July 30, 2014, 06:43:27 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 - tron

Pages: 1 ... 49 50 [51] 52 53 ... 120
751
EOS Bodies / Re: Pick between two options for the Canon 7D II
« on: June 25, 2013, 12:05:20 PM »
You missed the third oneā€¦ Availability.
;D

752
Canon General / Re: Is this a fair offer for an on location job?
« on: June 23, 2013, 07:16:59 AM »
I wouldn't do it if I didn't keep the copyright of my work period.
It isn't worth even for practicing. I believe they are trying to take advantage of you.

753
EOS Bodies / Re: Is This the EOS 3D?
« on: June 22, 2013, 11:33:14 PM »
It's the super-secret 9D..... A camera so secret that it uses the number of a different rumoured camera on it's strap....
So if the camera could speak it would say: My name is D ... 9D  ;D

754
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Just Dropped my 17-40L...
« on: June 22, 2013, 11:29:20 PM »
Last year I was shooting at an archaeological place and I dropped my 24 TS-E 24mm II.
Immediately I put my foot and decelerated its fall a lot. It landed at a wooden floor. It had its cap.
Nothing happened not even a scratch on the  plastic areas    8)

I still try to figure how on earth my 5D2's screen was damaged. Screens are inside and cannot in any way be harmed by a dropping lens (I hadn't put any finger inside).

Anyway I happened to have a Grid Screen which I hadn't used yet. So I replaced the screen and everything was as good as new  :)

755
Unfortunately I was not able to get it behind an ancient temple. So I took a few shots of it.

This is a 100% crop (5D3, 500mm f/4L II, EF2XII).

756
Lenses / Re: A wise lens upgrade?
« on: June 21, 2013, 09:43:58 PM »
Have you considered that you would switch between these two lenses probably often?

757
Lenses / Re: to TS-E or not to TS-E?
« on: June 21, 2013, 10:18:06 AM »
to TS-E by all means. I have got both TS-E 17 and TS-E 24 II and I have no regrets.

They are both part of my travel kit. 

758
A 14-24 f/2.8 would be a very cool lens, negatives include the inevitable stratospheric price and the inevitable bulbous, vulnerable front element that couldn't take filters. For my priorities, use and needs, such a lens would come a fairly close second to an upgraded 16-35 f/2.8 MkIII. Currently my very occasional ultra-wide needs are handled by a very good copy of the Sigma 12-24. These are OK lenses for occasional careful use, but YMMV.

The current 16-35 f/2.8II is a usefully competent lens, but not one that anybody could describe as consistently stellar. Used carefully, it does the job pretty well. The new 24-70 f/2.8II has given us a taste of what Canon is capable of, but given the usual life spans of Canon glass, I doubt there will be a 16-35 f/2.8III for quite some time.

-PW
+1 A 16-35 f/2.8III that has IQ comparable to 24-70 2.8 II would be ideal. I would get that lens to use with my Lee filter base. Now it seems we will wait a few more years ...  :(

759
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: My new camera!
« on: June 20, 2013, 09:23:45 PM »
I'm going to wait for the 1D X starts selling on ebay @ that price ;D
Hmmm I "see" your kids having their own ... kids by then  ;D

760
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM
« on: June 20, 2013, 03:44:05 PM »
When I bought the 100l I kinda swore I wouldn't have to get the 135. Just got it, haven't seen the magic yet. Probably won't get to use it till July :(
Never say never  ;D

761
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: June 20, 2013, 03:41:38 PM »
Excellent news! I've had my mouse hovering over the buy button of a 16-35II or 14II for some time

you and me both; for once, the timing of this rumor is a benefit!

16-50 f/4 would fit the crop bodies, to be sure, but wouldn't compete directly with the 17-55 due to the aperture.  I can see room for all three -- the 16-50 f/4, 16-35 III, and 14-24
I found a mint & cheap 14mm II so no regrets. However, I was sorry I lost a 16-35 2.8 II used sale.
Not any more. I will use my 16-35 2.8 version 1 and my fixed wide angle lenses in the meantime  ;D

762
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: June 20, 2013, 04:42:28 AM »
Just give me an ultra sharp 16-35mm f/2.8L III please...

763
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: June 20, 2013, 04:41:19 AM »
Once the 14-24 comes out, many of those who had converted to Nikon might convert back without second thought.
;D  ;D  ;D

764
I am really racially ambiguous.  I can look Chinese, Hawaiian, Philippino, or Hispanic on any given day... so I wasn't given the foreigner treatment when I was there.
Have you considered a career in spying? ;D ... from what I read in the news these days, spies of a powerful nation are getting caught or being accused daily of spying ... with their reputation at stake these days, I'm sure their secret service can use someone like you, with unique abilities to blend as well as your great photographic skill ... that's a rare combination ... I bet you'd get paid handsomely.
Plus, part of the payment could be in the form of big White Canon lenses  ;D

765
Landscape / Re: Stars above.
« on: June 19, 2013, 12:15:37 PM »
....... I had too much light pollution from Margaret River (WA) Town nearby.

That's a very manageable level of light pollution and easily processed out, based on the amount of detail visible in the Milky Way.  I visited Perth/Fremantle >30 years ago, I'll never forget the night skies. 

A couple of quick processing tutorials I put together for my astronomy club friends, specifically for dealing with moderate amounts of light pollution.  First one is for Photoshop, second for GIMP.

pbase(dot)com(slash)emagowan(slash)processing
pbase(dot)com(slash)emagowan(slash)processing_with_gimp
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

Pages: 1 ... 49 50 [51] 52 53 ... 120