April 20, 2014, 03:07:49 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 - dirtcastle

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 27
241
Software & Accessories / Re: What are most people using for processing RAW
« on: September 23, 2012, 06:51:13 PM »
Just upsets me how much Adobe charge for new versions and upgrades for the CS series. Encourages piracy, in my opinion.

Adobe's new "Creative Cloud" plan dramatically drops the price for anyone who uses more than one Adobe program and updates annually. There is also a 50% discount for students and teachers.

http://www.adobe.com/products/creativecloud/buying-guide.html

I'm not necessarily against piracy. And I agree that the price of a single program (outside of the "Creative Cloud") is steep for non-professionals. But as a pro, I feel an obligation to support a product... that supports me.

242
Here's a good article comparing the Blackmagic and 5D3...

http://www.eoshd.com/content/8841/5d-mark-iii-or-blackmagic-cinema-camera

It will be interesting to see how this whole sensor/codec shakeup plays out between Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Blackmagic, and anyone else who joins the fray.

While I feel like my 5D3's video capabilities are about to be dated, the bottom line is that you can make great videos with even modest equipment. Imagination still trump specs.

243
Site Information / Re: Why do some posts get locked for no apparent reason?
« on: September 22, 2012, 04:57:58 PM »
Just curious. Thanks.

244
Site Information / Why do some posts get locked for no apparent reason?
« on: September 22, 2012, 04:39:33 PM »
Dear Moderator(s),

A group of posts got locked in the "EOS Bodies - For Video" today, but it's not clear why. I'm confused.

Is there an explanation?

245
Considering the fact that the Blackmagic camera has an EF mount... it looks like the era of still cameras competing in the video-only market might be over. It's hard to beat specialization.

246
Software & Accessories / Re: What are most people using for processing RAW
« on: September 22, 2012, 01:36:12 PM »
I fully agree with you, DPP constantly produces cleaner images that are more color accurate, with better tones, it has nothing to do with being free,

Is this based on your own experience/opinion, or is this a broad consensus backed up by testing?

I'm not trolling, I just find it hard to believe that LR/ACR/Aperture aren't as clean/accurate as DPP.

247
Lenses / Re: If you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they...???
« on: September 22, 2012, 03:41:43 AM »
Leica Summilux-M 35mm f1.4 ASPH
Leica Noctilux-M 50mm f0.95 ASPH
Leica Summicron-M 90mm f2.0 ASPH

This is just about as fictional as imaginary lenses. ;-)

248
Software & Accessories / Re: What are most people using for processing RAW
« on: September 22, 2012, 03:11:05 AM »
Mac users use Aperture, pc users use Lightroom.

I think Lightroom dominates the marketplace across both platforms.

I'm a Mac user and I use LR4 and I think a fairly substantial number of Mac users use LR4 over Aperture.  I was surprised about earlier posts about Canon's DPP being better than both, has anyone else had the same experience or done test regarding DPP vs. any Adobe products?

DPP comes free with Canon bodies and it covers the basics. I can understand why a lot of people are enthusiastic about it. But if people had to pay for it, I doubt it would even exist. Lightroom can be a bit confusing to learn, but it's the best photo workflow program on the market. And it is, after all, Adobe software.


249
Software & Accessories / Re: What are most people using for processing RAW
« on: September 22, 2012, 02:48:27 AM »
Mac users use Aperture, pc users use Lightroom.

I think Lightroom dominates the marketplace across both platforms.

250
Lenses / Re: If you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they...???
« on: September 22, 2012, 02:34:34 AM »
Since we are allowed to include imaginary lenses...

14-24mm f/2.8 TS-E (w/ AF)
50mm f/1.2 L II
85-135mm f/2 IS Macro

251
Lenses / Re: Tamron 24-70 Focus Accuracy
« on: September 22, 2012, 12:53:29 AM »
That's great to hear. Seems like focus is what often separates great lenses from would-be lenses (something which seems to afflict a disproportionate number of Sigma and Tamron lenses).

That said, it seems reasonable to expect that a recently released $1300 lens would have good AF, right??

252
Macro / Re: Canon MP-E 65 1x-5x 2.8 Macro Lens example photos
« on: September 21, 2012, 08:11:59 PM »
I just took a closer look at the MT-24EX, and now I appreciate what the key difference is: the directionality of two separate light sources could make for some very dramatic lighting. Whereas the fixed ring style isn't as flexible and sometimes it will work fine and sometimes it won't. I understand now. :-)

253
Macro / Re: Canon MP-E 65 1x-5x 2.8 Macro Lens example photos
« on: September 20, 2012, 11:51:11 PM »
Actually when you're done it is more than $1k because this lens is not very useful without a flash.  It pairs best with the MT-24EX and I recommend anyone interested in the MP-E 65 to budget for the pair.

Absolutely. It's a package deal for sure.

What flashes are people using with this? Is the MT-24EX worth its extra cost over the MR-14EX, when used with this lens?

254
Macro / Re: Canon MP-E 65 1x-5x 2.8 Macro Lens example photos
« on: September 20, 2012, 06:31:19 PM »
But $1000 is a lot to pay for a lens that isn't good for much beyond shooting bugs.
I paid $500 for a pristine used copy.   ;D

That's fantastic. I just saw your other post about buying and selling on Craigslist.

The 65mm macro should be a great lens to by used, because of its specialty status. A lot of people probably buy it without realizing how challenging it can be. And then, as a buyer, I don't necessarily have to compete with a lot of people in the used market. Most people who buy a bug lens probably aren't tight on cash, and thus buy it new (rather than used). Well, that would be my guess, anyway. ;-)

255
Macro / Re: Canon MP-E 65 1x-5x 2.8 Macro Lens example photos
« on: September 20, 2012, 05:33:45 PM »
This lens is so freaking amazing. And these shots are incredible. Big up on everyone's shots.

Eventually, I will probably get this lens. But the thing that keeps knocking it down on my list is the fact that it's primarily a "bug lens". Don't get me wrong... I love me some bug shots. And I think it would be tons of fun to go around finding bugs to shoot.

But $1000 is a lot to pay for a lens that isn't good for much beyond shooting bugs.

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 27