March 04, 2015, 03:35:59 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 - keithfullermusic

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 27
Lenses / Re: Grand Canyon Lens suggestions
« on: February 17, 2012, 03:32:04 PM »
You might want an ND if you have a river in the pic, or if you want the sky to look smooth around sunset.  I always bring one just in case.

You definitely want a grad ND.  Get a square one, and you can just hold it until you get a filter holder.

Lenses / Re: IS substitute for faster glass in low light? Not convinced.
« on: February 17, 2012, 11:34:55 AM »
IS allows me to use my 100-400mm at 400mm with no shake blur - and thats the old IS.  Clearly it won't help if my subject is moving, but it is still incredibly useful at times.

Landscape / Re: Snowy pictures
« on: February 16, 2012, 03:18:12 AM »
My very first photo using a tripod. ;D It's hdr.

Nice shot - welcome to the wonderful world of tripods!

Now you're going to want a couple nice flashes, some L lens, filters, gels, wireless remotes, super telephoto lenses, a new bag to carry all your new stuff, a battery grip, soft boxes....

It never ends!!!

Lenses / Re: What lens for 7D EF-S or L
« on: February 15, 2012, 11:28:15 AM »
I have an EF 20mm 2.8 from Canon (It has to be Canon's most underrated lens) - It is suuuuper shard compared to the 10-22 Canon and 11-16 Tokina - I know this because my good friends have them, and I borrow them on occasion.  The only problem with the 20 is that it is not really wide enough for many applications.

I find that when I use the 10-22 I stay right around 10-12mm for most shots because thats the point of those wide lens.  So, if wide is what you want, you will have to go with a non-L lens on any of those crop bodies.  While the Tokina 11-16 has a higher aperture, the Canon 10-22 is the one I prefer because the images seem slightly sharper and just look a little better in general.

If you want, I can post samples from all of them so you can see for yourself.

Landscape / Re: Snowy pictures
« on: February 13, 2012, 01:26:37 AM »
i have been to the site on numerous occasions  times but have never posted.  i saw this forum post tonight, lucky me winter finally showed up last night and we got a little bit of snow!  Nothing spectacular, but i woke up for sunrise and got a few decent shots!  just finished one, and i do have to say i am impressed with this one.  What do you guys think?

Is that VA Beach?

I have never understood people who willingly chose to use mobile devices as their primary editing stations. If your going to be editing photos or anything else get a real computer. For doing any real work a 30" 10bit display is pretty much a necessity.

I dont know of any laptop that comes with a 10bit display and its nearly pointless to edit your photos when your only seeing a small spectrum of the color in the image. Keep in mind that even an 8bit panel wont be able to show all the colors in the 8bit color depth. That means even if you are using an 8bit display your not seeing all of the colors even at JPEG level. The same goes for resolution, what exactly do you plan to do with all those 18-20+megapixles in your images with a 17inch display? I would sure hate to have to expand my image 1:1 or better on a display that small to edit my files  :( It seems like it would be a complete and needless waste of time.

Now of course I do have to use a laptop when im on the road for live updates. I work for a local website so i dont have choice. It sucks using one but when i can publish my photos within minutes its great! Two days ago i was at an event and i saw some guy editing his photos right there on the spot and i asked him if he was local. He told me he worked for the New York Times. Thats a great example of where a portable is perfect. But i sure wouldnt want to use it for more than a few quick updates to the web or of course for tethered shooting.
Im going to get a new one soon but im waiting for Ivy Bridge before i buy one. When i do it will be something with one of those Ivy Bridge quad core procs and other high end stats.

I sure as hell wont get a Mac, thats nothing but a waste of money. I build my own computers and i actually understand basic computer science. When ever i hear people talking about macs they always seem to use  ambiguous generic terms that dont actually mean anything to explain why their some how better. Well i live in the real world and i need real reasons to buy my hardware lol. And no, OSX is not any better than Windows. Even if it was those computers would STILL be a rip off. They use regular grade parts in their machines designed to keep you from upgrading outside of what they sell you for the most part. You cant over clock with them even tho you should be able to, you cant get one with a an AMD proc, you cant get one with a 6 core SB-E proc from intel if you want, your just stuck with the S___ they offer and then you pay to much for it. They usually get hardware updates months after parts are already available for Windows and major software vendors usually release updates for their products on Windows before Mac. I could go but i wont. Apple is a rip off, wake the h3\\ up  ;) And no, I dont give a crap about your "Well I had a bad experiences on a 500$ used Dell but ive had nothing but bliss on my 2500$ Mac" story so dont bother!

So if i was you, i would wait for Ivy Bridge seeing as how its mostly an optimization for mobile computers in the first place, i wouldnt get a Mac at all and i would get a real computer to go with it or at least a good 30 inch panel to plug it in to. Ive Bridge is supposed to start appearing in a few months, it should save you some  battery life and has decent integrated graphics so it could save you some money on that to.

I think you find Windows easy because you understand computer science.

For people who do not give a crap about how computers work and how they are programmed Macs work wonderfully.  I'm not hating on Windows - if you prefer them, then you prefer them.  To say that my 27" better than HD screen on my iMac with 12GB of RAM and amazing wireless mouth and keyboard is a waste of $2,000 is absurd.

I bet I could get a Windows machine with similar specs for half, but I don't want to build it.  I don't want to research how it works and order parts.  I also don't want to run Windows.  For a computer that absolutely punishes and is great and easy to use $2,000 is nothing.

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next? Lenses & Cameras
« on: February 08, 2012, 11:44:41 AM »
yer dumb...

Take your name calling elsewhere, we don't need it here.

Woah.  Wasn't being serious, just a joke.

Also, why don't you read where he posted the exact same thing in another part of the forum.  There, people are passive aggressively saying that he is dumb. I am just jokingly saying upfront.

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next? Lenses & Cameras
« on: February 08, 2012, 11:24:34 AM »
Am i the only one who´s worried about the D800? People are selling their Canon gear like crazy, nobody even cares about what the 5dmk3 will be. Is the new D800 the end for Canon? What is this?? Why are canon releasing a new 24 and a new 28?? It´s the same! just walk two steps backwards or forwards. And a new 24-70 prised almost like the same as a 5d2 combined with the old 24-70! What is wrong with canon?? What are they doing? Wake up!

Yeah, it's insane - people were flipping over cars and burning down buildings trying to find buyers for their Canon gear, but no one is buying!!!  This is the end of Canon!!!  OMG!!!  The entire Canon company is going to go under because you don't like their newest three lenses!!!

Lenses / Re: Dust, is it myth or fact?
« on: February 07, 2012, 02:21:46 PM »
There is no such thing as dust.  It is a complete myth.  It is conspiracy brought on by cleaning product companies.

In all honesty, I have the 100-400 and I don't really have any dust in mine.  If anything, it is comparable to my other prime lenses.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Announced
« on: February 07, 2012, 02:03:47 PM »
canon is lost. with 4kcine zooms,c300 and now 24-70 lens. no offense fan boys.

What do you mean lost?  Do you mean they aren't making everything that you want them to make?

Let's be honest, the old school canon people obviously care more about straight photography and not much about video.  If canon only catered to people like you then they would be lost.  Let's look at other companies that decided to not progress with the market's demands:

Every single US automaker - people have been buying big trucks for years, so let's keep doing that and screw these babyman eco battery cars...

RIM - touch phones are toys...

Kodak - digital will never catch on...

Borders - people only want paper books...

The list can go on.

I'm sorry to say it, but video is the future.  I want photography first, and it seems like you do also, but we are not the majority.  And who cares if they incorporate video into their amazing dslrs, and who cares if they make lenses that work great for video and stills?

People saying canon is lost, and they are just screwing everyone don't really know what they are talking about.  They might be screwing a few people, but if they just made stuff that you wanted they wouldnt even stay in the dslr business. 

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Announced
« on: February 07, 2012, 12:23:06 PM »
The only dissappointment I have with the lens is the 82mm filter size.  For ,my wide angle I specifically went with the 17-40 for the common 77mm threads.  Now, If I upgrade lenses to this, I will need to get several new filters adding significantly to the cost.  Oh well, when we get our annual bonus in September, this lens will be high on my wish list!

Square filters

EOS Bodies / Re: 2 different 5Ds coming in 2012 ???!!!!!
« on: February 02, 2012, 01:53:13 PM »
45 MP sounds ridiculous and is probably just wishful thinking.

You never know - 45 MP on FF would give about the same pixel density as the 7D.

agreed - 45MP on a FF doesn't sound ridiculous to me at all.  I'm surprised there isn't one already.

I have a 27" quad core iMac with 16gb of ram.  The ram I bought afterwards and it was only 100 bucks to get from 4 to 16.

Obviously, if you don't want a big arse computer, then don't get it.  But with a student discount I spent $2000 on mine and it completely punishes.  Also, my prints are nearly identical to what my screen shows.

Once you go 27" everything else looks like a toy.

Lenses / Re: How do you pay for your lenses?
« on: January 31, 2012, 10:40:43 AM »

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Flip out displays -- why the resentment?
« on: January 30, 2012, 03:35:35 PM »
If there was one that was as sturdy and no more bulky than a built in screen I think it would be amazing.  Still, you will have people here who are against them for no other reason that they think they are only for "consumers."

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 27