481
EOS Bodies / Re: How does Canon respond to the D800?
« on: February 07, 2012, 10:55:26 PM »
I really want that face recognition feature of the D800. I hope Canon integrates something similar.
June 19, 2013, 10:39:45 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.
482
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II
« on: February 07, 2012, 06:10:19 AM »Yeah, it looks like someone at Canon has a sense of humor or are just out of touch with the economic times. Nowadays customers expect more for less, not less for more.My thoughts exactly. I won't buy the lens unless there is a worthwhile value-add beyond what I already have. A lot of people, including me, already have the 24-70 and/or 24-105.
483
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II
« on: February 06, 2012, 06:51:32 PM »Count me in for 24-70mm f2.8 IS - if not, I'll stay with my 24-105Yep, me too. I want that extra stop, but I don't want to give up IS.
484
Canon General / Re: Visibility of Canon gear at the Super Bowl
« on: February 06, 2012, 11:54:46 AM »
I only looked at the sidelines shooters on one occasion. I was not looking for the 1DX, but I did notice a preponderance of Canon gear in the scene I noticed. The standard rig appeared to be 400mm f/2.8 on monopods and 70-200 f/2.8 II on straps.
485
Software & Accessories / Re: RAW processing workflow query
« on: February 06, 2012, 05:47:46 AM »
Could you merge steps 1 and 2, or alternately steps 3 and 4, or both? Of the steps described, it seems as though step 3 may be the most redundant.
486
Canon General / Re: $5000 gear spree exercize
« on: February 04, 2012, 11:45:23 PM »
At current prices...
Canon 60D - $850
Canon 24-105 f/4L - $1,000
Canon 70-200 f/4 IS - $1,150
Canon 50 f/1.4 - $350
B+W UV 77mm F-Pro MRC 010 - $70
B+W UV 67mm F-Pro MRC 010 - $50
B+W Circular Polarizer 77mm - $80
Generic 67-to-77 step up adapter - $10
Canon 430EX II - $260
Gitzo 1542T tripod - $375 (this is the deal I got)
Markins Q3 ball head - $310
Saatechi TR-M Intervalometer - $50
Sto-Fen Omni Bounce Diffuser - $12
Cleaning supplies and other items...
Basically, this was my starting rig, and I have built up from here.
Canon 60D - $850
Canon 24-105 f/4L - $1,000
Canon 70-200 f/4 IS - $1,150
Canon 50 f/1.4 - $350
B+W UV 77mm F-Pro MRC 010 - $70
B+W UV 67mm F-Pro MRC 010 - $50
B+W Circular Polarizer 77mm - $80
Generic 67-to-77 step up adapter - $10
Canon 430EX II - $260
Gitzo 1542T tripod - $375 (this is the deal I got)
Markins Q3 ball head - $310
Saatechi TR-M Intervalometer - $50
Sto-Fen Omni Bounce Diffuser - $12
Cleaning supplies and other items...
Basically, this was my starting rig, and I have built up from here.
487
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8L IS II vs f/4L IS
« on: February 03, 2012, 08:40:04 PM »
I have both the f/4L IS and f/2.8L II, and I have the 60D. I went through the same debate that you are facing and ended up buying the f/4, which I have used for about a year. When I tried to take shots of moving animals in low light, it was obvious that the f/4 was not fast enough to get the shutter speed I needed. I bought the f/2.8 several weeks ago and it has lived up to its promise. Although both are great lenses, if I could do it over again, I would have gotten the f/2.8 from the get-go simply because of its speed.
The f/2.8 is considerably heavier and larger than the f/4, but it isn't too bad; I carry around on a strap without problem. I can take one handed shots with f/4, but I could not do this with the f/2.8. The f/4 hunts more in low light than the f/2.8. Both are super sharp, have fast AF, two-mode IS, and an excellent build quality.
The f/2.8 is considerably heavier and larger than the f/4, but it isn't too bad; I carry around on a strap without problem. I can take one handed shots with f/4, but I could not do this with the f/2.8. The f/4 hunts more in low light than the f/2.8. Both are super sharp, have fast AF, two-mode IS, and an excellent build quality.
488
Canon General / Re: What should be my first dslr?
« on: February 03, 2012, 07:30:03 AM »I think that the 7D would be more that good enough for many years to come. You dont have to use the extra features of the 7D from the outset - but it gives room for you to grow into without having to change cameras.I agree with this. I bought a 60D as a first DSLR after giving away my old Nikon SLR (film) ~20 years ago. I have started outgrowing my 60D primarily due to the auto-focus performance (the 7D AF is great), and I really want better low light performance (which is the realm of the 5D). That said, it is a good camera and it takes great shots.
I will echo others and tell you that great lenses make a big difference in your shooting enjoyment and in the final product. I can live with the 60D or a Rebel, but I do not want to shoot with mediocre lenses. I had one and I never used it because I disliked using it and I disliked the shots that came out of it. The only positive thing that came out of owning the glass is that I sold it for a profit. If you take care of a lens, you can resell it for little financial loss. I remind myself of this every time I bite the bullet and buy new glass. Good luck with your decision.
489
Canon General / Re: Truth in photography
« on: February 02, 2012, 06:52:54 PM »If a photo is actually a combination of several photos, but the photographer implies that it is a single, unaltered image, do you consider this unethical?I was thinking about this some more. The one area where I think ethics really kicks in is with photo journalism, i.e., documenting an event and then altering the shots. This recently happened with photos of the funeral procession in North Korea where the government cleaned up some photos so that they looked more orderly.
490
Canon General / Re: Truth in photography
« on: February 02, 2012, 05:28:10 PM »With all this talk about truth...I wonder how you guys feel about photographers using photoshop, particularly of actress's/model's faces in magazines that has been "altered". Isn't it pretty much the same concept?This is a grey area for me. If the company using the photo is alleging that the person is not altered, that is a clear "crossing the line" statement.
Re: composites (the Lik issue), I really don't mind them, as long as the person selling the composite is not alleging or implying that the photo is something that it is not.
491
Canon General / Re: Truth in photography
« on: February 02, 2012, 03:56:02 PM »Do you feel genuinely upset and angry when a photographer portrays a photo as something it’s not? If so, why does this get you so worked up?I don't get worked up. I don't consider it an "ethical" issue. It is disingenuous. The photographer is misleading whomever is reviewing his/her work. In the case with Lik, he is presenting some of his photographs as being single shots when they appear to be composites. The flowery prose explaining his excitement in setting up for "the shot" only compounds the misleading nature of the photograph presented. Further, he used another photographer's work in promoting his own work, which is unfathomable. I don't get worked up over it, but I certainly do not respect the man, and I will not give him further consideration, no matter how talented he may be.
If a photo is actually a combination of several photos, but the photographer implies that it is a single, unaltered image, do you consider this unethical?
492
Lenses / Re: Upgrade choices- full frame; wide prime or zoom; 135f/2
« on: February 02, 2012, 12:59:34 PM »
The 5DIII sounds like a good solution for you. I have a 60D and I ache every time I have to shoot at ISO 800 or higher just to get a decent shutter speed due to the excessive noise. The 5D is much better in low light. If the 5DIII has ~7fps as rumored, it should provide you will a decent burst speed in getting shots of your kids.
I have not used a wide prime for candid shots and wished I had a zoom instead. However, I do have the 24mm f/1.4L II, and it is a touchy lens on some bodies. My first copy was soft on my 60D at f/1.4. I swapped it out and got a much sharper copy. Like you, I do not have microadjustment.
Re: the 135mm, I cannot comment on this. I have the 70-200 f/2.8L II and the 70-200 f/4L IS, and although both are great, the f/2.8 speed (or faster) is critical for action shots in moderate to low light. If you get the 135mm, you can use extenders to get more range out of it at the cost of 1-2 stops of light.
I purchase my lenses from B&H, Adorama, and ebay. I bought three off of Craigslist, too. Generally, if I am buying an L lens, I stick to vendors I trust because if I need to swap the lens out, I don't want flack. I have had no problems with my ebay purchases.
If you are considering buying new, the Canon rebates are good until February 4, which is only 2 days away.
I have not used a wide prime for candid shots and wished I had a zoom instead. However, I do have the 24mm f/1.4L II, and it is a touchy lens on some bodies. My first copy was soft on my 60D at f/1.4. I swapped it out and got a much sharper copy. Like you, I do not have microadjustment.
Re: the 135mm, I cannot comment on this. I have the 70-200 f/2.8L II and the 70-200 f/4L IS, and although both are great, the f/2.8 speed (or faster) is critical for action shots in moderate to low light. If you get the 135mm, you can use extenders to get more range out of it at the cost of 1-2 stops of light.
I purchase my lenses from B&H, Adorama, and ebay. I bought three off of Craigslist, too. Generally, if I am buying an L lens, I stick to vendors I trust because if I need to swap the lens out, I don't want flack. I have had no problems with my ebay purchases.
If you are considering buying new, the Canon rebates are good until February 4, which is only 2 days away.
493
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Main difference in ND filter?
« on: February 02, 2012, 11:56:43 AM »
The simple answer is that "stops" are the darkness of the ND filter. It is like a pair of sunglasses. A 2-stop ND filter will be light sunglasses and a 10-stop ND filter will be dark sunglasses to the point that you can barely (if at all) see out of them.
Multi-coated are supposed to lessen reflections that could create flare in the lens, and therefore in your pictures. The multi-coated ND filters also are allegedly easier to wipe/clean. I haven't tested this to confirm.
Most if not all manufacturers that make filters make ND filters. The quality varies. I use B+W and Formatt, both of which are high quality, although the B+W is more solid. There are other quality manufacturers. One thing you should consider is the light cast provided by the ND filter. That is, some filters will cast a tone to shots, despite that they are "neutral" in color. For example, shots taken with my B+W 10-stop filter have a warm cast to them. I have read that the Lee Big Stopper has a cooler cast to it. The color cast is relevant to setting your white balance.
Multi-coated are supposed to lessen reflections that could create flare in the lens, and therefore in your pictures. The multi-coated ND filters also are allegedly easier to wipe/clean. I haven't tested this to confirm.
Most if not all manufacturers that make filters make ND filters. The quality varies. I use B+W and Formatt, both of which are high quality, although the B+W is more solid. There are other quality manufacturers. One thing you should consider is the light cast provided by the ND filter. That is, some filters will cast a tone to shots, despite that they are "neutral" in color. For example, shots taken with my B+W 10-stop filter have a warm cast to them. I have read that the Lee Big Stopper has a cooler cast to it. The color cast is relevant to setting your white balance.
494
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: EOS Bodies: Should I shoot in B&W? or shoot in Color then Convert to B&W?
« on: February 02, 2012, 11:45:02 AM »Many B&W digital specialists will actually increase saturation to the point of oversaturation before the conversion, to deepen the tones.I do this too. I don't have B&W specialty programs (e.g., Nik SilverEfx). I tried doing this in both Photoshop and Adobe RAW and found Adobe RAW to be much easier to use. For some reason, Photoshop is extraordinarily laggy.
495
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: EOS Bodies: Should I shoot in B&W? or shoot in Color then Convert to B&W?
« on: February 02, 2012, 07:18:34 AM »
I concur with Brian, too.