July 24, 2014, 07:03:17 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 - wickidwombat

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 295
31
Photography Technique / Re: Taking HDR shots
« on: June 30, 2014, 01:31:51 PM »
Photomatix is the way to go!

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5481/14437808722_638f9eb205_o_d.jpg

bleh photomatix please for the love of god dont join the herd of vomit inducing users of this terrible software
there are substantially cleaner methods of processing HDR that looks tasteful and subtle. try enfuse for lightroom for a start.


32
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM
« on: June 30, 2014, 01:29:13 PM »
9 months further on, are people still happy with the Sigma 35mm? I am thinking of buying one.

Honestly i havent used it at all since i got the 50... oh wait i havent taken the 50 off my 5dmk3 since i got it
oh except to attach to the sigma dock for calibration :)

its still a stunningly great lens but I'm just loving the 50 so much at the moment. I will get around to using the 35 again though. I did find the 35 a really nice 56mm equivalent on my EOS-M though too

33
EOS Bodies / Re: ISO D+ function
« on: June 29, 2014, 08:03:15 AM »
Hi wickidwombat

I made the test
2 shots using same ISO (200), speed and f stop
one shot with D+ and another one without
the one with D+ gave me better color results in the overexposed areas when lowering the highlights in ACR

like i said i might be wrong :P

but part of the reason it only does iso 200 is the raw file manipulation
I think neuro will clear it up eventually, in any case i agree bracketing and using enfuse is a much much better solution

34
EOS-M / Re: Next official EF-M Lens
« on: June 29, 2014, 07:59:48 AM »
but the 15-85 is an awesome single lens option for EF-S which is stellar and shouldn't be that hard to reproduce in EF-M mount
that said i will have a good look at the new tamron 18-200 though

35
EOS Bodies / Re: ISO D+ function
« on: June 29, 2014, 07:44:35 AM »
im pretty sure it does sweet FA in raw but i might be wrong.
It just applies a different process to the raw file than it normally would
check the manual

36
EOS-M / Re: Next official EF-M Lens
« on: June 29, 2014, 07:43:03 AM »
We shouldn't forget that the EOS M was "an experiment", as their CEO said. There are no real rumors about the long-awaited M3. I do still believe that Canon will go mirrorless with their 'normal' SLR's (I expect the 7DII to be the first one -> hybrid VF, stunning video functions, many autofocus points etc.) and they will have an EF mount, otherwise they would kill themselves after building up a lens system for, I don't know, 40 years?! I wouldn't bet on the M system.

an experiment where every piece of glass for the system so far is damn good

37
EOS Bodies / Re: ISO D+ function
« on: June 29, 2014, 07:37:01 AM »
I dont bother
it effects jpg files only
generally it will under expose the shot

38
EOS-M / Re: Next official EF-M Lens
« on: June 29, 2014, 07:33:41 AM »
a 15-85 EF-M would be a winner

39
If Canon bring back the APS-H, It must be in the niche market and meet the following requirement.
1. Smaller than the 6D for portability
2. Same pixel density(or even smaller) than the 1Dx for low light/high ISO performance.
3. Very fast FPS for sports photographer due to lower MP.
4. At least half of the price of 1Dx
Question is at this day of age, how many photographer can live with a 10 to 12 mp camera as a general purpose camera?

Why does it have to be smaller than the 6D when you're going to be hanging big whites off it?
I think a 7D size 24+MP APS-H body would be attractive since the 1D4 is 16MP and $3500 complements the current line alongside the 5D3

yeah I'd be all over that like white on rice if it had the 5D3 AF hell make it 22MP that would give it video abilities similar to the 5D3 too with its 3 to 1 pixel binning for those that care

40
Lighting / Re: Elinchrom - turn off single flash
« on: June 28, 2014, 08:46:54 AM »
i use the odin system with my elinchroms

buy the strato 2 recievers for the elinchroms which are much cheaper than the odin recievers for speedlights
then assing the groups and control everything from the odin controller
another benefit is getting high speed sync out of elinchrom studio lights ;)

41
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon 5 Layer UV, IR, RGB Sensor
« on: June 28, 2014, 08:43:37 AM »
Purely coincidence of course  ;-)

...but a week or two before the 7D was announced, there was a Canon multi-layer patent, which was apparently related to the dual layer one that appeared in the 7D as its metering sensor.

Keith, thanks for the great info as always, and I'm curious, how does the 7D metering sensor compare to the 1D X metering sensor?
the 7D licks balls and the 1Dx doesn't... well thats the short version ;)

42
Re: 16-35mm f/4 IS vs 16-35mm f/2.8 II

From these tests, it looks like
* At f/2.8, the 16-35 II is better because the 16-35 f/4 IS can't do it.

* The 16-35 f/4L IS USM is superior from f/4 through f/8, though at f/8 the difference between the two gets significantly smaller.

* At f/11, the two appear close in sharpness, but the 16-35 f/4 squeaks out a win with just a tad better sharpness and significantly less CA.




Overall, the 16-35 f/4L IS appears to be the superior landscape lens; that being said, the biggest difference appears to be from f/4 - f/8; at f/11, the 16-35 f/2.8 II is quite close.

Canon did a great job on updating the 17-40 with this lens. 

As I stated in other threads, I am holding on to my 16-35 II for f/2.8 at events, especially seeing how close the two are at f/11, where I commonly shoot landscape.  But, if you are primarily a landscape photographer the 16-35mm f/4 IS looks like a must have.

i'm 100% in agreement although i do find i'm using the 11-22 IS on the M alot more for wide stuff where i dont need f2.8 then i have the 50 art on the 5d3 this covers most stuff if i need longer i'll throw the 70-200 on either body or the 135 depends what i have at a particular time

43
EOS-M / Re: What is wrong with the AF speed of the M?
« on: June 27, 2014, 12:21:20 AM »
Dear All,

After running a few tests I was indeed surprised to find out it was kind of 'All in my head' this "the AF being faster with those settings" thing...  :-[ Maybe it was the case before I updated my firmware?? Or maybe I was just dreaming: I am probably not the only M owner having this 'wet' dream about being able to make their baby focusing faster  :P :P :P

Anyways, sorry for making you guys excited for no reason.........don't hate me for it (you hear me Polack dude!)  >:(

different USM lenses perform very differently to each other on the M some are fast while other quite slow also the 22mm pancake is slow but the EF-M STM zooms are faster

44
Now im eyeing on Voigtlander 20mm.  ;D

when when oh when.
It really is a great partner to the 40 and they both use 52mm filters so can share!

45
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D810!!!
« on: June 26, 2014, 12:09:19 AM »
Seems like the 5D iii just got pooped on.  For anyone who can stomach 36MP that is.

Luckily for Canon they have the better lens line-up.  Which is what really matters.
Yeah totally. So now everyone with 5 d 3 had better stop taking good photos because the d810 pooped on em....
 ::)
Soooo  tired of reading this increscent useless drivel in every single thread

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 295