December 21, 2014, 12:23:15 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 - zim

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 53
271
Lenses / Re: digitalrev return policy
« on: September 24, 2013, 05:20:10 PM »

DigitalRev is garbage - http://www.resellerratings.com/store/DigitalRev_Limited

Generally looks like people buying from the UK are having a very different experience from those in the US

272
Lenses / Re: What does Blue Dot on a box means?
« on: September 17, 2013, 09:51:25 AM »
I would urge the seller to explain it. If you don't have a good feeling with the answer, return it.

where they put a yellow sticker on it and sell  it on as new  ;D

Always wondered what actually happens to lenses that are returned 'I got x copies before I got a good one' type of thing. Unless it's actually broken what happens I guess is stock just keeps getting rotated round buyers until a happy match if found?

273
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 24-105 f/4 OS on the Way? [CR1]
« on: September 09, 2013, 08:11:52 AM »
Have to agree with Neuro.
The current prices of the Canon and its real excellence will be a hard act to follow.

My copy needs a CLA buts is still a go-to lens for 80% of my shooting. What I really need is another for backup.
It is a decent lens, but not really an "excellent" one. It could use way more sharpness across the frame, especially in the corners. I wouldn't use the 24-105L for landscapes.

Sharpness is probably one of the things that Sigma is going to bring to the table.. And lots of it.

$500 for a Canon 24-105?? not for all of us!

If sigma bring more sharpness (and for a walk around I think the Canon 24-105 is fantastic as it is) to the table then it will be a real winner.

I'm wondering why Sigma would go head to head with that lens though? wouldn't the 50 1.4/2 be more obvious? unless they maybe they see it as a near future gap in the market.

They already did their 50 1.4

So no need for Canon to upgrade any of their 50's either then, I think a fair few peps are looking for a new 50 art from Sig no?

274
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 24-105 f/4 OS on the Way? [CR1]
« on: September 08, 2013, 04:07:23 PM »
Have to agree with Neuro.
The current prices of the Canon and its real excellence will be a hard act to follow.

My copy needs a CLA buts is still a go-to lens for 80% of my shooting. What I really need is another for backup.
It is a decent lens, but not really an "excellent" one. It could use way more sharpness across the frame, especially in the corners. I wouldn't use the 24-105L for landscapes.

Sharpness is probably one of the things that Sigma is going to bring to the table.. And lots of it.

$500 for a Canon 24-105?? not for all of us!

If sigma bring more sharpness (and for a walk around I think the Canon 24-105 is fantastic as it is) to the table then it will be a real winner.

I'm wondering why Sigma would go head to head with that lens though? wouldn't the 50 1.4/2 be more obvious? unless they maybe they see it as a near future gap in the market.

275
Canon General / Re: procamerashop?
« on: September 08, 2013, 05:29:16 AM »
Indeed but a customer on another web site has reported that all orders have been cancelled.
I've been thinking about using them but this has put doubt in my mind hence the original post

276
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Online Storage/Cloud - What's Good?
« on: September 08, 2013, 05:20:18 AM »
+1 for Crashplan

I also use Skydrive to automatically backs everything on my phone when in range of free wifi, usefull for phone snaps on holiday. It's also good for simple secure sharing of final images on a per folder basis.

Don't think that either are geared up for photography use, certainly not Skydrive but Crashplan is excellent value and I like their T&Cs


277
Lighting / Re: Thinking of buying a Light Meter
« on: September 07, 2013, 02:20:58 PM »
Thinking about buying a Light Meter and I'm wondering what are some of the features I need to look for? Thanks for the help.

That it's a Weston Master..... Still don't know where my Dad's went to.... still gutted  :'(

(only joking about the first part incase anyone takes offence!)

278
Canon General / procamerashop?
« on: September 07, 2013, 11:53:04 AM »
Anyone know what's going on at
http://www.procamerashop.co.uk/
Apart from not a lot according to my browser, seems like a very strange way to shut down a web site though.

Anyone got outstanding orders?  :(




279

Great info gbchriste, been thinking of getting LR, the above is very compelling. Being able to roll back history and take virtual copies as you have described is incredible. That alone makes my mind up.

Two questions if you don't mind though before I download a trial.

Do all vers have this facility or is it only the latest?

Can you also roll back crop info?

Regards

I've been using LR since V3 and all have the unlimited/eternal editing history and virtual copy features.

Any edit in LR can be rolled back no matter what it is.  But you do have to be careful.  When you look at the history, you see it as a series of steps stacked up in a vertical window, with the latest edit on the top of the stack, and the earliest on the bottom of the stack.  You can't just yank a step out of the stack to undo it.

If I click on an earlier step, the photo will re-rendered to the version that contains that step and all steps prior to that.  I can then export a photo or create a virtual copy with those edits applied.  I can then step back forward to the later edits in the stack to return the photo to where it was when I started.

thanks again (and others that replied)
I understand those limitations, that's fine, the thought of being able to try different ideas on an image without filling up disk space is really appealing *, have to admit I probably do this way more than I should but it's a big part of the fun I get out of photography.

Regards

Edit: * and cross multiple sessions of course

280

Whoever told you that at Adobe is smoking something.   Yes, many of the ACR tools replicate the tools in the LR Develop module.  But being able to adjust white balance, recover highlights, adjust contrast, etc, is only a small part of the LR package. 

I don't know how anyone doesn't think file management in LR isn't superior than just piling on PSD after PSD file in PS.  With Virtual Copy, I can create an unlimited number of versions of a photo - different sizes, different processing, etc, without creating any additional files in the system.  I could create 100 different versions of one photo and still have only one raw file on the system.  The only time I get a new file is when I chose to export one of those versions out to some other format like JPG.

Unlimited and eternal editing history on any image, without having to ever hit "Save".  Edit history in Photoshop has a limited number of steps it can retain, and only during the time that photo is open in PS.  I can pile up literally hundreds of edits on a single photo in LR, go away for a years, come back to that photo and see every editing step I ever took, and can roll the image forward and backward to any previous step.  Let's say that 50 steps ago I converted the image to B&W.  But now I want a color version.  I can roll the image back 50 steps to the last step it was in color, create virtual copy at that point to get a second copy in color, then roll the original forward back to the black and white version.  Now I have two independent copies of the same photo that I can process separately.

Collections - these are groupings of photos that span any location on the file system.  So I have a "Grandkids" collection.  Every photo I take of the my grandkids I add to that LR collection, but they don't physically move from whereever they are on the disc file system.

Slice and dice all my photos by any criteria I want.  I want to find every shot taken with my 5DIII with a 70-200 2.8L at ISO 3200 and shutter speed of 1/60?  No problem.  I've zipped through 10,000 or more photos applying search criteria like that and had them all up in the grid view in a matter of a few seconds.

Rate every photo numericall (1-5), with a color rating (Green, Red, Blue, Etc), a "Pick" flag, a "Reject" flag, self-selected key words, and retrieve every photo at any level of my LR catalog hirearchy by those attributes.

Burn entire collections directly to CD at any size and resolution I want without having to first dump a bunch of JPGs to disc, further cluttering up my file system.

Export photos as JPG images directly to email attachments without having first dump a bunch of JPGs to disc and then manually attach to email.  Further avoids cluttering up the file system with more files.

Export and manage whole catalogs for archive off-line but easily reopen and access those catalogs.  My current LR catalog has the current year plus the previous two full years of images, organized at the top by year (2011, 2012, 2013).  When the new year rolls over, I export the oldest year in to it's own LR catalog and store on an external harddrive, and remove that year from my current working catalog.  Keeps my image volume manageable.  But if I need to get something from an earlier catalog.  It's less than a 2 minute operation to close my current catalog and open the archived one to find and work with what I'm looking for.

I could go on and on.  IMHO, anyone who thinks LR doesn't bring significant added value to their workflow of PS either doesn't have enough images to make it worth their while, or isn't using LR to maximum effect.

Great info gbchriste, been thinking of getting LR, the above is very compelling. Being able to roll back history and take virtual copies as you have described is incredible. That alone makes my mind up.

Two questions if you don't mind though before I download a trial.

Do all vers have this facility or is it only the latest?

Can you also roll back crop info?

Regards

281
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: ETTR or ETTL?
« on: September 04, 2013, 08:34:15 AM »
with ML it shows RAW histogram that and you can get auto ETTR if you want.

Hi, I don't know ML, what do you mean by 'auto ETTR' ? -the auto bit not ETTR  :)

282
EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: September 01, 2013, 09:53:54 AM »
What ISO were these outdoor crowd shots taken at?
ISO 100.

Why?

Photographically (is there such a word!) no matter what camera I was using I wouldn’t have used 100 for that type of picture, what’s the advantage?

283
EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 31, 2013, 01:05:08 PM »
@Pi: I’m only here to learn not to bait but I only have a Canon sensor so the only thing I’m interested in is how to use it to get the best out of it i.e. not how bad it is but how good can I make it – hope that makes sense!

My understanding of ETTR is simply to get to histogram as far to the right as possible without clipping the highlights, in manual mode I can either reduce shutter speed, use a wider aperture or increase iso so I don’t understand “Now, at ISO 400, choosing slower SS, say 1/60 vs. 1/125, is not really ETTR”

I have to admit I’ve been trying to expose to the right for some time and I do struggle not to get clipped highlights so hopefully I’m missing something here!

284
EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 31, 2013, 11:55:15 AM »
The unprocessed image is fine.  You can't blame the camera for your processing.  To even see this supposed problem with the sensor, one has to raise the darkest parts of the image to exaggerate it, and one has to turn the monitor brightness all the way up.

By the way, ETTR has nothing to do with asking the subject to remain still.  It sounds like you are thinking of HDR?

+1 I think the unprocessed file is rather good, If anything I'd be darkening the background a little to get rid of the slightly distracting drum set in the background

I think the subject remaining still thing is about shutter speed, ETTR would force a slower speed and therefore subject movement, the subject doesn't look like much of a speedy gonzales to me but you never know! isn't that what better high iso performance is for though?

285
Lenses / Re: Which L Lens to start with?
« on: August 26, 2013, 07:51:16 AM »
You've reached the stage where you recognize that you can improve your photography, and you're wondering how to go about it. This is an exciting place to be, but also one fraught with confusion. The mistake that a lot of new SLR photographers make is to think that an ultra-sharp lens will, somehow, magically improve their photography and make their pictures look 'professional'. Actually, this is the wrong way to approach things. May I suggest that what you should do right now is think about how you can change your approach to how you take pictures? How can you make your pictures different from the crowd? Can you look at things in a different way? As a so-called professional, this is the question that I ask myself every day on the drive in to work.

L lenses won't inherently give you this - what they will give you is a robust and reliable tool that you can use every day without having to worry about it and that you can realistically expect will still be earning you money in three years time. Most of all, what you're going to get from an L lens is robustness, reliability, solidity and a tool that will do the job in adverse conditions, amidst a scrum of other photographers when, quite frankly, all you want to do is go home. Sharpness and color rendition comes a long second to all this. An L lens is just a working tool. Yes, generally, they will be slightly better than consumer lenses in sharpness terms (though not always), but there is a limit to this. It's not that L lenses are bad, more that these days, consumer lenses are really good, and good value to boot. Just not reliable or tough enough for day-in, day-out professional use. That's what you're paying for. Believe me, I'm much more concerned that my lens/camera will stand up to a bash against a wall than how sharp the lens is. When I want to make a memorable photograph, sharpness is a very minor consideration. Composition, perspective, content and subject interest and dynamics are what I'm looking for. I take accurate focus and an acceptably sharp result for granted, and even focus is a tool in itself. And you're probably going to be looking at most of your pics on a computer screen at best. Come on, guys, how many of you regularly print photos to 20x30?

So you want to spend some money. That's fine. First of all, go and get yourself a copy of Adobe Lightroom and learn how to use it. This will make more difference to your photographs than any lens ever will. Check out Lyndadotcom - it's a great educational resource. Learn how to use your camera in aperture priority mode and in full manual. Then, as JDRamirez suggests, get yourself a good prime lens and a polarizing filter. The new Sigma 35mm is a very good place to start. If I only had one lens, it would be a 35 prime (and my second would be a 135L). This will teach you to make yourself think before you release the shutter. It'll stop you being lazy and make you more aware than you believed possible of what's in front of you. Put your zoom lens away for a month or two and dream up some projects with specific themes that you'll use your new lens exclusively for. Rust. Specific colors. Water. Close up. Monochrome. Motion blur - whatever - anything that your imagination can come up with, but be strict with your self and don't goof off, because at the end of the day, the only person you'll be fooling will be yourself. Walk out of the door with a purpose and don't get side-tracked. Down the line, you can pick up a 300L f/4 or 400L f/5.6 or similar for your wildlife, etc. Same theory as the 35. For travel, you've already got a great lens. Personally, I'm not a great fan of ultra-wides (e.g. 10-22) until you've got a lot more mileage under your belt. They're novelty lenses in most people's hands, although that particular lens is very good on a crop camera. Whilst the 70-200 f/2.8 v2 is a magical lens on full frame, somehow, as someone else mentioned, it doesn't really gel on a crop body. Furthermore, you've already covered its range. If you really have to get a zoom, the 70-300L will work better for you.


Not sure that this is what you wanted to hear, but I remember when I had the same questions as you (back in 1978). I wish I knew then what I know now...

Don't know if you helped the OP's but you sure made me think
I'm gonna print this out!

Thank you for taking the time


Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 53