October 21, 2014, 02:08:33 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 - J.R.

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 101
301
If Birds are your thing then the 600mm. You need as much reach as you can get.
So it depends on what your subjects are if any advantages apply.

The 500 will be lighter and a bit shorter and because of this a bit more portable.
It will be easier to hand hold as well.

Thanks...  I'm an old school type shooter who likes to shoot with a tripod.  I plan to shoot with a wimberley gimbal head. 

I do enjoy birding and I guess you are right, the 600 should be better there.

302
Lenses / Which supertele? Any reason for 500 over a 600 except the price
« on: December 03, 2013, 09:31:33 AM »
Hi Guys,

While I am presently saving up for a 300mm f/2.8L II (almost done), my mind is dwelling on its bigger cousins and I am not sure which to get first. I plan to get a 300 and a 500/600 next year in any case so it is basically an issue of which one to get first.

I can probably get the 500mm by early February next year if I do decide on it and the 300 can follow up later. However, a 600mm will be a step too far right now and my wait will probably be longer.

Of course the biggest differences between the two are the 100mm of FL and $$$. Can you guys please advise whether there is any other reason to buy the 500 over the 600?

Thanks in advance for your help!

Cheers ... J.R.

303
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D3: is shutter dying?
« on: December 03, 2013, 04:45:55 AM »
This is a common problem when using fast shutter speeds under fluorescent lighting. You are using. Shutter speed that is higher than the cycle time for fluorescent lighting which is probably resulting in the odd color casts. Drop down to below 1/60 sec and you should be just fine.

304
EOS Bodies / Re: Two New Full Frame Cameras in 2014? [CR1]
« on: December 02, 2013, 09:39:25 AM »
Gentlemen, please step back from the brink..... a lot of you are getting way to personall and it would be a shame if the moderators had to step in.

I value all civil voices and like to hear both sides of the debate, but only when it is civil. When you resort to name calling and taunting each other, anything good that you have to say gets lost in the noise.

Take a deep breath, count to 10, go take some pictures, whatever.... let us restore our sanity.

+1 ... Well said. I agree

305
EOS Bodies / Re: Two New Full Frame Cameras in 2014? [CR1]
« on: December 02, 2013, 08:39:45 AM »
I don´t need to talk about new gear because I have it.

If you 'don't need to talk' about it, why are you constantly doing so?  The possible answers are:

1) You have new/prototype gear, and you can't talk about it because you signed an NDA (but if that were true, public blabbing like this would mean Canon would cut you off),

2) You have new/prototype gear, and Canon has authorized you to 'leak' information (in which case the frequency of your posts and the absurdity of some of your statements, such as Canon letting you permanently keep a prototype, has destroyed any credibility you may have had, and with it your value to Canon and they'd cut you off),

-or-

3) You're a liar.

Anyone who's been following this forum for a while knows which one of the above is correct.

He cannot possibly have the prototype as he has himself said -

Latest informationen from Canon Japan:

So basically all we are left with is option 3  :-X

306
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: December 02, 2013, 07:59:11 AM »
OK, I finally did a set up for my waxwing friends.  First I cleared my pond of all the snow -whew.  Then I got out the garden hose and stretched out all 200 feet of it over there this morning after the sun was coming up.  Then I invited my friends to model for me once I got the water distributed.  Unfortunately, they would not behave!! ;)  What a bunch of troublemakers.

6D 300 X2  1600th F8  ISO 1600

Jack

Very nice shot ... birds showing attitude.

307

2.   I said at the beginning that the photos were not very good. These photos are for comparison purposes under the same set of conditions, not choosing the best photos taken on a particular camera under optimal conditions. They are not the highly selected best ones taken, of which one is proud - I have plenty of fine keepers from both cameras. So no snide comments please about how you would have discarded them immediately.

That exactly is the point ... isn't it? To see the IQ differences in both cameras, you need to test the limits to see which one does better.

Shoot the same subject in good light at ISO 100 and I very much doubt whether you will see much difference between FF and an(y) APS-C. It's only when the lighting gets a bit murky that the 5D3 pulls away.

308
EOS Bodies / Re: Two New Full Frame Cameras in 2014? [CR1]
« on: December 02, 2013, 07:21:42 AM »
I don´t need to talk about new gear because I have it.

Excellent ... so can you please post the photo of your EF-1200mm lens taken with the new EOS-1 body?

309
EOS Bodies / Re: Two New Full Frame Cameras in 2014? [CR1]
« on: December 02, 2013, 07:20:41 AM »

Does a movie critic need to make their own movie in order to comment on a movie?
Do food critics need to offer up their own food in order to be accepted?
And so on.
The world is full of people offering up opinions on whatever without providing their own for comment on just about every topic imaginable. Get over it.

Oh, I didn't realize you were offering an unsolicited critique to jrista's photos, in which case it is nothing short of a personal attack because his photos are not "junk" (not to me at least). Maybe you need an eye exam.  :P

Commenting on photo on CR to movie / food critics ... clutching straws are we? Movie / food critics exist as a source of information (whether biased or unbiased) for prospective customers of a particular product. I don't understand, was jrista selling something which you were critiquing and coming up with the "junk" opinion?

As far as your comments regarding movie critics, the only thing that comes to mind after reading your post is ... Rotten Tomatoes ... hell, it could even be Pure Mashed Potatoes! 

I'm with Eldar on this one ... you join as a member of my ignore list.

310
EOS Bodies / Re: Two New Full Frame Cameras in 2014? [CR1]
« on: December 02, 2013, 06:25:54 AM »
Latest informationen from Canon Japan:

The new EOS 1 body will have two CF card slots (none of them are CFast slots).

Don´t expect a big megapixel camera or a medium format camera in 2014. But expect more than 18 megapixels, dual pixel tech., a bigger camera display and better IQ.

Canon Japan drop hints on future EOS 1 body? Seriously?

The CR Oracle (albeit with a rather low success rate) has spoken  ::) ... now it is for Canon to deliver.  :P

BTW, Correct me if I'm wrong ... doesn't the current EOS-1DX have two CF card slots? so what is this "new" stuff are you talking about?

311
Canon General / Re: TEN YEARS FROM NOW.
« on: December 02, 2013, 06:21:17 AM »
ten years from now ... who cares, just go out there and shoot with what is available, today! 

As Don Haines has it in his signature ... The best camera is the one in your hands

312
EOS Bodies / Re: Two New Full Frame Cameras in 2014? [CR1]
« on: December 02, 2013, 06:16:17 AM »
I wouldn't want to be too quick on that as a lot of the material I've seen here and the "wow, cool" means a lot of junk is praised when it shouldn't be.


On the the point of "Images" good or bad, most people that actually post images on CR do so because they want to share these Images with other like minded people, not all the Images Posted are or claim to be "Ansel Adams" quality, they don't need to be, most post Images for constructive feed back in an endeavour to better their Photography, and most people that understand this give constructive criticism, constructive criticism is not the same as your comment above, your comment, unfortunately, is just plain bad manners.

And yes, often less than stellar Images receive positive reviews from people on CR, it's called "being positive", or "being nice", which seems to me to be so much easier than the opposite, which in case I need to spell it out, is "being negative" or "being an arsehole".

Well said!

BTW, has dilbert ever posted photos his masterpieces of artwork on CR?

Why would I want to?

Because regardless of how good or bad they are, you'd all just rip it to shreds anyway.

I'm sure I won't be doing that regardless of who took them because an image might mean nothing to you but may mean the world to the person who made it. Nevertheless, IMHO it is poor form to call someone's images junk while not posting your own. 

313
Landscape / Re: Waterscapes
« on: December 02, 2013, 06:07:18 AM »
Blue skies today


Barnwell reflections No.1 by jamiewednesday1, on Flickr

Beautiful. Just shows that you can break the rule of the thirds and still get a beautiful picture.

314
Landscape / Re: Waterscapes
« on: December 02, 2013, 06:05:48 AM »
Queenstown, New Zealand. Such an amazingly beautiful place!

New Zeeland is filled with beautiful places like this, got tons of pictures from my last holiday.

Nice ... IMHO, a dash of red somewhere in the photo would have made it stand out even more. 

315
Landscape / Re: Slot Canyons- Canyon X and Upper Antelope, Grand Canyon
« on: December 02, 2013, 06:03:49 AM »
Lovely photos Scott. I enjoyed seeing them.

PS: A select few posters on CR might just tell you that your images lack DR and/or that your photos are "junk" ... don't believe them  ;)

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 101