April 21, 2014, 11:54:09 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.

Messages - Dylan777

Pages: 1 ... 66 67 [68] 69 70 ... 210
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: RAW or JPEG
« on: September 23, 2013, 11:14:04 AM »
100% Raw I need all the help I can get too cover my crap technique..
You beat me to the punch. This is exactly my attitude!  :D

I'm 2nd to that...been shooting both Raw + JPEG. With 2 kids(2+5yrs), I have no time for editing raw. Been keeping a lot of jpeg lately :-\

Just get one :) I did, and it is honestly the most "fun" camera I've used.. The design and feel of it just makes it a joy to use, plus there's always something special about looking through a viewfinder to frame, and the IQ is super.. Colour is punchy, skin tones are amazing! And the little flash is great for fill light, especially in day light.. The one draw back though is the AF, for static it's fine but for moving objects it's a bit of a challenge, wish it had the AF of Olympus cameras..

I would buy at heartbeat if the x100s was FF. Since I already have rx1, kinda dif to jump on x100s now. Besides, I need to get my wife a decent gift for our 10yrs anniversary.

If the wife happy, I can get my 400mm f2.8 IS II or 300mm f2.8 IS II sooner  ::)-- ;D ;D

typical gear acquisition syndrome.

with the pocketable cameras from your sig i wonder why a x100?

but if it makes you feel good for a while.... until the next GAS attack.

Indeed :P

I like to try out new gear and don't mind loosing $100 or 2 to sell it.

It's a great camera. I have been thoroughly impressed with OOC jpegs.

I agree, plus the retro look. Looking at jpeg files I shot with x100s, the skin tone seems to be very accurate. The color is more real & pop. 


I rented the X100s for a week and absolutely loved it.  I'd own it, but finances dictated it was a Sigma 35/1.4 for the 6D or the X100s.  The Sigma 35/1.4 was just a better purchase for me at the time.

The JPEGs out of the X100s are beautiful and colourful, the camera is also easy to shoot and quite fast.  I also really liked its strobe exposures.

I'm saving up for 400mm f2.8 IS II, otherwise.... ;)

BTW, the new Sigma 35mm is solid - from quality build to IQ. Can't go wrong with that lens.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Finally did a few paying jobs now what?
« on: September 22, 2013, 05:54:34 PM »
It's not going to be easy. Could take year(s). If you really want it, learn how to master PP. Hint: Lightroom is not enough.

I have 4 friends(pro wedding). First couple years, they made no almost no profits. Years went by, they now top 10 wedding pro in Orange County, CA.


Canon General / Re: Patent: EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS
« on: September 21, 2013, 09:26:29 AM »
If this rumor is true, the price tag will be huge - $2700plus ;)

RX1 > X100s? Or is the rangefinder part that is drawing you to spend you monies?

The design and look of x100s. I don't care much about rangefinder.

Lately, I'm getting lazzy dragging my 5D + L lenses around. My wife and I took a lot photo of our kids. 80 to 90% from RX1 due to compact size of camera. With 2 kids(2&5yrs), I don't have time to edit raw. JPEG file from x100s looks really really good for everyday photos.

I brought my wife to local camera store last week. She wanted a "pink" camera bag for the RX1. While I was there, I got a chance to play with x100s.

I'm NOW having a high fever for it ::) ::) ::)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 2 5d3's or 1d x
« on: September 20, 2013, 09:00:19 AM »
If you need EXTRA speed 1d X is the camera. Otherwise, shooting with x2 5D III is so much easier. I thought I mentioned this in your prev post.

I still don't understand your approach getting 24-70 f4, when you already have 24-70 II :-\ :-\ :-\

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS M Update Information [CR1]
« on: September 19, 2013, 09:14:39 AM »
many more lenses.
Lots of tiny prime lenses (similar to the current 22mm lens size) and a tiny radio trigger ... please
This is what I have in mind:
* EF-M 10mm at least f/4
* EF-M 16mm f/2.8 at least
* EF-M 35mm f/2 at least
* EF-M 50mm f/1.8 at least
* EF-M 85mm f/1.8 at least
* EF-M 100mm Macro f/2.8 at least

* Last but not the least ... a tiny version of the ST-E3-RT speedlite transmitter
That would make me very happy :)

Count me in for these:
EF-M 10mm at least f/4
EF-M 50mm f/1.8 at least

I took this picture with Sony RX100II, in low light. This is 3200ISO, JPEG straight out from camera, zero PP.

RX1 & RX 100 II always amazed me...body size and IQ.

Just incase anyone interested to see the remaining photos:


1st picture was taken this morning, around 5:30AM California time, indoor,with little light at 3200ISO. The remaining photos were taken this afternoon with decent lighting, next to patio door. All jpeg files. Copied straight from camera - zero PP.

The RX100 II is a great small camera for this type of work. It fits in jean and shirt pocket well. It delivers great IQ, even in JPEG. I carry this camera to work everyday.

Ohhh...almost forgot, please excuse my crappy composition:P

Are those diagonal stripes across the UPC bar codes on the original box?  If added by the camera, it really ruins the image.

What "diagonal stripes across the UPC bar codes" are you talking about? I don't see it ???

 All three of the bar codes have stripes on the posted image as viewed on my monitor, which is why I was wondering if they were actually there.  Others are seeing them as well.
I downloaded the image and noted that there were no stripes, but there appeared to be a lot of NR.  Cameras do add NR, even if turned off, and if its set to "Normal", they add more with high ISO.  Its pretty typical of all cameras at high ISO using jpeg.
Can you process a raw image and clean it up so we can see what the camera can really do at its best?
Try resizing the image to 800 pixels on the longest side.  That will prevent the built in resize software in the forum from causing any issues, but it will also prevent viewers from downloading the full size file, so that's unfortunate.  Still, only a few download it for every thousand that view the image as posted.

I don't raw files, just JPEG. It's "normal" NR in camera setting.

Are those diagonal stripes across the UPC bar codes on the original box?  If added by the camera, it really ruins the image.

What "diagonal stripes across the UPC bar codes" are you talking about? I don't see it ???

what amazes me is that people with a 700 euro camera post such "examples".   ;)

i know.. i know.. it´s just a snapshot, an example.
but it reflects bad on you as a photographer nevertheless.
there are sure some more interesting motives around you?

Just helping a friend selling the flash on ebay..that all

Pages: 1 ... 66 67 [68] 69 70 ... 210