3121
Australia / Re: C'mon Aussies
« on: February 02, 2012, 07:00:48 AM »C'mon Aussies I mustn't be the only one that regularly visits Canon rumors!im pretty regular
June 20, 2013, 07:26:25 AM
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.
3122
Canon General / Re: Truth in photography
« on: February 02, 2012, 06:26:09 AM »
An interesting question. Here is my take.
I do feel angry when a photographer misrepresents or lies about a photograph, I find this is usually because they are insecure and protective of their secrets they never want anyone else to be able to reproduce what they did. Many of these people run workshops and such, charge astounding prices but they never truely reveal all the secrets to their spellbound audience they give them enough to keep them on the hook but not enough to get as good as them. Especially when t comes to the post processing tricks they use you will find them very ellusive and cagey.
When I first discovered HDR i was blown away I just couldnt work out how to get those results so i researched it and bought the software and practised it and read everything from trey ratcliff, bought all his books and once i worked out how to get all that out of photomatix i got bored of it and really dislike the photomatix outputs now. However I still hold trey in the absolute highest regard. The guy has first class business and moral ethics. He is totally open about the level of maniplutaion he applies and if you look at his blog he does post normal photos he takes from time to time that arent hdr and he is a tallented photographer. While I no longer like the look of most of his work i Respect him alot, I have hoped he evolves his HDR technique and workflow away from using photomatix because I personally think photomatix really can ruin potentially good images. The guy is down to earth honest and still high on my list of favourite photographers primarily because of his ethics and attitude even though his work no longer does it for me.
It seems to me that there is an alarming trend in digital photography to heavy over saturation and "fine art" seems to be the worst offenders they also seem to be the most prevalent in misrepresenting the truth about the creation of the image. several recent threads have highlighted this to me, that one about the hassleblad competition for instance, this peter lik shinanigans, almost all landscapes wannabe landscapes seem to have heavy amounts of added saturation. I understand the photo needs to pop and grab the viewers attention you dont want it to be bland and uninteresting but that line between acceptable and hideous is very very fine and what makes it harder still is everyones tollerance to this is different.
I do feel angry when a photographer misrepresents or lies about a photograph, I find this is usually because they are insecure and protective of their secrets they never want anyone else to be able to reproduce what they did. Many of these people run workshops and such, charge astounding prices but they never truely reveal all the secrets to their spellbound audience they give them enough to keep them on the hook but not enough to get as good as them. Especially when t comes to the post processing tricks they use you will find them very ellusive and cagey.
When I first discovered HDR i was blown away I just couldnt work out how to get those results so i researched it and bought the software and practised it and read everything from trey ratcliff, bought all his books and once i worked out how to get all that out of photomatix i got bored of it and really dislike the photomatix outputs now. However I still hold trey in the absolute highest regard. The guy has first class business and moral ethics. He is totally open about the level of maniplutaion he applies and if you look at his blog he does post normal photos he takes from time to time that arent hdr and he is a tallented photographer. While I no longer like the look of most of his work i Respect him alot, I have hoped he evolves his HDR technique and workflow away from using photomatix because I personally think photomatix really can ruin potentially good images. The guy is down to earth honest and still high on my list of favourite photographers primarily because of his ethics and attitude even though his work no longer does it for me.
It seems to me that there is an alarming trend in digital photography to heavy over saturation and "fine art" seems to be the worst offenders they also seem to be the most prevalent in misrepresenting the truth about the creation of the image. several recent threads have highlighted this to me, that one about the hassleblad competition for instance, this peter lik shinanigans, almost all landscapes wannabe landscapes seem to have heavy amounts of added saturation. I understand the photo needs to pop and grab the viewers attention you dont want it to be bland and uninteresting but that line between acceptable and hideous is very very fine and what makes it harder still is everyones tollerance to this is different.
3123
Canon General / Re: What should be my first dslr?
« on: February 02, 2012, 05:36:03 AM »
I'd also recommend going with B&H they are very good
3124
EOS Bodies / Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« on: February 02, 2012, 04:43:34 AM »http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150478730122996&set=pu.164554897995&type=1
Lots of people telling him over on Facebook.
ROFL @ the flamewar between the sack ryders and the h8t0rs
so funny
3125
Lenses / Re: How do you think we should spend the money?
« on: February 02, 2012, 04:29:18 AM »
Just checked through ebay
you could possibly get $400 for the 70-300
and maybe $400 for the T1i
so you have $4800 budget
and still have the
17-40
50mm f1.4
430ex
firstly i assume you will both be shooting so you NEED 2 good bodies
I would say with that $4800 you might be able to swing an extra deal from b&h if you ring them up and see what they can do
see if you can get 2 x 5D2 bodies a canon 85mm f1.8 and another 430ex flash
I think its doeable on that budget
you need both you and your wife to be able to shoot comfortably without feeling they are using the crap camera so avoid problems get 2 the same then just change lens duties have a look on this sit in the lens section at samples of shot people have taken with the 85 f1.8 its a stellar lens for cheap half the price of the sigma
you both NEED flash the long end you need zoom less than the wide end IMO as you are shooting portrait tighter head shots I find the 85 perfect and the wide end zoom gives you some flexability
the other side effect of shooting primes is because you are naturally moving around more you discover different angles that you might miss when depending on zoom
since you are getting into weddings here are a couple of links to start you out with a laugh
you could possibly get $400 for the 70-300
and maybe $400 for the T1i
so you have $4800 budget
and still have the
17-40
50mm f1.4
430ex
firstly i assume you will both be shooting so you NEED 2 good bodies
I would say with that $4800 you might be able to swing an extra deal from b&h if you ring them up and see what they can do
see if you can get 2 x 5D2 bodies a canon 85mm f1.8 and another 430ex flash
I think its doeable on that budget
you need both you and your wife to be able to shoot comfortably without feeling they are using the crap camera so avoid problems get 2 the same then just change lens duties have a look on this sit in the lens section at samples of shot people have taken with the 85 f1.8 its a stellar lens for cheap half the price of the sigma
you both NEED flash the long end you need zoom less than the wide end IMO as you are shooting portrait tighter head shots I find the 85 perfect and the wide end zoom gives you some flexability
the other side effect of shooting primes is because you are naturally moving around more you discover different angles that you might miss when depending on zoom
since you are getting into weddings here are a couple of links to start you out with a laugh
| Judge Joe Brown - Cheap wedding photographer | Small | Large |
| Wedding Photography | Small | Large |
3126
Lenses / Re: Lens Decision Conundrum
« on: February 02, 2012, 02:03:29 AM »
I find the 50 f1.4 on a 5D2 is fine for group shots of 5 or 6 I have shot groups of much bigger but you have to move wayyyyyy back and its a pain, times like that i wish i had 24mm or 35mm but if you family groups dont regularly exceed 5 or 6 people the 50 will be fine.
edit: if you are using flash the 24-105 is outstanding
edit: if you are using flash the 24-105 is outstanding
3127
Lenses / Re: How do you think we should spend the money?
« on: February 02, 2012, 01:56:20 AM »
Well interesting proposition
can you still get your hands on 5D mk2 bodies for close to 2k?
I think your 3 existing lenses are good enough for a start and give you good platform to build from
I say spend your $4k on 2 5Dmk2 bodies. Then put them to work with the glass you have, sell the T1i and buy another strobe 430 or 580 exii if you can. now you have enough solid kit to support 2 shooters I also suggest grabbing a couple of yongnuo external battery packs for the flashes from ebay (under $40 each).
Once this setup starts bring in some coin maybe the 5D3 will be on the shelves and you can get a couple of those to give each shooter a second body and start adding lenses
a slight variation would be
Seriously consider the sigma 85mm f1.4 on a 5Dmk2 I have found that shooting weddings I love this lens it has taken over most of the duty i used the 70-200 for, at f2 it is significantly sharper than the 70-200 f2.8 is at f2.8
just needs some feet zooming. the other massive benefit is its much lighter than the 70-200 so much less of a drag over the course of a 10 hour wedding shoot. so perhaps consider getting rid of the 70-300 and picking up the sigma 85. I could quite comfortably shoot a full wedding with the 16-35 f2.8 on my 1Dmk3 and the 85 f1.4 on the 5D with the 50 f1.4 that i quite often swap onto the 5D2 at the reception because the 85 is a bit long and the 50 on the 5D2. your 17-40 is close enough to the 16-35 just a stop slower however you will be shooting 2 or more people with this lens more often than not so will be chasing f5.6 or f8 anyway so it will be just fine if the sigma makes it too expensive look at the canon 85f1.8 too as an alternate.
In summary both shooters need a good body (5D2 each) and a good piece of glass each plus a capable flash each look at selling the zoom and the T1i pick up a couple of bargain 5Dmk2's (price might drop more once the 5D3 is actually announced, its a bit of a gamble though and if they can start earning you money right now it outweighs any minor saving on the gear cost) then get a sigma 85 f1.4 and another flash, then you are set with one shooter in close and wide with the 17-40 and possibly changing to the 50 f1.4 as needed with the other shooting longer over the top with the 85. then at reception you have two 1.4 lenses for low light duty (you will still need flash here but the fast glass and high iso lets you expose for the background and fill flash or bounce flash even in a dim lit reception getting nice vibrant shots and often good bokeh
down the track once money isnt such an issue you can pick up a 70-200 if you think you need more reach and look at some more glass as well as the extra bodies
oh i forgot to add if you havent already get yourselves a rapid strap each it will save your necks and backs
can you still get your hands on 5D mk2 bodies for close to 2k?
I think your 3 existing lenses are good enough for a start and give you good platform to build from
I say spend your $4k on 2 5Dmk2 bodies. Then put them to work with the glass you have, sell the T1i and buy another strobe 430 or 580 exii if you can. now you have enough solid kit to support 2 shooters I also suggest grabbing a couple of yongnuo external battery packs for the flashes from ebay (under $40 each).
Once this setup starts bring in some coin maybe the 5D3 will be on the shelves and you can get a couple of those to give each shooter a second body and start adding lenses
a slight variation would be
Seriously consider the sigma 85mm f1.4 on a 5Dmk2 I have found that shooting weddings I love this lens it has taken over most of the duty i used the 70-200 for, at f2 it is significantly sharper than the 70-200 f2.8 is at f2.8
just needs some feet zooming. the other massive benefit is its much lighter than the 70-200 so much less of a drag over the course of a 10 hour wedding shoot. so perhaps consider getting rid of the 70-300 and picking up the sigma 85. I could quite comfortably shoot a full wedding with the 16-35 f2.8 on my 1Dmk3 and the 85 f1.4 on the 5D with the 50 f1.4 that i quite often swap onto the 5D2 at the reception because the 85 is a bit long and the 50 on the 5D2. your 17-40 is close enough to the 16-35 just a stop slower however you will be shooting 2 or more people with this lens more often than not so will be chasing f5.6 or f8 anyway so it will be just fine if the sigma makes it too expensive look at the canon 85f1.8 too as an alternate.
In summary both shooters need a good body (5D2 each) and a good piece of glass each plus a capable flash each look at selling the zoom and the T1i pick up a couple of bargain 5Dmk2's (price might drop more once the 5D3 is actually announced, its a bit of a gamble though and if they can start earning you money right now it outweighs any minor saving on the gear cost) then get a sigma 85 f1.4 and another flash, then you are set with one shooter in close and wide with the 17-40 and possibly changing to the 50 f1.4 as needed with the other shooting longer over the top with the 85. then at reception you have two 1.4 lenses for low light duty (you will still need flash here but the fast glass and high iso lets you expose for the background and fill flash or bounce flash even in a dim lit reception getting nice vibrant shots and often good bokeh
down the track once money isnt such an issue you can pick up a 70-200 if you think you need more reach and look at some more glass as well as the extra bodies
oh i forgot to add if you havent already get yourselves a rapid strap each it will save your necks and backs
3128
Lenses / Re: If you could buy one ...
« on: February 01, 2012, 07:57:11 PM »
out of those choices for me it would be the 50 f1.2L for sure, I'm not a fan of the 24-70
3129
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Joe McNally - Nikon D4
« on: February 01, 2012, 05:26:35 PM »I think I watched the part with the model and the snake about... oh... 40 times. Stunning, stunning girl. Every time I watch a Joe McNally video, I buy another 580EXII and another FlexTT5. Your really can't have enough of them.
So its YOU i keep bidding against on ebay for more 580s everytime he releases a new video or book!
3130
EOS Bodies / Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« on: February 01, 2012, 05:17:29 PM »Can't say I care too much whether its "real" or not but I do care that its garish rubbish.But hes sold 200 million in limited edition prints and is a master of photography! and has memberships to all the exclusive clubs
But on a more serious note i do feel like saying "put down the mouse and step away from the saturation slider!" with a loud horn
3131
EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« on: February 01, 2012, 05:10:42 PM »
Just some advice to anyone seriously considering switching to Nikon.
Nikon are not without their faults, before switching make sure you are happy with the controls and button layout. Once I got used to the canon system I found the Nikon system more clunky and hate some of the button placements. also that dpad on the back they have is really crap, The canon wheel and joystick blows Nikon out of the water here. Also have had the controller wheels become intermittently faulty in the past and hence making it really hard to change things like shutter speed and aperture.
As others have mentioned lenses tend to be a little more pricey however they do have a few stunning lenses
14-24, 50mm f1.4, 105 f2.8 Micro, 70-200 f2.8VR and the 200-400 to name a few
Nikon are not without their faults, before switching make sure you are happy with the controls and button layout. Once I got used to the canon system I found the Nikon system more clunky and hate some of the button placements. also that dpad on the back they have is really crap, The canon wheel and joystick blows Nikon out of the water here. Also have had the controller wheels become intermittently faulty in the past and hence making it really hard to change things like shutter speed and aperture.
As others have mentioned lenses tend to be a little more pricey however they do have a few stunning lenses
14-24, 50mm f1.4, 105 f2.8 Micro, 70-200 f2.8VR and the 200-400 to name a few
3132
Lenses / Re: 24, 35 or 70-200
« on: January 31, 2012, 11:53:15 PM »
have you considered the 16-35 f2.8? this will cover everyling wider than your 50 is quite compact and will be fine when you get full frame however the caveat to this is on a full frame is is very wide so you change the way you use it. you could also get the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS and get image stabiliser, the 17-55 hold value very well so you could just sell it when you move to full frame on the long end you might want to consider the 100 f2.8L macro it will give you 160 for the long end and is awesome for portraits and an exceptionally sharp lens and of course it can take pictures of really small stuff too, its light and more stealth than the 70-200.
you can get the 16-35 f2.8 and the 100 f2.8L together for less than the 70-200 f2.8L IS2
just a few things to ponder
you can get the 16-35 f2.8 and the 100 f2.8L together for less than the 70-200 f2.8L IS2
just a few things to ponder
3133
EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* New High-End DSLR Later in February [CR3]
« on: January 31, 2012, 11:44:23 PM »Not to bash CR or anything, but I find that many times some rumors are poorly phased so that they ate misleading. I hope it's not the case this time as now it's CR3 saying that a new high-end camera in February. I just hope it's not like, wait, it should be later "than" February.
It's a rumor site, nature of the beast.
Just think of it as Canon foreplay. I'm excited for the release too, but hell, its still fun!
LOL @ "canon foreplay" I love it
3134
EOS Bodies / Re: From NL: Wait for 5D3 could be longer
« on: January 31, 2012, 11:42:55 PM »
just because they release a 5Dmk3 doesnt automatically mean they have to stop selling 5D mk2 I mean the 5d mk3 will come in at a higher price point. I can totally see canon resetting the 5D2 price to $1999 once the 5D3 is out and keep selling them to people that dont need AF. for example you can still buy 550D cameras new even though the 600D has been out for ages and soon to be superceeded by the 650D. I think the 5D2 will still be a solid seller in the sub 2k category as it does give good bang for your buck , just my thoughts on it anyway
, just my thoughts on it anyway
3135
Lenses / Re: Revolutionizing the kit zoom
« on: January 31, 2012, 11:35:47 PM »1) if there were a market for it, somebody would be doing it. Do you see Nikon doing these lenses? How about aftermarket, do you see Tokina, Sigma, Tamron doing it? The market (not you but most buyers of DSLR's) WANTS tjhat 18 - 55 more than a wider apertureThis is exactly why the 16-35 f2.8L is perfect on the APS-H sensor you get 20-48 f2.8 but lose all the negatives of the lens due to the 1.3 crop. still get a bit of barrel distortion but lens correction in LR takes care of that. it is the sharpest zoom lens body combo in that range you can get. Another REALLY nice benefit is the lens is non extending and weather sealed where as the 24-70 and 24-105s etc all have an extending barrel
2) bratkinson is right on about the weight issue, you need all the elements of the lens to be bigger, there's even more of an issue on sharpness (at the corners in particular); and then all that weight means bigger motors to move it; and then you have a width problem putting it on the lens; all that is cost and you end up with a lens not much cheaper than a "L" lens
3) you do understand that most lenses are DESIGNED to be their sharpest at F 8 - F 11 and any wider also has a fall off in sharpness (but I agree on using primes; most zooms are designed to be sharp only near the center of the range and edge or center sharpness falls off in both directions; many simply should not be used at their widest except in emergencies)