December 17, 2014, 08:07:06 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 - RAKAMRAK

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 21
136
I believe 50D is a great investment specially during our journey initial part of the learning curve. Just keep shooting.

Now I have created/assembled a macro rig for myself and am expecting to post some macro photos soon.

PS: never used the 17-85 lens, but read that it is slightly worse than the 15-85 that it was later modified into. But still a little post processing will probably take out those small shortcomings. For example some of these photos of mine were taken by a Tokina 12-24 f/4 DX which no one seems to talk/care about. :)

137
A Few more..

138
Some of my recent photos.... C&C welcome.

139
Software & Accessories / Re: What size RAW should I shoot at?
« on: August 03, 2013, 04:19:34 AM »
I thought the third commandment on CR is "Thou shalt only shoot fullframe"...

140
Lenses / Re: Should I replace my zooms with primes?
« on: August 03, 2013, 02:42:57 AM »
I believe you might benefit more from a full frame - 6D or 5D series.

Combine it with something like 24-70 or 24mm prime or 25mm prime or 24 mm TSE or 17mm TSE.

141
Software & Accessories / Re: What size RAW should I shoot at?
« on: August 03, 2013, 02:24:31 AM »
This might be a useful read -

http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2011/eos_qt_small_raw_images_article.shtml?categoryId=121

Interesting to read, but for all the uses that the author proposes shooting in mRAW or sRAW I thought JPG/JPEGs created from RAW could do as well. With the added advantage of the photographer being able to have full control over post processing.

142
Software & Accessories / Re: What size RAW should I shoot at?
« on: August 02, 2013, 08:11:02 PM »
Why invest in a full frame, 20 megapixel camera if you don't take advantage of it?

Exactly my principle (although I do not have those great cameras). Now a days memory cards are not that costly I think (at least when compared to the price of the camera into which it goes).

I try to get the best out of my equipment - so full RAW it is always. May be today I do not know that much processing but tomorrow I might learn better processing. Then if I do not have the full resolution file I shall not be able to do anything. I am not that good photographer so out of every 100 photos that I shoot I generally finally keep only 20 to 30 photos. So ultimately it is not that memory hogging exercise either. While deleting my principle is if at the computer screen the photo does not look sharp or does not please me compositionally at the first sight then it goes.

143
EOS-M / Re: EOS M or T3i which one?
« on: August 02, 2013, 01:19:33 AM »
I do not have either EOS M or T3i (I use 40D/50D). So cannot tell you anything about the image quality. But I have another point. I have been reading that Canon is not even introducing a particular lens suitable for the EOS M in the US market. So I wonder how much canonusa is behind this camera system (EOS M). In any case it is a new system, and so there may be first adopter's disadvantages associated with it for the next one or two years.

144
Thank for sharing your experiences.

@Mount Spokane..... Thank you very much for the warning/pointer. I will surely keep that in mind.

145
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma Announces Mount Conversion Service
« on: August 01, 2013, 12:32:36 PM »
My guess is Sigma is expecting to introduce some very good DSLR in next three year's time. But meanwhile they want their current wonderful line of lenses to proliferate (at least among the amateurs and cash strapped enthusiasts). So that when finally their great camera comes in some can be tempted to change over to Sigma. Sigma (my guess) does not even want people to change from Canon to Nikon or Nikon to Pentax. But rather they are wishing that people will changefrom Canon, Nikon, Pentax (users of those cameras who bought Sigma lenses, not those who all use only their own manufacturer's costly lenses) all to Sigma (when the expected future great Sigma camera comes into picture). Meanwhile is some Canon users with Sigma lenses change over to Niikon (or the other way round) that does not really matter to them.


146
I cannot say for sure but my guess is when the first lenses were being made in the 1800s for medium and large format cameras the photographer scientists manufactured lenses with whatever focal lengths their state of the art technology allowed them to be made. Then those focal lengths became standardized because others also made similar lenses. Each of these focal lengths gave rise to a particular angle of view. Then probably when the 35 mm camera came the lens makers tried to emulate those angle of views and some particular focal lengths became manufactured repeatedly and became popular and then standardized. But all these are my guesses.

147
Canon General / Re: People that don't shoot in manual...
« on: July 30, 2013, 04:13:51 PM »
It annoys me immensely when people keep on wasting time on useless forum posts instead of actually taking photographs.... Now I am annoying myself.....

148
Just wondering if any of you have used either of these older lenses from Sigma .... internet reviews say they were good, but just wondering if any of my CRian friends have firsthand experience with either of these two (by off chance)....


149
One reason may be that it is for a lens which is now outdated (400 2.8 mark I). The newer lens (mark II) seems to use the ET 155 WII hood which is worth 700$ in US. And the second reason is that the lens which takes this hood is 11000$ worth.

And to put it into perspective (may be I am stretching it too much). The hood for Canon EF 85mm 1.8 costs $26 while the lens costs $419 (right now) which is around  6% of the lens price.

The $700 hood for a $11000 lens is also approximately 6% of the lens price.

150
Software & Accessories / Re: Macro gear suggestions for 5DIII?
« on: July 25, 2013, 12:18:28 PM »


If Roger/Lensrentals says it, you can believe it.

Right, actually I saw later that it was blogged by Mr. Cicala originally. I added the last two line (lensreantals reference) later as a modification to my post. That is why I was not sure about its correctness when I first wrote it.

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 21