September 03, 2014, 03:24:38 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] 5 6 ... 31
46
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: March 14, 2014, 02:54:03 PM »
I think most of the images posted here was meant to show what the lens can deliver, not the skills (or lack of skills) of the photographer. At least that was my intention. So, from that perspective, the quote from distant.star is quite relevant.

Every time I get one of the images from this lens up in LR, I´m trying to figure out whether I could have the same IQ with one of the other (and much cheaper) lenses. And, after a fair number of shots, I am confident that this lens outperforms every other lens I have seen. The 4MB limitation for these posts reduce the IQ a bit, so for you who would like to see the full performance, it is well worth getting access to some images in full size raw format.

For the record, I am in the camp that believes you cannot substitute for great equipment.  Great equipment will not make a crappy photographer a good one, but it can certainly make a good one better and a great one truly remarkable.

But I'm still not buy this lens.   ;)

That being said, do you have any photos that you've taken the same shot with the Zeiss and with the next best option that you can share.  No doubt these images look good, but like you I'm curious if/what the lens delivers that can't be gotten elsewhere.

47
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: March 14, 2014, 11:54:51 AM »
.Wow!

Your lens takes really good pictures!
*He takes really good pictures!  :)

I suspect this is a tongue-in-cheek reference back to earlier threads talking about skill vs. equipment and photographic pet peeves.

It does beg the question though, for those who say it's not the equipment but the skill of the photographer ("I can take great pictures with my iPhone"), what is the point of a $4000 50mm manual focus lens?   ???

48
Business of Photography/Videography / Re: RIP Calumet Photo
« on: March 13, 2014, 04:39:43 PM »
So does one say "thanks!" to someone for sharing bad news?  Seems a bit strange, but none-the-less, thanks for sharing this.

49
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Replacement Mentioned Again [CR1]
« on: March 13, 2014, 04:18:53 PM »
Ok, like I said if it bothers you that's your thing but I still don't understand why it bothers you.  So what if you can see the pixels? It doesn't affect your ability to frame an image in any way.

If you are spending hours looking through the viewfinder, it's not just "the ability to frame an image".  I think you're asking for migraines and digital eyestrain and a whole bunch of other uncomfortableness looking at a pixelated image for that amount of time.

50
Lenses / Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« on: March 07, 2014, 01:34:23 PM »
You asked which I would prefer, and that's easy: the 200-400.  Why?  Because I'm technically incapable of using sneaker zoom (aka primes).

51
Site Information / Re: How often you visit Canon Rumors?
« on: March 05, 2014, 11:40:49 AM »
One definition of insanity is doing the same thing again and again and expecting a different outcome.  ;D

You mean like checking back for a CR2 or 3 on the 7DII?   :-[

52
Reviews / Re: Nikon D4s VS Canon 1Dx Comparison
« on: February 28, 2014, 04:44:24 PM »
this part's my favorite though:

Quote
the Canon 1Dx has a tendency to produce inaccurately focused images should the lock-on be wrongly positioned.

so what you're telling me is, if the operator focuses incorrectly, due to focussing on the wrong focus point, blame the camera for operator error??   ???

Welcome to the world of "it's not my fault" followed shortly by "who can I sue?"

53
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Announcement in Q2 of 2014 [CR1]
« on: February 27, 2014, 05:27:50 PM »
Here we go again

So you're saying this is the 7D Mark II rumor Mark II?   ;D

I'm cautiously optimistic--maybe they're targeting getting it out in time for the World Cup?

54
Canon General / Re: $4 Million Photograph
« on: February 27, 2014, 12:23:36 PM »
Please update this thread as NSFW or remove the wrecking ball photo.

55
Canon General / Re: Off Brand: Nikon Announces the D4S
« on: February 25, 2014, 12:01:14 PM »
All the talk about the Canon 1Dx vs the D4/s , and referring to one as "king" is just silly. These are cameras made for professionals that use their system of lenses. Talking about "Canon Camp" just sounds like geek fanboys with lots of disposable income that graduated from arguing over Marvel vs DC and Xbox vs Playstation.

You're right, it's silly to argue, because clearly Canon, Marvel and Playstation are the best.   ;D

56
Canon General / Re: $4 Million Photograph
« on: February 24, 2014, 05:37:36 PM »
I do think he's an unmistakable genius at what he does and that if you're not seeing it, the problem isn't with him.

So if some no name took this picture, you would recognize the "unmistakable genius" in it?  I don't believe that in the least.

Just recently there was some "famous" artist (sorry, don't remember the name) who's paintings sell for big bucks set up shop in central park and was selling his stuff for $50, and as I recall, only sold a single piece.  Without some art curator telling them it was so amazing and worth a fortune, no one cared.

57
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Coming in March? [CR1]
« on: February 21, 2014, 05:31:16 PM »
canon cannot afford a loser

Another loser like...?

58
Photography Technique / Re: Perspective Distortion and How to Use it
« on: February 21, 2014, 12:16:26 PM »
Thanks a ton--awesome to see this with real world examples.  I've done similar things to try and teach the concept, but mine was so much more clinical and boring. 

I'm going to bookmark this thread so I can refer people here instead of trying to explain it myself.   8)

59
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Coming in March? [CR1]
« on: February 21, 2014, 12:07:24 PM »
Just to double check, he only said March, right?  So is that 2015, or 2016?

60
Canon General / Re: Canon lack of innovation
« on: February 19, 2014, 11:15:47 AM »
The rationale is that the 400/5.6 is still "current" despite the age of its design, where is your aging 28-70/2.8 has been updated...not once, but twice.

As for your scenario, we've already established that Canon is a for-profit company, and their concern is making profit and returning value to shareholders, not treating customers with compassion, unless that is absolutely required for them to make a profit (hint: it's not).

Actually, many companies have found that good customer service is a great way to make a profit.  Is it "required"?  Nope, but if you have crappy customer service, you better have a product that no one else can touch or you'll lose your customers.

And I guess I tend to agree, that a professional lens should probably always be a professional lens, regardless of whether there is a newer betterer version.  Like Agent Coleson said in Agents of SHIELD, "Many people confuse new and improved."   ;)

Of course, I'm not sure how this relates to being innovative and filing patents.   ???

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 31