September 19, 2014, 08:18:52 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 - Drizzt321

Pages: 1 ... 44 45 [46] 47 48 ... 112
676
Lenses / Re: Any one ever seen a zoom extender
« on: May 07, 2013, 04:24:23 PM »
Years ago, I had a Vivitar extender that was coupled with a variable extension tube - it was quite useful for macro. I suppose you could say it allowed independent control of magnification.

That's different than what OP was referring to. An extension tube is, as you say, is good for macro photography. Not so good for increasing the focal length which is what OP was talking about. A variable extension tube is pretty simple, since extension tubes are basically just empty space (such as bellows), whereas tele-converters usually contain 1 or more lens elements to re-focus the image to get it to hit the focal plane correctly.

Yea, a zoom Extender, TC - not an extension tube.  If not continuous, how about a stacked option - similar to the pending 200-400. Move a different power extender into position.  Perhaps 1.0, 1.2 and 1.4 options

From the lack of anyone have seen such a device I suspect that it optically very difficult at best

Well, sure, you can stack TC's now, they just are different physical things. I imagine it'd be quite a bit more complicated to have one device that you introduce the different optics into position. More complicated mechanically, which introduces many more points of failure, and probably much more complicated optically unless it simply lifts one of the optics out of the way and puts another in it's place. Theoretically possible...but why? Just pull off the lens, and stack your TCs.

677
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Do you trust your camera?
« on: May 06, 2013, 06:34:37 PM »
I trust my camera, but only to a certain point. I just learn the limitations, and where it starts to no longer function quite as desired, and then figure out a workaround if necessary.

Granted, I have a 5d3, but was shooting a 5d2 before. Really it comes down to experience with your equipment, regardless of what it is. Once you have the requisite experience, and know the strengths and weaknesses, you have trust that you can get the image you want with what you have. It sounds like you've shot a lot of photos, but have you really thought about what you are doing and why during certain types of subjects and situations you are photographing? Have you tried shooting one way, then shooting a different way in similar situations and see if one way gives you better images (subject to what you consider a better image)?

One thing which would help you (if Canon would implement it) is AFMA which can help avoid AF misses due to slight front/back focusing problems. Your idea to take multiple shots is a good one, especially if you are working with a low shutter speed since your 2nd or 3rd photo will likely when you are in a more stable position, instead of slightly moving the camera as you press the shutter button.

678
Lenses / Re: Lens Flare
« on: May 06, 2013, 06:27:45 PM »
Using a hood designed for the 50 f/1.8 you should be fine, however if the light source is within the field of view, then a lens hood probably won't help because it's going to project light into the lens anyway. You can always use your hand or piece of cardboard/posterboard or something and hold it just out of the frame while still blocking the light from the source. Personally I'm not sure I would spend the money given the lens is so cheap. I'd put the money towards saving up for a better lens, which probably will also control lens flare better.

679
Animal Kingdom / Re: Honey Bees
« on: May 06, 2013, 05:24:38 PM »
where's my industrial sized can of raid when you need it lol

For shame! Honey bees are your friend. It's wasps and hornets that you pull out the big guns and go in with overwhelming force.

Mt Spokane, I don't suppose you could have a bee keeper open one up and get some macro shots of them working inside on the honeycomb? Or do some of them climbing in and out or something. That could be some neat shots :)

680
Lenses / Re: Poll: Most Wanted New Lenses of 2013.
« on: May 06, 2013, 05:21:44 PM »
You left off the 24-105 f/2.8L IS USM with near Macro (0.7x or better) capabilities that's nearly as sharp as the new 24-70 v2.

Joking aside, for me it's the 135L (1.8 or 2, either one, but with IS and even better optics) or the 14-24 2.8 that has little distortion and is very sharp.

681
Lenses / Re: Any one ever seen a zoom extender
« on: May 06, 2013, 05:17:58 PM »
Years ago, I had a Vivitar extender that was coupled with a variable extension tube - it was quite useful for macro. I suppose you could say it allowed independent control of magnification.

That's different than what OP was referring to. An extension tube is, as you say, is good for macro photography. Not so good for increasing the focal length which is what OP was talking about. A variable extension tube is pretty simple, since extension tubes are basically just empty space (such as bellows), whereas tele-converters usually contain 1 or more lens elements to re-focus the image to get it to hit the focal plane correctly.

682
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS
« on: May 06, 2013, 01:49:00 PM »
This lens has one significant issue: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC which is around 30% cheaper in my country. Professionals will probably take the absolute best = Canon 24-70 f/2.8 Mk. II and hobbyists will either take the absolute best (if they can afford it) or the best in cost/performance ratio = Tamron. IMO the main market for this lens will be using it as a new kit lens for FF bodies.

Personally I'm with you on the Tamron 24-70, however it's quite a heavy lens. Trust me, it's heavy. When I buy it I probably will get the Canon 5d3 grip at the same time to try and balance it out some.

Otherwise, I'm split on my opinion. In some ways, I'm with Neuro in that it's a solution in search of the right problem. On the other, the idea of a light travel lens with near macro capabilities is nice. Although I think I'd prefer a somewhat longer focal length in a standard travel zoom since versatility can be more important sometimes.

683
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Samyang 24mm f/3.5 ED Tilt-Shift in Stock
« on: May 06, 2013, 01:41:36 PM »
This lens definitely has interested me. Glad to see it's at least fairly decent, resolution-wise, to the Canon 24 T-S. I'd hoped it would be a bit closer, especially at the larger apertures. If the other reviews on the Tilt and Shift functionality are positive, I think I'll be looking to add this to my lens collection at some point in time, maybe after it's been in the wild long enough that the price might come down a bit.

684
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Interesting contest from Tamron
« on: May 03, 2013, 02:14:13 PM »
If I photograph a group of friends smiling and holding up their index and middle fingers, while sitting behind the cracked windshield of a blue, 1950's T-Bird that they've just washed, does that count for 9 or 10 of the photographs?!?   ::)
I'll give you 9.  I don't think it would count for the cooking utinsel.

the hood could be open with someone cooking an egg on the engine

Actually, I was thinking the T-Bird would pass for "An interesting structure."  If not, then I'll just shoot it front of Stonehenge!  Oh, and I have to make sure the chrome bumper is polished.  Then, I'll throw a potted plant next to the car, while one guy holds a spatula and another brushes his teeth, and I think I've got it all covered!   ;D

Wish that'd work, it's pretty creative, but according to the rules:

Quote
...and must contain 14 images as they relate to all 14 clues (images may be ordered in any way).

685
Canon General / Re: Just Why
« on: May 01, 2013, 04:22:15 PM »
??

No lens (at least today) comes with a UV filter, you need to buy them yourselves. As for the super telephoto lenses, they do, it's just a filter that's dropped in close to the lens mount rather than all the way on the front of the lens like smaller lenses. I shudder to think of the cost for a filter that size.

686
Technical Support / Re: T4i HDMI output shut down
« on: May 01, 2013, 11:58:15 AM »
Is the camera going to sleep? Check your settings, I'd bet that you have the auto-off or auto-lcd off set to just a minute or two.

687
Lighting / Re: Speedlite Remote Trigger Question
« on: April 25, 2013, 07:05:14 PM »
Using the YN-622's you don't have any of the speedlites being 'master', that's what the Yongnuo triggers are for. You stick the transmitter on your hotshoe, and the receiver on the bottom of the speedlite and you have you're wireless RF TTL.

In order to get TTL you'd need a possibly very long cable, if it'd even work due to there likely being a max length for ETTL cable. Using PC-Sync triggering you have a very, very long max length, but you lose any TTL/remote setting and you need to make all the changes on the speedlite itself.

Hopefully all of that made sense. So short answer is, you don't need to worry about master/slave with that kind of wireless TTL system, however there are certain limitations. However they're a great deal, and I've heard nothing but good things, and if you eventually hit their limitations you'll work around them or there will be a new version that's fixed it or you'll just have to fork over for pocket wizards.

688
Portrait / Re: Need advice, what can I do to improve?
« on: April 25, 2013, 07:00:53 PM »
Was the off camera flash below the model? I think since these seem to be going for a natural look you need to balance the ambient light with the off camera flash and the reflector better- Ie: A lot of the shadows on her face (especially shadows cast by nose) are going UP! This just looks odd and isn't flattering on an otherwise beautiful face.

I'd suggest raising the light source higher so the shadows fall more naturally.

OP was using a reflector, not a flash. Although you're point about being careful about the shadows on the face is a good one, and just as relevant with any lighting setup.

689
Portrait / Re: Need advice, what can I do to improve?
« on: April 25, 2013, 04:33:52 PM »
I'll put in another looks pretty good. I'd say you used your reflector(s) well, although I think the other 2 posters have some good comments. While the model is pretty, there's just something in the composition, or the way she's holding herself, or something so that the images generally aren't grabbing me, even though they otherwise are reasonably good. Sorry I can't zero in on it a bit more for you.

690
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss 135mm f2 Apo Sonnar Preview
« on: April 22, 2013, 07:54:22 PM »
Looks to be a great lens, but it still has no AF, weighs a lot (2.02 lb), and costs double the current 135L price  :'(

So it'll cost as much as the next Canon 135L then? Joking, I kid. I kid. No really.

Joking aside, I'd love to get some Zeiss glass, but just too expensive for me and for what I normally do. So, perhaps some day...

Pages: 1 ... 44 45 [46] 47 48 ... 112