January 30, 2015, 04:41:49 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 - Maui5150

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 34
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 2.8x Teleconverter
« on: March 27, 2012, 09:54:36 AM »
so the 70 - 200 F/2.8L IS II becomes a 196 - 560?

While F/8 is not ideal, still might add in some use.  The TCs already slow the AF down as it is, so manual focus is not as much a big deal.

Not sure the price... Probably somewhere in the $600 - $800 range, but if it works with the 70-200 like the 2x does, I could see there being interest

The biggest thing I took from the article is the D4 is a piece of junk.  Nikon should be ashamed for selling and overpriced d400 marked and sold as a D4.

Accordingly, the D3s also appears to be an over priced POS...

at least that is what the DxOMark score says...

So the bigger question... What does that say about the DxO scoring and testing...

Coming from someone who shoots with three 550EXs, and is about to shell out big bucks with multiple 600EXs and an ST-E3, I'm certainly not doing it to save money over a proper monolight setup! I'm on location for 90 percent of my shoots, and using off-camera flash in 90 percent of those shots. The portability, the lack of cords, the lack of a power supply, quick setup time, and precise ETTL metering is why the Speedlites suit my needs most of the time. However, they are by no means a substitute for a set of real monolights in a studio environment. If you need to light up a large subject with fast recycle times, you need a set of monolights.

Speedlites can work just as well as monolights in certain situations, but you pay a hefty premium for the added portability. IMHO, Speedlights and monolights are merely different tools for different situations. One isn't necessarily as substitute for the other, and arguing that one is better than the other is silly.

Never said it was.

The title of this thread is "Pocket Wizards Plus III - what am I missing here?" and there is a general theme that since it does not have e-TTL it is crap, where in many of the cases enumerated, not only do these hold their own, but are cheaper and preferred. 

And agreed, both speedlites and monolights have different advantages and uses, and depending on ones needs and uses, certain features will be more valuable than others. 

Cameta is so-so.

I got my 24-105 F/4 L from them.

Things I learned from my transaction that they "don't tell you"

** They make most of their money from "unbundling" items.  They will by the kits and then sell the items separately.  Nothing wrong with this, but just be sure you know what you are getting, so if your order arrives in just a plain white box, don't be surprised. 

** It is not uncommon to be missing the warranty card, especially with the lenses.  I had no problem registering mine with Canon, but then again, sometimes you find out AFTER THE FACT whether a warranty will be honored or not. 

** Not sure if you got the HARD SELL... But they will try and sell you a ton of accessories, cards, cases, etc. 

** ONLY go with NEXT DAY or EXPRESS SHIPPING.  Their standard shipping DOES NOT include tracking, and you should always getting tracking with better items, especially if you need to sign for it. 

Would I buy from them again?  Maybe.  Depends on price... But I know with them generally not to expect a retail box and get a hard sell. 

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Gutted! (5DMkIII Adorama Bundle)
« on: March 21, 2012, 11:07:26 AM »
Point being blame the COUNTRY not the manufacturer. 

While gas prices in the US have soared, most of that is really a devaluation of the currency, and not the price of gas.  You can thank the Quantitative Easing for that.

The point with price of cameras in UK has to do with UK, corporate taxes, import taxes, etc.  and if you look at the cost of most if not all durable goods that are imported, you will see that most, if not all are MORE EXPENSIVE. 

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Gutted! (5DMkIII Adorama Bundle)
« on: March 21, 2012, 05:55:53 AM »
Before blaming Canon, Blame your country.

How much do you pay for gasoline per gallon?  Even though the US has soared as of late still cheaper.

By a motorcycle in the US like a Suzuki or even a Ducati... In the states you will pay $3,000 - $6000 less.

See a trend? 

For one, you are probably better off selling on Amazon in many ways.  I have dealt far too many times with eBay and PayPal than I care to recall, and as a Top Rated and Silver Power Seller, I have seen the site go to crap.

As well, there are a few annoying changes coming forward that can increase the final value fees on many sellers by as much as 450%

Yes... that is 450%.

The feedback process is incredibly skewed now, and sellers are in a real bad spot if you are not careful.  In short EVERYTHING needs a tracking number, and if it is above $250 it needs a signature.  You can have delivery confirmation... Does not matter if it is above $250, the buyer can receive it, as long as they do not sign for it, file a claim and you will get charged back.

Also be forewarned, Ebay and PayPal have been pushing hard on the BillMeLater.  Do note, that the Buyer Protection under this is COMPLETELY different.  I had an "Item not as described" which would have been fully covered under eBay/PayPal that was not under BillMeLater. 

Software & Accessories / Re: sRGB vs Adobe RGB
« on: March 20, 2012, 06:01:53 AM »
Problem with ProPhoto is you need a more capable monitor.  There are a few monitors out there that will deliver the 1.07 billion colors, since most monitors displaying 16.7 million colors aren't enough

If you want to use the ProPhoto color space you really also should have gear that is capable, and most monitors that are out there are not

EOS Bodies / Canon most popular brand
« on: March 19, 2012, 07:55:31 AM »
Despite the "I am switching," "I am disappointed," et al threads, still looks like Canon is ruling the roost when it comes to the biggest market... consumers... Cha-Ching!


Perhaps you should stick to Point and Shoots for the time being. 

Tv or M.  'Nuff Said.

I detect Blue Crane Introduction DVDs in your future.

As i pointed out Tv and M dont solve anything with this. Read and understand.

Sure they do. 

If you are shooting in bright sunlight and need to go low and fast, then M is perfect and add either a ND or speedlight as needed. 

I would be far more concerned with the camera mismetering when trying to shoot an action shot at speeds of 500 or more, especially if you are dealing with objects such as cars, or anything else that can reflect light.

Software & Accessories / Re: Lightroom VS Photoshop
« on: March 16, 2012, 01:22:21 PM »
Which is recommended for photographers? Not necessarily most popular but more for practicality, ease of use and functionality. I’m currently using Photoshop.

Depends what you are doing. 

I use both.  I use lightroom to work with general exposure and adjustments, especially when doing global changes like applying color management across all photos shot (see ColorChecker Passport)

I will then use photoshop to do my editing, especially when working with fashion or beauty shots, tools like clone, patch, etc can do wonders with skin blemishes, etc. that are far easier in photoshop than lightroom, and I find lightroom much more capable at doing things like lens correction, dealing with shadows, blacks, highlights, etc.

I preordered my 5D and I've been torturing myself by reading forum posts about how terrible it is ever since. It's made me question my decision. Is a pair of L lenses and three others enough to keep me on this horrible platform?

Seeing this made me feel a lot better.  To be honest, it's really going to be about what the picture/video is of and not what you took it with. Thanks.

That's because you've been listening to a lot of people who, to be honest, don't really know ;) 36 vs. 22 MP is not  going to make the difference between a camera that's usable and one that isn't but people get themselves in a frenzy etc etc... and pour over JPEG files rather than waiting for real tests. It just feeds into the marketing machines, which if I'm honest Nikon is better at.

It's the same with high ISO. I've heard people say the d3s and d700 "destroy" the 5dii. The d3s is 8/10ths of a stop better and the d700 is 1/3rd of a stop better. These are not "destroy" level stats - especially the comparison with the d700. 1/3rd of a stop is not even noticeable yet I've had discussions with "photographers" who claim the d700 is the high ISO king and the 5dii sucks.

I've said it before, but the difference between 22 and 36 MP is about a third extra resolution. So, if you were printing at 300dpi, most people would get an extra few inches on their maximum size print. Scaled, I'm unsure if many people could tell the difference, and by this I mean if you didn't have them side by side and asked which camera they were printed from, they couldn't tell you. Even side by side it's not certain. That means there will be no significantly business advantage to having the d800 (for most photographers).  In fact, I'm not even sure most people would notice the difference between a 12mp d700 and a 36mp d800..

Certainly, for me, the difference is less than the difference a great lens will make - who wants more resolution when the lens can't resolve it and you just have greater resolution blurry details?

Canon rule the roost when it comes to lenses (except for the 12-24). I wouldn't consider switching to Nikon for that reason alone.

Photographer > Lenses > Body (for most photographers).

You make far too much sense and are far too rational for this site...

Please consider yourself officially notified of being on probation.

In the future, please feel free to voice hysterics, complain that Canon does not listen, the prices are too high, the MP too small, the DR non-existant and how ( ) Nikon ( ) Sony (please select one or more) are kicking Canon's butt and that you are switching...

Now back to this regularly scheduled thread. 

You can not take images from 1 that is pretty much from Raw and compared to another that is upsampled by close to 30% and expect to make a true judge of sharpness.

Sure you can.  All you have to do is decide ahead of time what 'conclusion' you want your 'test' to show, and then design your test accordingly.    ::)


I can understand some of the initial premise of the upsizing, i.e. showing the same size crop so the size of an object shown in the crop is the same size, but this just does not work. 

If anything, what it tells me is either:

1)  The author is intentionally being deceptive

-  or -

2)  They really do not understand digital files, resolution and comparison.

To me the proper way of doing this comparison has to be raw to raw with an understanding that the the Nikon image will obviously be blown up a bit, but looking at a 500 x 500 pixel representation of the Canon Raw and then comparing to the Nikon Raw, one can look at the edges, CA, noise, etc. 

By the same token, another poster raised an excellent point that the lenses used will also make a big difference as I expect the quality of say a 70-200 L2.8 IS II will produce a different image than a 24-105 F/4.

By that degree, Camera to Camera comparisons can be very selective between different brands, where as at least within a brand, lens performance and difference can be mitigated.

Huge?? lol hardly download the RAW files and compare, you will see the 5D III beats the D800 at ISO and the detail on the D800 is not that much better.
I'd dissagree. I say it is noticeably better. Off course the 5DIII can go higher on the ISO with less noise. Downsampling the D800 raw to 22MP does but it in 5DIII terrytory though.
overall I think the D800 remains the better camera by far to its purpose: studio/landscape. I'm not sure high ISO tests really get what the camera is all about.

     If you actually look at the photos without Canon-colored glasses, there is a significant difference in detail and clarity, particularly with the 1st, 3rd and 4th ones. Implying that lack of detail in one image compared to another is not much different just makes one's analysis of them have zero credibility.
    I could care less about either camera (1DX is really the only new camera model for professionals to consider anyway), and I'm a rejuvenated Canon supporter thanks to the 1DX announcement, but that doesn't mean one should overlook the facts.


The Canon images were sampled up.

Quick test.

Take an image from a Nikon D4 and Bicubic resample it to 36MP and then compare it to the D800.

Which is sharper at ISO 100?

By this logic the D800 is a vastly sharper/better camera than the D4

You cannot take a 22MP image, resample / increase the image size to 36 MP AND NOT have a loss in quality.

In fact, you could probably take a D4 16MP image at ISO 100 and Upscale it to 21MP and compare to a 5D MKII and see how the 5DMKII is a SHARPER IMAGE than the D4?

You might as well compare the RAW from one to a JPG from the other.

Why not shoot the Nikon in Medium instead of Large for the file size which would be more indicative of a comparable resolution???

Ahhh... because maybe that would not show the results the bias was tending to show.

Raw is Raw... You can not take images from 1 that is pretty much from Raw and compared to another that is upsampled by close to 30% and expect to make a true judge of sharpness.

Correct me if I am wrong, but what exactly does:  "5D3 was upsided to 36 MP via Photoshop Bicubic" mean???

My interpretation is they took the Canon 22MP file, and in PhotoShop did an Image Resize using bicubic to be equal in size to 36 MP

I have NEVER been able to resize a photo up by 20% or more and not introduce defects, loss of sharpness, etc. 

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 34