Messages

16

Lighting / Re: When do you use spot metering?

« on: July 27, 2012, 09:02:35 AM »

When do I use spot metering?  Almost never.  Current meters are pretty good, but it depends on the light.  I use it in conjunction with manual mode in tricky lighting.  When the part of the image you want to expose "correctly" is a fairly small part of the frame, it works well. 

Which reminds me, I need to post my Pentax digital spotmeter for sale.

17

EOS Bodies / Re: Let's see some great shots taken with old, cheap gear!

« on: April 27, 2012, 08:11:40 PM »

Minolta SRT-101, Vivitar 35-105 f/3.2-4, B&W film

18

EOS Bodies / Re: Let's see some great shots taken with old, cheap gear!

« on: April 27, 2012, 08:09:45 PM »

Minolta XD-11 with a Vivitar 100mm macro (Kiron), scanned with a Canon FS-4000.

19

Canon General / Re: I've switched to the Dark Side (no, Literally).

« on: April 26, 2012, 03:28:14 PM »

I love the smell of fixer in the morning. 

20

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon, STOP shipping defective products!!!

« on: April 25, 2012, 02:06:03 PM »

As a veteran of years of software quality assurance, I would not likely have thought to test this.  I guess the folks at Canon didn't either.   And it is hard to detect, apparently.   If I'm shooting at night, I generally have the camera on a tripod.  That means I'm not touching the camera, and I don't use the LCD light during the exposure.   

In QA work, we frequently rate a "bug" in two ways... the severity of the issue, and the likelihood that a user will spot the mistake.  The light that gets through during the day is far far less than what comes in via the lens.   While it is is a mistake, the severity is quite low.  Low enough that Canon won't recall the bodies affected. 

We know about it thanks to the internet.  But, how many of you would ever have found this issue without the 'net? 

21

Lenses / Re: 50mm Zeiss 2.0 vs Canon 1.4 - manual focusing on 5D Mk III??

« on: April 24, 2012, 10:43:54 AM »

My friend has the ZE50, I have the Canon 50mm f/1.4.  Both are great lenses.  The ZE is better at f/2.0, but I have no complaints either.  I like having AF.  He doesn't seem to have any issues focusing with his 5D (mark I) though. 

22

Software & Accessories / Re: Short tripod for close to ground shots

« on: April 08, 2012, 01:52:28 PM »

Beanbag is good, so is a tripod that goes to ground level like a Gitzo with out a centerpost.   The up-side down thing is awkward.

23

Lenses / Re: Prime VS Zooms.

« on: April 05, 2012, 03:17:59 PM »

The definitive answer:  It depends!

If you need a shallow DOF or are shooting in low light, a fast prime is the way to go.  If your subjects will be moving, a zoom may be the best solution.

Budget and style of shooting are also important factors.  In the end, the "right tool for the job" depends on you.

+1

I could not vote, I use both.  It is always a matter of the best tool for the job.   I have an equal number of each.

24

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's bad marketing - big mistake

« on: March 30, 2012, 07:19:11 AM »

With the 5D3, Canon did exactly what I hoped they would do this time.   However, for those of you who want that high res sensor, I hope they make one of those too.

25

EOS Bodies / Re: Ken Rockwell Updated 5D MK3 Review

« on: March 28, 2012, 02:36:45 PM »

 

My favorite quote... "No one will ever figure this out."

26

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark

« on: March 24, 2012, 10:33:27 AM »

How many of you used slide film back in the day?   

i am .. but i won´t go back.....

Neither will I, digital has spoiled me.  But, with the approximately 5 stops of DR in slide film, many photographers made great landscapes, wildlife, and every other type of photograph we enjoy.

27

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark

« on: March 24, 2012, 10:29:44 AM »

I'm still standing by a few points that I've said earlier in other threads:

1.) The D800 seems to be a great "all-rounder" camera, but I must admit that 5DIII with the improved AF-system comes much closer to being one too.

2.) I still think that D800 owners will have to adapt a medium format "workflow" to get the best results from it. Hand-holding is going to be tricky one here, at least to get sharp images at 1:1.

No argument.  As I have gone to smaller pixels, I've had to be more careful about my technique to get good images.  I won't be surprised to see a lot complaints about it from users who haven't dealt with it before.

28

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark

« on: March 24, 2012, 10:20:00 AM »

How many of you used slide film back in the day?   

29

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark

« on: March 24, 2012, 10:03:32 AM »

Here's the problem with DxOMark. They say about themselves:

To design DxOMark Scores, we have made choices about our photographic use cases and their associated image quality requirements (such as resolution, distortion, noise, dynamic range, etc.). It is clear that other photography experts may see things differently. We are very open on this site about the choices we have made so that anyone interested in creating a different scoring system can do so based on their own analysis of our DxOMark Scores and Measurement Database.

They apply arbitrary - and by their own admission, completely subjective - scores to a series of metrics to end up with one number.

The issue is that if you don't give the same priority to the metrics that they do, the scores can be moved substantially.

The simple fact is that DxOMark's conclusions are no more objective than simply looking at the images and picking the one you like best.

Thank you for pointing this out.

30

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark

« on: March 23, 2012, 08:53:35 PM »

I congratulate Nikon on producing a stellar camera in the D800. Now can someone please post sample images taken with both a D800 and a 5DIII, where the D800 made them a better photographer? I have a feeling that I'll be waiting for a long time.

Easy to spot Canon images they are the ones with banding in the shadows & with burnt out highlights  & very poor  reds , I love the Canon red colour its a great red just like to see more shades of red sometimes.

Reds are poor with defaults from ACR in some Canon models, but I found I can tweak settings and get detail without too much trouble.  For more troublesome color images, I use DPP, which usually nails the color.

Banding... is much improved recently.  I don't see any in any of the 5D3 samples until 25600.