August 23, 2014, 01:53:12 AM

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 - wockawocka

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 26
316
Software & Accessories / Re: PC or MAC
« on: December 21, 2011, 07:39:16 AM »
Macbooks are awesome on the move.

Main workhorse is a PC though.

317
If you can look people in the eyes and call yourself a 'photographer' without feeling deceptive or a fraud...you're a photographer.

As art is subjective only you will know when you reach that point.

318
EOS Bodies / Re: Why not 16bit?
« on: December 14, 2011, 03:14:04 PM »
I read somewhere that even those cameras with 16bit a/d actually only DXO'd in at around 13-14bits - 1Ds3 territory.

Whilst it's nice to have the best images possible nearly 99.9999% of all photographic images viewed are A4 and smaller (think magazines and ipads).

The human eye can't discern the level detail on an image that size.

319
EOS Bodies / Re: Should i go for the 1DX or the 5D Mk III?
« on: December 13, 2011, 06:25:13 PM »
If it's for weddings you want the one that writes to two cards at the same time.

I doubt the 5D3 will have that ability.

320
Lenses / Re: Is Canon EF 24mm f/1.4 L II USM Lens too wide for FF?
« on: December 13, 2011, 02:07:31 PM »
I rarely use mine. When I have the 16-35 and 24-70 it never gets used.

That and the 17mm TS-E will be the next to go.

Whilst it's a fast piece of glass the 1Dx will negate the benefits.

On a crop though it's a fab 35mm equivelant.

321
United States / Re: Is 1D Mark IV boring or almost perfect?
« on: December 12, 2011, 03:58:17 PM »
It's a great camera but I can't seem to break away from the 1Ds3

322
Lenses / Re: EF 35 f/1.4L II & EF 24-70 f/2.8L II on January 3, 2012? [CR2]
« on: December 10, 2011, 02:21:24 PM »
The 35L doesn't have much scope for improvement?

I can't see the benefit of IS in a 24-70 as it'll only add weight to a commonly used lens that doesn't require it.
I think for shooting people I never usually go slower than 1/60 otherwise folks blur.

With that in mind should I need to go slower I use a prime.

Edit, if anything a fast prime with IS would be really interesting for low light photography without a tripod.

323
EOS Bodies / Re: Earthshatteringly Disappointed With 7D
« on: December 09, 2011, 06:50:38 PM »
Experience of noise in camera bodies I've owned:

40D - Great starter camera, well controlled noise levels for it's ISO range
50D - Very poor high ISO noise compared to the 40D
7D - Unacceptable low ISO noise but decent high iso
5D1 - Beautiful IQ, noise present in High ISO, like a 40D almost
5D2 - Very clean images up to ISO3200
1Ds3 - Cleanest images I've ever seen at ISO 100. Noise clearly present from 1600, but grain like film.
1D4 - Pretty much the same as the 5D2 up to ISO 6400 where it's better.

324
EOS Bodies / Re: Earthshatteringly Disappointed With 7D
« on: December 09, 2011, 02:52:49 AM »
It's commonly known that there is low ISO noise, and lots of it.

Great features, crap sensor.

If IQ is paramount buy a used 5D mk1, but unless you get a 1D series you can't have both I'm afraid.

325
EOS Bodies / Re: How can Nikon remain in business with 12MP FF?
« on: December 06, 2011, 06:14:14 PM »
Like this:



(D700 & 85mm f/1.4 wide-open)

I was the backup that day on a friend's D300, but got to use the D700 for about a minute.  Sweet setup.

Note to self:  make sure the bride doesn't take her earrings off before a shoot...

Fantastic shot, but with 12mpx, you are hoping that your shot is spot on (like this) so that you do not have to crop much.

Not heard of genuine fractals then?

326
EOS Bodies / Re: B&W photography: What happened to grain?
« on: December 01, 2011, 08:16:22 AM »
Grain has it's place, as opposed to noise.
I prefer to add grain to a clean image though, like a black and white landscape. It texturises clouds and can enhance the overall feel of an image.

I'm sure a lot of pros in the times of film would of loved their images to be grain free though.

i.e. http://www.freestylephoto.biz/6031330-Kodak-Ektar-100-iso-35mm-x-36-exposure-film

327
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Push vs. ISO
« on: November 29, 2011, 07:50:24 AM »
It's well known that an incorrect digital exposure will create noise as a result.

If you are in a situation where you take a picture at the incorrect settings when you correct this in post production you will introduce more noise.

I'm not too sure how well this stands up if the ISO used was in the expanded range though as generally things get nasty up there anyway.

328
EOS Bodies / Re: Only 4.3 mil.
« on: November 21, 2011, 12:12:46 PM »
You can have this one for 2.9 million.



329
EOS Bodies / Re: 5DmkII price drop in Japan....due to a box fail?
« on: November 18, 2011, 03:45:15 AM »
The price drops are simple business manouvers.

The camera is getting older yet Canon wants to sell them at the same rate so lowers the price. There's a big profit margin on these (I expect) and another Canon owner is one less Sony, Nikon, Olympus owner etc.

Just plain old supply and demand.


330
Lenses / Re: ? on why Canon ignored...
« on: November 16, 2011, 08:03:58 PM »
It wouldn't make much sense to stick a 2k piece of glass on a $300 body.

Really?  Which would give you a better result - a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II on a T3, or a 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III on a 5DII?  There's a reason for the 'glass before body' maxim.

Anyone who can buy an L lens should be able to afford a decent semi pro body, even if that's a used 5DC. The EF-S lenses are aimed at the Canon amateur range and are cheaper to reflect this. Canon doesn't need to make L series EF-S lenses as they fit all their cameras regardless. Sure, perhaps a L series 10-22mm would make sense but then they'll be merging the distinct categories between amateur and pro kit.

There's also something to be said about the ability of a camera to make use of the light an L lens shines on the sensor. I don't think the T3 would be as good as a 5D2...

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 26