August 28, 2014, 09:23:40 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 ... 53 54 [55] 56 57 ... 261
811
Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: April 14, 2014, 10:35:43 AM »
She is gorgeous!
Thanks, Menace, and it's shots like these that have me thinking that I should just cancel the Sigma 50 f/1.4 pre-order.  I'm perfectly happy with the 50L.

I know the feeling ;)
You can always put a red rubber band on the Sigma ;D


812
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Speedlite Tutorials?
« on: April 14, 2014, 10:09:55 AM »
Don't spend another penny until you get, read, and digest, this book. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0321832752/ref=as_li_ss_il?ie=UTF8&tag=pasoroblphot-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0321832752

He has another book too, but this one is more appropriate for you. If his rumoured 600 EX RT book comes out I'd recommend that but it hasn't appeared yet and he now has a full time educators job.

Thanks privatebydesign for the link. I just purchased the material and will try to go through this weekend.

I'm interested getting some lighting for home studio. Not sure if I should get some 600ex rt or just regular studio set. I like the ideal of having speedlite so I can take with me if need it. Any suggestions? Thanks

For a home studio I think the Speedlite route is the way to go. They are nowhere near as powerful, but for most people they are way more practical.

Stands: Manfrotto 420, a boom stand should be everyone's first stand, then I really like the stacking Manfrottos at whatever size you like, I have the BAC 1052's.

Umbrella brackets: There are many but the Manfrotto 026 (?) is the industry standard. I'd go for metal ones over the poly and plastic ones.

Modifiers: This is where it gets involved, but I'd suggest a Westcott Apollo 26" softbox, I prefer them to the Lastolite style. A convertible umbrella. A 5-1 reflector around 36" and I really like the collapsible style 78" kits, they give you huge scrims as well as black and white backgrounds.

This gives you enough to play with and to see what kind of light you prefer and the direction you'd like to go in, without committing too much money to something you won't use in the future.

Get a couple of gel sample books from B&H too, they cost $2.50 and are so much fun, they also teach you a huge amount about where your light is going.

Thanks privatebydesign, I'll put my BH rewards to work. Kinda wait for some rebates from Canon.

813
EOS-M / Re: Canon EOS M3 in Q3 of 2014?
« on: April 14, 2014, 09:13:50 AM »
I hope that one of them will be FF with dual pixel AF :).

Now, that sounds "promosing" for Canon in term of mirrorless. Many Canon shooters are way too deep into the EF L lenses. To attract current DSLR users, just add an EF adapter to it.
 

814
EOS-M / Re: Canon EOS M3 in Q3 of 2014?
« on: April 14, 2014, 09:11:33 AM »
The 2 models will be split into entry level and prosumer.

Who cares? Just give us ONE camera that is on par with the FUJIFILM X-E2, Olympus E-P5, Sony A6000 and Panasonic GX7 ... as a minimum. Then add weather-sealing as the trump card.

Still not enough, even Fuji going FF mirrorless. Sony has raised the bar in mirrorless world...others are playing catchup.

Edit: Sony out sold Canon in ONE country ;D
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/korea-sony-sells-more-system-cameras-than-canon/


815
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: FUJIFILM'S latest, X-T1 ?
« on: April 14, 2014, 01:34:59 AM »
added the new 56mm 1.2 to the X-T1 today. super sharp and super bokeh.

Beautiful shot.

If you have time, would you pls show a photo or two of X-t1 + 56mm f1.2 combo ::)


816
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM
« on: April 14, 2014, 01:29:21 AM »
Recycle me

Lovely :)

Thanks Menace.

I like this one a lot....classic head shot of 85L II

817
Lenses / Re: New 50mm Sigma ? There are other options !
« on: April 14, 2014, 01:09:32 AM »
Interesting theories regarding the price drop. I believe there has to be some truth in the fact that these lenses were originally intended to be quite high market and fill the gap between Ls which have not yet come out ( 35 1.4L II , 50 1.2 II L ) etc and sit above the entry level primes. It seems owning both the 24 and 35 IS that the 35 is ahead of the game glass wise. I have also owned the new 40 2.8 which i did not click with and ended up selling a month or two after getting it. Did not have the sharpness or unique quality that the 35 IS has.

Someone mentioned wondering why i posted two shots that werent at F2 , well simply because a large majority of shots at a wedding are not F2 as its just too shallow at close range. however the abililty to use the F2 when i want to artistically produces better results than the 24-70 2.8 and the added benefit of the IS makes it a great low light lens during church ceremonies and for detailed shots without flash. There is also the added bonus of its great close up ability and its light weight along with its very good build quality and fast af.

Someone else mentioned they were surprised I have just noticed primes. Thats not really the case i have a house full of old cameras with primes and adapters to fit them to my DSLR i have played with for years. It was the leap from the safety of a zoom to the primes which require a little more thought which was always the hurdle. For years i told myself that the 24-70 2.8L was the best lens for weddings ever - probably following the flock a little ! I cannot comment on the new 24-70 2.8II L though as i have not used it so whether that can get close to the prime someone else will need to answer.

This is a list of the lenses /Cameras I have used extensively from which i am using to judge this 5d3+35 IS combo from when i started with digital around 2004

Pentax istD
Pentax istDS
Pentax k100, k200, k10, k20
Canon 5Mk1
Canon 5Dmk2
Canon 5dmk3

Tokina RMC 17mm - amazing lens for its age
Sigma 10-20 - staple diet wide angle for many years
Sigma 105 macro - noisy but good if it didnt scare your subject away or squash it
Sigma 70-300 - absolutely diabolical
Sigma 50mm 1.4 old one - poor back focussing issues
Pentax 16-55 - really good expensive lens
Pentax 18-55 - noisy and cheap but did the job
Canon 17-40L great lens but took a wack and fell to bits !
Canon 24-70 2.8L mk1 - fab lens used it for years just a bit on the heavy side and could be sharper
Canon 24-105 F4L still own this one - very sharp and very versatile just struggles in low light , used in the second photographers kit
Canon 50 1.2L never really got on with this one wasn't a range i liked but the glass was good
Canon 50 1.4 still have this as a back up as its not really worth selling , used in the second photographers kit
Canon 40mm 2.8 STM impulse purchase which i ended up sellling again , pretty average on all counts
Canon 85mm 1.8 part of current kit really like this lens lovely bokeh fast focus
Canon 70-200 F4 still have this in our kit good for longer distance work very fast light and sharp
Canon 200mm 2.8L owned this ahead of its time when i just started out and didnt really understand primes that well , wish now i had never sold it as it was a lovely lens and will probably buy another !
Canon 35mm F2 IS - current main lens absolutely love it sharp fast low light and close ups quality equal to Ls
Canon 24mm 2.8IS good landscaper and for wider interiors , glass not as good as the best L stuff but still good

That hopefull demonstrates where i am coming from with the judgement on the 35 f2 IS

Bokeh of the 35 f2 IS is very good , i am not sure i would say it is the best - to be honest i have a Super Takumar from the late 1960s 55 1.8 which has the creamiest bokeh i have ever seen in a lens - if it was AF i would use it all the time ! I would not be suprised if the sigma 35 and 50 art have slightly better bokeh but then i would be looking more for 85 135 or 200 anyway if bokeh was the main concern. For me the main concern was being able to shoot in low light, and thats what this lens is the master of - 35mm F2 with four stop IS , not sure if that will be better any time soon ?


Cheers
Andrew
www.andrew-davies.com

Andrew...after looking through your list of lenses used, I would suggest that you're missing two of Canon's best...24-70ii and 70-200ii.

These two lenses truly are "prime eliminators"....unless you need the extra light below 2.8.

+1...plus 85L II(a magical portrait lens for wedding pros) + 135L

818
Lenses / Re: 135mm L if I already got the 100mm L?
« on: April 13, 2014, 07:21:11 PM »
I have both and a 70-200 2.8 II and use them all quite a bit.  To me the extra stop of light (f/2) of the 135L sets it apart from the zoom and Macro.  Here is what I use each for:

100L Macro - Macro, limited portraits and occasionally as a longer compliment to my 24-70 2.8 II
135L - Portraits and light weight tele option to go with my 24-70 2.8 II.  Terrific sports lens and I use to shoot my sons high school wresting and golf meets.
70-200 - Great all purpose lens for outdoor activities with the kids in conjunction with a wider lens (35-50mm or EOS M and 22/2).  I also use it for portraits when I want something longer than 135mm

I really enjoy the 85-200mm focal ranges, so for me having these three lenses works out well.  I have a friend who thinks I'm crazy for having all three, but he prefers and takes most of his pictures from 17-85mm, so he has 7 primes in that range.  So, depends on what you shoot and your personal preferences.

-1

Some people think I have too many similar lenses ::)

819
Lenses / Re: 135mm L if I already got the 100mm L?
« on: April 13, 2014, 07:17:39 PM »
I've got the 100mm L and I'm very pleased with the IQ.
I've seen very nice pictures made with the 135mm L, not only portraits, but also flowers etc.
Do you think the 135mm L will be used if I already got the 100mm L.
Or will a buy be a waste of money.
The 70-200 mm will be another target in the nearby future by the way.

I do not have 100mm L. However, I have 135L & 70-200 f2.8 IS II.

Since I have two 5D III, my setups are:
1. Decent lighting & short distance: 24-70 II + 70-200 f2.8 IS II
2. Decent lighting & longer distance: 70-200 f2.8 IS II + 400mm f2.8 IS II
3. Extreme low light: 50L + 135L
4. Portrait: 85L II

Of course you can always mix-it-up when having mutliple lenses

820
Lenses / Re: Focal lengths
« on: April 13, 2014, 01:40:15 PM »
I'm not lucky as Neuro and Eldar.

Longest focal length I have is 560mm(400mm f2.8 IS II + 1.4x III TC)

821
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Paidha, Uganda
« on: April 13, 2014, 01:00:49 PM »
I LOVE the film PP style. These are WONDERFUL photos. Thanks for sharing Dan :)

822
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM
« on: April 13, 2014, 12:51:55 PM »
Recycle me

823
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art
« on: April 13, 2014, 11:26:57 AM »
Would the price come down a bit if I wait for a few months?

Sigma 50mm ART production lines are in high gear. I bet 10cents that the price will not drop within few months. If you in need for 50mm, I say go for it. Just enjoy the best from Sigma.

824
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF-M 22-46mm f/3.5-5.6
« on: April 13, 2014, 11:20:52 AM »
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=16342"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=16342">Tweet</a></div>
<p>A patent which appears to be for the EF-M mount has appeared. In APS-C, this lens would be a 35-75mm f/3.5-5.6.</p>
<p>Canon has stated that more lenses are coming for EOS M, and that could potentially mean the North American and European markets are still on Canon’s radar for the EOS M system. My bet is we’ll see an EOS M3 to re-introduce the product line to a global market.</p>
<p><strong>Patent Publication No. 2014-63025 (Google Translation)</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Publication date 2014.4.10</li>
<li>Filing date 2012.9.21</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Example 7</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Zoom ratio 2.09</li>
<li>Focal length f = 22.10-34.22-45.19mm</li>
<li>Fno. 3.60-4.59-5.60</li>
<li>Half angle ω = 31.72-21.76-16.48 °</li>
<li>Image height 13.66mm</li>
<li>65.76-62.07-64.72mm lens length</li>
<li>BF 28.16-36.88-45.09mm</li>
</ul>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2014-04-12" target="_blank">EG</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>


Needs to be FF, otherwises :-\ :-\ :-\

825
Lenses / Re: New lens - Sigma vs. Canon
« on: April 12, 2014, 11:34:45 PM »
I had 17-55 back in 2008, was shooting with 40D & 60D. This is a GREAT lens.

Haven't touch the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 yet, no comment. As Neuro mentioned, "the 18-35 would be very tempting"

Will be diff. decision ;)

Pages: 1 ... 53 54 [55] 56 57 ... 261