August 29, 2014, 06:27:41 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 - bseitz234

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 19
Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: April 28, 2014, 05:32:43 PM »
Not my best friend... I was puppy sitting for the weekend. Naturally took lots of pictures... :-)

Dixie by bseitz234, on Flickr

EOS-M / Re: Canon EOS M3 in Q3 of 2014?
« on: April 14, 2014, 10:24:33 AM »
Canon seems to have made a limited investment in mirrorless, to date.  Still, in Japan – one of the largest mirrorless markets – the EOS M outsold every MILC model from Fuji, Olympus, and Panasonic for 2013.

So what's your point? Have you ever thought that Europeans/USA/Canadians might prefer the "SLR"-style of camera (with integrated OVF/EVF) over the GF, E-P and EOS-M type of cameras, which explains why these [latter] cameras have not sold well in Europe, the USA and Canada? That it might be cultural thing, huh?

This is a serious question, I know it sounds snarky, but I can't figure out how to rephrase it, so here goes....

what is your point? Where's Canon's incentive to do better in the MILC markets in Europe/North America, if consumers are going to go to DSLRs for form factor anyway? If it's a tiny market, of course they're not going to spend a lot of money on it- there's not much to be gained. And where there is money to be made (Japan), apparently they're doing well already, so again, they have no incentive to release a better camera...

(I say apparently because my only source is what Neuro says, I haven't actually looked for sales figures, and Neuro could be making up numbers and I'd have no idea.  ::) ) Not saying he is, just that I'd be none the wiser if he did.

Lenses / Re: New 50mm Sigma ? There are other options !
« on: April 11, 2014, 11:58:27 AM »
For info for those interested DXO mark one of the most trusted resources online

Come on guys, give the guy a break. He obviously just misspelled "least".

Sports / Re: Kayaking
« on: April 08, 2014, 11:03:46 AM »
A bit overcooked,  but here's what I mean about the perspective. This drop may be a little taller than the one in your 3rd image (This one is about 10 feet, I'm guessing that one is 8), but there's something about shooting from below that just emphasizes the height...

Sports / Re: Kayaking
« on: April 08, 2014, 08:54:52 AM »
I think the biggest drop my DSLR has been off of was a 35 foot waterfall in chile... Granted, it was safely in a pelican case in the back of my boat at the time. ;-)

In general, I like these shots. Timing is good, and they're loosely cropped enough that you get a sense of the overall scene, which I like. My only advice would be on Airborne, to see if you can't get a lower vantage point (so you're shooting up at the paddler), I think that would emphasize the height of the drop and add more drama. I'll see if I can find any examples to show what I'm talking about in my library.

EOS Bodies / Re: New DSLR and PowerShots in May [CR2]
« on: April 02, 2014, 06:47:29 AM »
Who wants to bet that come may 1st, we'll get a CR2 about new cameras in June?

I'm off to shoot the sunrise with my 5 year old camera body, then blow my canon budget on a road bike. Have fun!

PowerShot / Re: Compact cameras - do everything but good fotos
« on: March 25, 2014, 11:41:53 AM »
two words: sensor size.

Compacts have tiny little sensors, I think usually 1/2.3", which gather much less light than even APS-C, let alone your 6d. If ISO is an issue, go for the biggest sensor you can... I've contemplated an M to fill the small-pocket camera niche, but I'm afraid that with a lens, I'd just as soon bring a 7d and have the AF and controls I'm used to. I'm not familiar enough with the true compact offerings to know any models to recommend, but if you can find a compact with an APS-C sensor, or at least MFT, then I think you'd be much happier...

Great explanation from Chuck, thanks for sharing! Since I switched to BBF I usually end up using servo even for stationary objects, so I'm glad to have this explanation of the limitations of each to know when to switch back to one shot. Specifically, I knew about locking focus vs. tracking, and shutter priority vs. focus priority, but did not know about the light sensitivity due to sampling time, which is very interesting.

Again, thanks for sharing!

EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 27, 2014, 02:04:09 PM »

Depth of field is affected by two things: aperture and subject distance.

No, dof is affected by two things, aperture size (not number) and subject magnification.

A 17mm and 200mm shot from the same place with the same aperture value have different dof, your statement says they would be the same.

Ok good point. I was taking FL as static, basically trying to distinguish lens from sensor. But that is more accurate, I will edit.

EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 27, 2014, 01:28:56 PM »
I'm stool a little confused... but I'm glad the topic of conversation has gone back to full v crop and how we measure the difference... having said that... I'm still just as confused as when I first posed the question...

If I understand the question, see if this helps make sense of it:

Depth of field is affected by two things: absolute aperture and subject magnification. In terms of exposure, sensor size doesn't change anything, the whole "2.8 on crop is like 4.5 on FF" only refers to DoF.

If you took a picture, with a given aperture and subject distance, on FF and crop, you would get the same depth of field on both, just framed differently. (The FF image would have a wider angle of view.) if you framed them identically, your subject distance would have to change, therefore changing depth of field as well.

I just don't worry about it, as I'm quite happy with my 7d and the depth of field it gives me. :-)

Edited to steal PBD's words, since I had ignored focal length.

Canon General / Re: Off Brand: Nikon Announces the D4S
« on: February 25, 2014, 10:38:57 AM »
I thought you were doing A Bat's Eye View series
That's what caught my eye, too, and as someone who uses ISO 102400 on my 5DIII all the time, I might have to sell all of my Canon gear to get the D4S.  I think it will really help with my upcoming series - Coal Mines by Matchlight.  If I accidentally run into some methane, this might be my last post ;)

Both of these posts made my day, and it's not even noon yet. going to be a good day...

you can put a 100mp sensor in a phone and a 10,000x zoom but you're still going to get shitty images with a shitty lens with shitty auto focus with shitty 1 second delay with shitty shitty shitty S___

Yeah, but who cares…it's a smartphone.  Instant Facebook uploads anytime, anywhere.  Post your dinner plate, post your cat, capture and post your S___ right NOW.


Yepp, you can take a 16mp image of your dinner so Facebook can down-res and compress it to look exactly the same as a 4mp image taken with an old nokia.  ;)

On a more serious note, I'm curious why this can do 4k/30p and 1080/60p and most (all?) DSLRs cannot. Is it just that the smaller sensor has less overheating issues? Canon marketing not wanting to cannibalize cinema EOS? Some combination of the two?

Lenses / Re: 70-200 2.8 advice
« on: February 16, 2014, 03:41:17 PM »
I have the canon 70-200 2.8 non-is, which I have been very happy with. It's sharp, it's 2.8, it's built like a tank, AF is awesome... and it's a lot cheaper than the canon IS mk2 version.

That said, for your uses IS sounds like it would be useful... I use it mostly for sports, so I try to keep my shutter speed above 1/500 anyway to stop action. But maybe worth considering?

Also...he notes that his 200-400 is his favorite lens for shooting sports.  I've been tempted by the new canon 200-400, but can't justify the cost.

But....(I'm primarily a sport shooter)

I had an idea, what if I could pick up a second pro body and a 200-400 for about the same price as the canon 200-400 alone. ( my 5d3 is my current second body, but it's not nearly as good for sports as my 1dx)

Enter....a Nikon D4s(coming to market any day now) and a Nikon 200-400vrii. (I would get a used 200-400vii for about $5500)

So this would give me two "fast" pro bodies with a 70-200 on one and the 200-400 on the other.

I also like this idea because I could also add a Nikon prime like the 50 or 85 for indoor low light sport shooting to compliment a 1dx attached to a 70-200 or 24-70.

Thoughts anyone?

A friend of mine shoots both canon and Nikon simultaneously, and has been quite happy doing so. He will often shoot a 1dx +70-200, and have that remote trigger a d4 + wide angle prime placed on the ground right by the finish line for indoor track. He says each camera (and system, really) has its strengths, and that's why he uses both. Makes sense to me, I just never had the money to invest in both. But you make a valid economic argument- I'd say go for it!

... a state-of-the-art fibre optic network ... the 100Mbps network ...


Surely they mean mbit? 100mb/s would be 800mbit/s, which is pretty damn fast......  My own connection is only 60mbit/12mbit hehe.

You're confusing bits and bytes. Lower case b (as in Mbps) is bits- so this is 100mbit. If it was 100MBps, that would be 100 megabytes, which is 800Mbps. Regardless, I'd expect them to have more speed within a lot of their network, but to maintain that 100Mbps all over the venues is pretty good. Especially because I bet the photogs get pretty far from wireless access points at times....

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 19