burning bush and heard the voice of God.

Yeah, but can you imagine if he'd gotten a picture??   ;D

Macro / Re: Water macro
« on: February 02, 2012, 10:58:33 AM »
Is this image inverted?  It looks to my highly untrained eye like the pencil is actually underwater and the surface is at the bottom of the image.

No. The image is not inverted. Below is just the reflection.

Here are two more I took recently.

BTW, I love your work!  I guess the reason that my eye seems to think the one with the pencil is inverted is that coloring and lighting on the pencil has an underwater look to it.  Do you add the color in post, or is your lighting set up that way?

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 30