December 20, 2014, 03:21:58 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 - stefsan

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9
EOS Bodies / Re: Is this a joke?
« on: August 15, 2014, 03:55:28 AM »
Bogus – the entries are several months old and unless Canon has deployed the 7D II without telling anyone, there is no 7D II (yet)  ::)

EOS Bodies / Re: One other hoped-for feature on the 7D2
« on: July 28, 2014, 12:19:09 PM »
With auto-ISO enabled, the Manual camera setting isn't really fully manual. It would be great if the camera allowed exposure compensation for the "not quite manual" setting where shutter and f/stop were fixed but ISO was automatic. 

I miss this functionality on my 7D as well…

Software & Accessories / Re: Camera bag for camping
« on: July 21, 2014, 07:34:31 AM »

You can always put camera gear in to a serious hiking backpack but it's hard (if not impossible) to take an expensive photography backpack and use it for serious hiking.

I could not agree more. I've been using a F-stop Loka for a few years now, and while it's a great backpack and probably one of the finest camera backpacks available, I feel a lot more comfortable with my Arcteryx Astral 65 even if I put twice as much weight in it. There is a world of difference, at least to my me and my back. I would say that camera backpack manufacturers have a very long way to go, when it comes to ergonomics.  I'm thinking of adding a Lowepro Toploader AW 50 to my kit, now that I have sold the Loka, to be chucked in with the rest of my hiking kit. It should hold a L-plated 6D with a wide angle zoom nice and snugly.

Generally I agree that trekking/mountaineering-specific packs are the best available in terms of wearing comfort. But the comparison of the F-Stop Loka with the Arc'teryx Altra is not really fair. The Loka is a 37 litre pack with not that much padding on the hip belt and the shoulder straps. It is not meant to carry 30 kilos like the Altra (which is a fabulous pack by the way). If you try a Tilopa BC (48 litres) or a Satori EXP (62 litres) you might get a rather different experience: both packs are very well constructed and padded so that you can carry your 20-30 kilos of photo gear, mountaineering stuff, clothes, food etc. quite comfortably. It's still heavy to lug around 20 kilos though…  ;D

Lenses / Re: What Lenses are missing from Canon's range
« on: July 19, 2014, 05:33:47 AM »
… oh, and I forgot the EF 24-105L II with better IS, coatings and really good sealing 8)

Lenses / Re: What Lenses are missing from Canon's range
« on: July 19, 2014, 05:30:44 AM »
I'd like to see UWA lenses for both FF and APS-C that are
  • fast
  • sharp (even if wide open)
  • and do not suffer from the beastly coma aberration that turns stars into wedge-shaped UFOs like the EF-S 10-22 does.

Software & Accessories / Re: Camera bag for camping
« on: July 17, 2014, 04:02:34 AM »
In general:

This may be a bit above your price range, but this Gura Gear bag is designed expressly for mixed cargo:

The F-stop Mountain series is similar in its configurability and chambering of different types of items:

It seems a small distinction to have separate compartments, but it lets the nasty dirty campy stuff stay in a separate chamber. 

But in specifics, the type of camping you are doing defines your answer.  Car camping is not backcountry camping...

- A

The Uinta looks good too but if you want to strap half a ton of additional gear to your pack and still be quite comfortable, I think there is nothing better than the F-Stop packs out there.

Software & Accessories / Re: Camera bag for camping
« on: July 17, 2014, 03:27:16 AM »
One possible solution for not having to take off the backpack to get to your camera is a clip like Peak Design's Capture Pro ( Works great if the weather is good  8)

Software & Accessories / Re: Camera bag for camping
« on: July 17, 2014, 03:14:34 AM »
You might want to have a look at F-Stop packs like the Tilopa BC ( They don't come cheap (about 130$ over your budget) but they really deliver in terms of quality and versatility. I use them for skiing and mountaineering, trekking and for camping.

Software & Accessories / Re: Capture One
« on: July 03, 2014, 08:46:08 AM »
While we are at the subject: Does anyone have experiences with both CaptureOne and DXO? How do these two compare?

Animal Kingdom / Re: Unexpected Events
« on: July 02, 2014, 03:05:54 AM »
Wow, good catch and a very nice sequence! I quite often see herons in my neighbourhood but I never saw one catch and devour a fish.

Software & Accessories / Re: Apple to Cease work on Aperture
« on: June 27, 2014, 04:25:30 PM »
They're about to obsolete all the head phones all their customers currently own and use, and the likely path to "continue using what you have" is bulky, cumbersome and expensive.

I must have missed that one. What could they do to my head phoes?

Landscape / Re: Mountains, Lakes and Rivers
« on: June 27, 2014, 07:39:14 AM »
I would like to ask what do you think about brightness of this image. Do you see it as too dark/too bright or OK? Especially in the rocks. I'm asking this because if I look it on my display (MBP retina) it looks OK, but if I look it on my older (cheap) display it looks brighter (actually too bright).


Looks good to me (Macbook Pro), not too bright and not too dark. Very nice shot!

I'm a fan of DPP (and Digital Lens Optimizer), and this new version looks very good so far.  I do hope DPP's slowness in converting RAW to JPEG has become faster as well as how slow it is to "transfer to photoshop" to use some specific Photoshop function/plug-in while in DPP  :'(

DPP 3.14 feels clunky and sometimes cumbersome to work with, but non the less I use it as a first step in my RAW-workflow. I really don't get the point of shutting out the (presumed) majority of DPP users from the improvements of version 4  >:(

Lenses / Re: Canon Working on Faster f/2.8 Ultra Wide Zoom [CR2]
« on: May 16, 2014, 07:50:27 AM »
(Veering a bit off-topic here, sorry) Only done night sky a couple of times and chose f8. What do you get at wider apertures? Is the idea to stop the stars streaking?

Exactly. If you wish to get a nice shot where you can see the Milky Way above a nice bit of landscape you want to to have a fast ultra wide angle lens to minimize exposure times and lessen the need to use high ISOs. And in a perfect world this UWA lens would give you really good corner sharpness and no coma aberration (optical aberration distorting the stars in the corner to oblong splotches).
If the 16-36 f4 would deliver that kind of optical quality/sharpness across the whole frame (FF), I would be willing to give up f2.8  ::)

Software & Accessories / Digital Photo Professional Problem
« on: April 28, 2014, 04:41:53 AM »
Hi all,

I just installed version 3.14.15 of DPP on my MacPro (running OS X 10.9.2 Mavericks). The application works well until the moment I want to process my CR2 files into TIFF. The processing does not work, regardless wether I want to process one (cmd+d) or several (cmd+b) pictures. Earlier versions of DPP worked well under Mavericks. Unfortunately I erased the older version I used before the update to DPP 3.14.15 :-\ 
Has anyone a clue how to solve this problem?


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9