September 17, 2014, 05:58:07 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 [2] 3 4 ... 20
Let me explain my question a bit further. I have seen/used only two macro lenses till date Canon 100mm L and sigma 150mm OS. That also at a distance of more than 1 year. So I had no opportunity to test this question of mine.

What I am asking is, let's say I am photographing a small flower (pretty small) which is not going to occupy the entire image at 1:1 (let's say on a full frame camera). Now if I use different macro lenses - 50mm (Canon), [60mm (Tamron or Canon)-APS-C only], 70mm (Sigma), 90mm (Tamron), 100mm (Canon), 105mm (Sigma), 150mm (Sigma) or 180mm (Canon/Sigma/Tamron) -  at 1:1 magnification focusing distance (varying the distance between the flower and my camera, of course) would I get the same image (not talking about sharpness here)? Probably this may be framed slightly differently, what is the importance and significance of the angle of view of different macro lenses at their minimum (or comparable magnification) focusing distances?

In case any of you have used more than one lenses at the same time you may have some idea about this. Any comment will be highly appreciated. Even better is if any of you have images like this to demonstrate the difference/similarities.

Thank you guys. So at least some people here on Canon rumors also faced the same problem. That is comforting.

Thank you for taking time to reply. :)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Canon 40D Main Dial (Front Dial) slipping
« on: April 21, 2014, 10:11:21 PM »
Have any of you faced this issue? My 40D's front/main dial started slipping a little. This is happening when I am trying to turn the dial anticlockwise, and not clockwise.

Searched google and found out some DIY cures for this. But just wondering if any of you have faced a similar problem ever or not.

Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro
« on: April 15, 2014, 07:43:13 PM »
Just bit the bullet after resisting myself for loooong. My Sigma 150 is coming soon.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Available for Preorder
« on: April 11, 2014, 07:51:48 AM »
I cannot buy it right now, but it gives me immense pleasure that I correctly predicted the price at least .... yayyayayyyaa :)

(Just because I have not written on CR for many days so I felt I should write something)

The sigma lens will be priced at $999 (±$50) in USA.

I don't think you're too far off. I do expect the price to be 999 USD / 899 EUR.

How did I hit the bullseye?

(Just because I have not written on CR for many days so I felt I should write something)

The sigma lens will be priced at $999 (±$50) in USA.

Regional Boards / Re: Anyone from India?
« on: February 01, 2014, 06:21:51 PM »
I am from India, now temporarily in Atlanta, GA.

Lenses / Re: Short tele for street portraits in Southeast Asia
« on: January 23, 2014, 10:19:38 PM »
take/get EF 24-105. (or just 135mm ) Do you really think it will be a good idea to change lens on the street? And if not why carry two lenses on the street?

Portrait / Re: Bikini on the beach
« on: December 22, 2013, 05:00:16 AM »
Interesting opinion. I'm sure you know that if I didn't light her with anything and metered on her, then everything else would be completely blown.

Of course.  I'd just wait for better light.  Perhaps a less strong lighting would have been less obvious.

This isn't a knock against you but, I've been told repeatedly that when someone KNOWS what they're doing with flash, you can't really tell they used it.  I've yet to see an example of that myself, but I've had my eyes open for it.  Until then, I prefer natural lighting.

Yep, true. This shot was certain time of day, so either couldn't shoot down towards the water or use flash.

As you have said the time of the day and the angle of the sun you had to make the choice of taking the shot and use flash or do not get the shot at all. I shall always go for getting the shot.

Just one thing, the "obviousness" of the flash is basicaly due to couple of areas on the skin (and the rim of the glasses) with localized highlights/reflections which would not be there if flash is not used, and a bit of extra (cannot say overexposure) exposure on the entire body. It is upto your taste and liking - but you may want to thing about reducing that over exposure slightly and eliminating those highlights. My guess is that will give a more "natural look". Of course depending on your liking you may disagree.


So, lets say you're a heterosexual male, the only way to keep your 100,000 dollar a year occupation is to sleep with your homosexual male boss. What takes precedence?
Like I said, you don't want to, you dont have to PERIOD!
Me being a straight male will tell you, that I won't have sex with another man, EVEN IF MY JOB WAS ON THE LINE. I stand by my principles. If you would be gay simply for that occupation, then don't go and cry about it later. Yes, he was in position of power. NO, he did NOT force you to make the decision you made though. It's that simple, no matter which way you TRY and spin it. These are all adults we're talking about here.

Ok, so tell me this AAPhotog, if this is the same 100,000 dollar a year occupation on line, and you do not need to sleep with your male homosexual boss, rather you have to sleep with your heterosexual female boss who is just a bit older than you. What would you do? Would your "principles" remain the same, if not then the example that you game is misleading and not appropriate in the present case.

Everyone is chiming no, so why not me.

My take. What are the given here?

1. Some of you are claiming that he is an well known sleaze.
2. Apparently he "can make" careers, at least there is this perception among aspiring models and that is why they go to him, that is why he get the power to coerce.

I am not going to argue whether it is immoral/unethical/illegal to do what he is doing. Those are rather philosophical and legal questions. I would also not argue whether girls wanted/deserved/craved for what they got. and whether they could decide not to go to him or not.

But my point derived from the above two givens is

"Why does the modelling industry support him (or him like other sleaze bags?)"

He derives the power to exploit because of the modelling industry. Clearly the modelling "industry" as a collective does not "disapprove" his behavior - the larger "society" may. That is why there are laws (which are creations of the society at large) against blackmailing like this, but there is no such disciplining mechanism created by the modelling "industry" (or film industry against casting couch) against such behavior. Clearly the evidence says that the modelling "industry" does not consider this behavior as troublesome or wrong by the codes of that industry - that is why he can flourish and stay in business. Individual acting independently inside the modelling industry can surely dislike or disapprove him, but as a collective the "industry" does not do so.

By my moral standards he is "bad", but that is my personal opinion. As long as the industry he is in supports his behavior and does not explicitly take steps to correct it, he is just an opportunist from the perspective of that industry. The industry is equally to blame, not only Terry Richardson.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: zeiss filters
« on: November 20, 2013, 12:34:47 PM »
That is good to know. As always Mr. Neuro thanks for the help.

Third Party Manufacturers / zeiss filters
« on: November 20, 2013, 02:42:03 AM »
I was reading about the new zeiss lens and this question came to my mind - what about zeiss filters? Do they make filters? So I searched their website and yes they do. So I have a questions for you guys have any of you used zeiss filters ever - specially the CPL? I always read good things about B+W filters from all of you, what about zeiss filters? anyone?

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