October 22, 2014, 11:12:54 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 6 ... 20
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....

Photography Technique / Re: Photography fail moments !!!
« on: February 06, 2014, 02:46:35 PM »
I'm sure everyone has left the self timer on there camera and forgot about it until they next used the camera. Generally resulting in a frustrating few moments of waiting for it to fire while you scream in your head that the must capture moment is about to disappear.  :-[

Haha I've definitely done this one... multiple times. Starting to get better about putting it back on burst before putting it back in my bag.

Sports / Re: track and field photography
« on: February 04, 2014, 01:33:17 PM »
Aperture really was my first thought too. At an indoor venue, I'd never want anything narrower than 2.8. Granted, I read this thread on my phone while walking, so may have missed previous discussion of this, but I usually prefer my 85 1.8 @f/2 to my 70-200 @2.8 if I'm indoors. Opening up more will give you better background blur and a faster, action-stopping shutter speed. I know everyone always says "a stop isn't that much", but in terms of stopping action, 1/1000 is much better than 1/500. So I'd go as wide as reasonably possible, and definitely recommend at least 2.8 if not faster.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5d mk III, the honeymoon is over
« on: December 23, 2013, 06:05:59 PM »
I agree with everyone.  I would add that upS right now is not up to snuff unless they straightend thing out over the weekend.

No kidding- send it Fedex.

Lenses / Re: More Mentions of 2014 Being the Year of the Lens [CR1]
« on: November 19, 2013, 08:49:42 AM »
What, no rumours about a 1500mm f5.6 with built in 1.4x converter?  :(
Probably a global market of less than 10, but I can day dream can't I?  ;D

Funny you should say that, but I heard a mention of a 1400mm f5.6 IS floating around last year.  No built in 1.4x or 2x though. Of course if you can afford it, you can afford the staff to carry it for you and to bring the things closer to you ;)
I can see it now... "Smithers, fetch me that grizzly bear. Oh, he cannot be too far from the river. Bring the river closer as well."

Lenses / Re: Big whites
« on: November 16, 2013, 07:59:36 AM »
Over the past couple months, the Canon Direct US store has had the 300 2.8II iS and the 400 4.0DO in its refurbished store at some great prices.  They come with a 1 year warranty so that is at least an option on the shorter focal lengths.  But I agree with others that the market for these lenses isn't swayed by $500 discounts.

I just hope those are there for the Black Friday 20% off or whatever they do this year....

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Spec List Surfaces [CR1]
« on: October 29, 2013, 08:43:43 AM »
I remember someone saying change the card slot to SD....the worse idea I've head this thread, cf all the way I want my buffer clear asap....

also usb3 or better yet gig Ethernet jack to get my files off.

I can't see GigE connectivity on a camera.... consumers like wireless... the throughput of wireless is laughable compared to GigE, but wireless is more convenient... so the poorer solution wins... USB3 has to come soon, at some point people will stop making chipsets that only go up to USB2... USB will win out over Ethernet because all you have to do is plug it in.... no configuration required, and a lot of people use laptops and tablets with no wired Ethernet connection... USB is a more universal solution than wired Ethernet.

I can't speak from experience, as I haven't made the leap yet, but I understand 802.11ac is actually starting to approach the real-world throughput of gigE. While I doubt they'd put an ac antenna array in the 7d2 for space and power reasons, they COULD get the throughput if they wanted.

Also, given that Apple's target market for laptops correlates pretty strongly with pro and prosumer camera buyers, I think a thunderbolt / USB3 combo would be awesome- USB3 for PC users, TB for mac...

Portrait / Re: 'Straight' Portrait of a Young Woman
« on: October 22, 2013, 08:45:04 AM »
I'm always curious about people's monitors- to me, it looks very dramatic and contrasty, but with just enough skin texture remaining that I wouldn't call it 'blown'. I could see how a slightly differently calibrated monitor in this situation would make it look blown or texture-less, but it looks great to me!

Canon General / Re: I hate photographing my family for posed photos...
« on: September 13, 2013, 01:09:44 PM »
I've decided...  I'm going to set them all together....  take a photo and then use a zombie app.   I'll print the photos and when they ask whytheyare all zombies,  I'll say that is how they look and i don't see what they are talking about.

I see no possible repercussions of doing this. ;-) Sounds like a good plan to me!

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 20