October 25, 2014, 06:25:21 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 - Viggo

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 140
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« on: August 28, 2014, 05:19:33 PM »
Amur Leopard
5DIII, @115mm, 1/100s, f3.2, ISO1600

REALLY cool shot!!

Lenses / Re: Canon 24-70 f/2.8L mkii Focus Shift
« on: August 28, 2014, 05:18:21 PM »
Of all the lenses that NEEDED improving is the 24-70 f2.8 L. I can't stand it when I am doing EVERYTHING right... i.e. standing still, bracing my camera tightly, working in good indoor/ outdoor lighting, using a cross point, not shifting the focus... literally taking a picture after being certain there is enough detail to get a good focus lock.. and I am standing directly in front of a person, who somehow manages to become like......3 ft back focused! Why...??????  That should not happen with Professional equipment!!!!!!!!!!  Why would Canon not fix that HUGE problem in the MkII version of this lens...???  a new lens that costs SIGNIFICANTLY MORE money than the cruddy lens that I have put up with for the last 10 years!! This problem has peed-off so many photographers that Google.com is filled with many pages of people all over the world complaining about the focus problems!  Oh wait... I know what the flaw is...  There is none.... This lens was designed this way intentionally, because they know that if we are angry about the cruddy performance of such a lens, we would have to buy a new one, thinking that Canon would have corrected all the problems that the last version was known for!  Oh no!  That stuff will be fixed in the MkIII version... costing a whole lot more than the MkII...  Follow the money!  Canon is known for releasing products with MAJOR flaws.....and for denying problems ever existed.......even after stacks of evidence show otherwise!  Jerks!

Have you afma'd to both tele and wide end?

My 24-70 mk2 is just astonishing when it comes to locking and tracking with any of the 61 points. I can hardly get it to miss if I try. And I shoot running small children indoors.

Lenses / Re: 200 f/2.0 vs 70-200 f/2.8 II
« on: August 26, 2014, 12:57:16 PM »
You mentioned nothing in your original post about needing to shoot low light, so it seems the 200/2 is not necessary for that reason.

You would save so much money by going with the 70-200/f2.8, especially since you don't need that extra stop.  With the money you save over the 200/2, you can pick up a few books on composition in photography, and also on composition in painting (where there is much overlap).  Basically, a book that will teach you about rules of composition, about using contrasting elements, about using negative space, about using symmetry, etc etc.  You don't need to "kill" your background with f2 when you know how to properly compose a photograph.  I used to have the same lust after that lens, luckily I never bought it thanks to the wise words spoken by a professional portrait photographer. 

I've got a few buddies who either have the 85/1.2, 135/2, or 200/2, and I just think "what are you doing???"  They claim those lenses are great for background separation.  You know what else is?  ANY lens and a knowledge of composition.  I saved so much money, and weight, by going with the 70-200 f4, which is also my most expensive lens.  You can tell it eats at my friends' hearts that I am taking better photos with gear that is not high end.  But as they always say, a great photographer can take a better photo with an iPhone than a shitty photographer with the best SLR.

I urge you, because I used to be in the same position of lust for that amazing-bokeh lens as you, to reconsider.  You have the potential to save so much money, which will increase what you can spend on other things.  Not having spent thousands upon thousands (or even tens of thousands) on gear has allowed me to travel much more (which in itself is a lot of fun, whether it be traveling locally, nationally, or even internationally), practice photography more, and just enjoy life more. 

Think about it this way.  You'd be paying thousands more in order to take pictures where less and less stuff is in focus.  Yes, I know that it is a fantastically sharp lens , but let's not kid ourselves about to the real reason most people lust after the lens.  Super thin DOF/background separation.

My head hurts from reading that... It's different what you and I want from our photography, so don't tell anyone what they need or that a 70-200 f4 gives you what you want if you want a 200 f2 just by reading a little...

Lenses / Re: 200 f/2.0 vs 70-200 f/2.8 II
« on: August 25, 2014, 02:37:48 PM »
^ I agree... The 300 II has some incredible bokeh!
Nice examples!  The bokeh on the lizard shot is insane!

I love the lizard shot also, very nice color and the light is spot on ! (Pun intended)

Lenses / Re: 200 f/2.0 vs 70-200 f/2.8 II
« on: August 25, 2014, 03:48:04 AM »
It might not be for everyone of course, but I feel a bit of bubbling in my belly when I keep seeing people say "it's almost the same as the 70-200 @ 200" no it is not. It might not be worth it to you, but it's a BIG difference. I must've read a thousand user reviews that said the same and 90% had one thing in common, they were written by people who had read other user revies, not by people owning or using the lens.

The 85 L is wonderful for some things, but "sharpness to die for" when we're talking about the 200 f2? Yeah, not so much.

And I think what makes a lens give that pop, is very high level of sharpness against the smoothest possible background and there there is no lens like the 200, unless you go even higher up. But for portraits I find 200 is the longest you should go for head shots.

Again, it isn't for everyone and god knows it's a lot of money, so if you're happy with the 70-200, there's nothing wrong about that, because it's absolutely killer and one of the best zooms ever made. But it's never going to be "basically the same as the 200".

Lenses / Re: 200 f/2.0 vs 70-200 f/2.8 II
« on: August 24, 2014, 05:21:11 PM »
I've had every 70-200 Canon makes and had the 70-200 mk2 when I bought the 200, sold the 70-200 after a week when I promised myself I would keep it six months to be sure, but I have never looked back. There is NO lens like the 200 f2. It's simply insane in every aspect.

I bought mine used, it was hardly touched and only 13 months old and I saved 3238 dollars compared to buying it brand new. so it was actually only 2,5 times more than the 70-200 I already had..

The one lens I will NEVER sell..

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D810 users are seeing spots
« on: August 21, 2014, 04:04:35 AM »
If you're going down that route dilbert, at least use the 1d3 as an example ::)

You don't get it do you? Unless your relation has broken the laws of physics his 4"x4" panel is not going to "soften the light" any more than any other 4"x4" piece of diffusion material.

Go learn about light before you get in a fight with people that know what they are talking about. There is nothing your relation can do with his £120 kit that I couldn't do with a 69c piece of foam paper, the bottom of a milk carton, and a book of Rosco swatches ($2.95). For under $5 I get a quart of milk and better performing flash modifier than your relations.

I'm not in a 'fight' with you. Don't get too excited mate, this is a discussion. One in which my corner is backed by a knowledgeable source and who i'd trust over any forum lurker. Here, read the preview: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2101747734/bouncelite-the-revolutionary-flash-diffuser/description
He's only a distant relation but I know the inventor has 30 years experience as well.

I don't get why you don't get that softness has to do with size ?

Do you really think people bring those giant parabolic broncolor boxes and sand bags and big lights around JUST to lug them around? And do you really think ProFoto, Elinchrom, broncolor and every other light modifier brand on the planet makes big modifiers because they haven't figured out a small one can do the exact same? It's not a discussion, it's denying facts ...

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: to 600rt + st-e3 or not....
« on: August 18, 2014, 01:32:11 PM »
I sold both my 600's and the st-e3. I bought the Godox AD360 instead, and a new amp for my car, lol.

But my 1dx is in for repair since forever and I will probably not see it before the snow gets here by the looks of it, so haven't tried it yet. It's kind of hard to sit and watch my spanking new ProFoto 90cm (3') Octa and the new flash and have nothing to shoot with...

, I mean the 35 is not even considered anywhere in the future for me.

That's why I went for the Canon 35mm f2 IS, the AF is always spot on, IQ is great and I never have to worry about missing focus.

It's just too big a difference in dof for me to use an f2 instead of 1.4. I would buy another 35 L, but I love the 50 so I can wait for a 35 L II.

The f2 aperture was the reason I sold my Zeiss 50mp, it's just not the same pop.

Sorry to hear that Eldar, I wish you could borrow my 50 and see for yourself, but fully understand you have up, I mean the 35 is not even considered anywhere in the future for me.

Viggo: do you have any problems with Sigma 50 and 1dx? I've read about focus inconsistency when using 50 Art and 1dx and 5dIII.

I had with my first copy, same issue as both the 35 Art I had. But my current copy of the 50 is very very good. It's not perfect and the outer points could be better. But it is a 1.4 lens and all of them struggle more than smaller aperture lenses. And I am comparing to the 200 F2 and 2470 mk2 which are both top of the top in regards to AF.

Sorry to hear that Eldar, I wish you could borrow my 50 and see for yourself, but fully understand you have up, I mean the 35 is not even considered anywhere in the future for me.

EOS Bodies / Re: Suggestions of a Canon MF announcement at Photokina!
« on: August 11, 2014, 04:58:49 PM »
This is Canon, perhaps a video MF  ::)

Hi I live in Victoria Australia and purchased a Canon 1DX but all is not well, the camera shuts down telling me to recharge the battery but the battery that came with the camera is fully charged, I went back to the supplier of the camera and he sold me another battery to see if the problem is the one that came with the camera from canon, I charged the new battery and installed it in my new !DX, but the problem exists I believe in the camera being faulty, I have been using Fuji cameras for the past few years without any issues and traded my Fuji as a deposit payment for my new canon, I took the camera back to the place of purchase here in Melbourne and they said it must be returned to canon for repairs, so I looked across the web for more of the same problems as I have got with mine, to my surprise I came across a professional in new south wales that took canon to court over his new 1DX and lost the court case. is this what's happen when you get a lemon, also when formatting a new SanDisk sd card it now does not work even in my PC . what would you do.
the link below is from the NSW court case that canon refused to fix.
Canon warranty dispute leads to claims of fraud

1dX does not use SD cards.

It's not a case to take to court. Why did he SELL you a new battery? that's ridiculous. If the camera is faulty when you buy it, it's just to return and get a replacement, do not take the argument with the store if they want one. You call Canon and clear it out first, and just swap to a new camera. If it's different rules than here and there is no such thing as d.o.a time, simply send it in for repair and tell Canon you want a new one, not to repair a brand new product.

All I can say is that sh!t happens, and it's most likely solved with some patience, and you'll get a working one to use hard for many years.

1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: August 03, 2014, 10:01:19 AM »

But Dave is really missing the point, this is not, predominantly, an image centric forum, it is a gear centric forum where most people come to see and talk gear and are photography geeks who enjoy the equipment as much as the image making, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that as far as I am concerned. If you want more stunning images than you can believe go to 500px, or Flickr.

I  am obviously missing the point totally as we are talking about Canon's top of the range body, the topic is " any thing shot with a 1DX " and you say that image making is not what it's all about. My original observation was that someone passed comment on another 1DX 's owners approach to photography and yet the shots they posted were , well let's just say, not good and that's being generous.

Thanks :) Appreciate your opinion. You've completely missed the point, but that's okay.

Share some images that I can use as an inspiration. I obviously need it.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 140