September 23, 2014, 11:00:41 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 ... 8
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?


Software & Accessories / Re: Photo Backpak
« on: April 28, 2014, 03:33:39 AM »
Is this what you are looking for?

Software & Accessories / Re: Chuck a 5dmk iii in a rucksack
« on: April 23, 2014, 02:33:38 AM »
Depending on how much stuff you want to carry in your backpack I would consider something like the f-stop ICU's ( or Gura Gear modules ( These will not only protect your gear but also organize it well and enable you to load your rucksack with other stuff (jacket, food etc.) without mixing it with your photo gear. Works very well for me while skiing, mountaineering and hiking.

Photography Technique / Re: Perspective correction
« on: December 29, 2013, 07:26:44 AM »
Rather than try to explain the way I do it, I thought a video would better illustrate the method, so I made one, here, forgive the questionable production quality, I only ever did one of these before.

Super cool! Thanks for the video.


I hear that it will be named the Mephitidae Mephitis and that the only new feature will be a mode dial that goes all the way around :)
As long as the new camera doesn't stink like a skunk I won't mind Mephitidae Mephitis as model designation…  ::)

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Spec List Surfaces [CR1]
« on: October 29, 2013, 06:48:04 AM »
Very Good ISO performance would be an upgrade for me (assuming that means at least one and possibly two stops lower noise)

That's a very optimistic interpretation of 'very good ISO performance'.  A full stop improvement would be a significant jump in technology (especially if it was a 24 MP sensor).  Two stops would be groundbreaking.  Not going to say it's impossible, but making a crop sensor with better ISO performance than the best full frame sensors would be huge, and it wouldn't be premiered on a $2000 camera.

Given that the 7D has about 40% QE, a 2 stop improvement of the (photon) noise would mean 160% QE, enough to earn Canon a Nobel prize, and shake the foundations of physics.

I don't need them to find new physics and win a Nobel Prize (I wouldn't complain if they did) but getting rid of that annoying banding noise the 7D sensor produces would count almost as much for me  8) 

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Spec List Surfaces [CR1]
« on: October 28, 2013, 08:28:33 AM »
I really liked the 7D, it's a fantastic camera for it's day except for the very poor quality sensor. It was noisy at low ISO's and it lacked the micro contrast and sharpness of it's full frame brothers of the similar era. Every other part of the camera was excellent. It's handling and UI were a big step forwards for Canon. Certainly better than the XXD which pre-dated it. If there wasn't a 7D then I doubt the 5DIII or 1DX would have been quite as stunning.

Except that I would use present tense (the 7D still has a slightly crappy sensor but is a very capable camera in every other respect) I agree wholeheartedly!

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8