July 24, 2014, 05:02:23 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 - Viggo

Pages: 1 ... 57 58 [59] 60 61 ... 133
871
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: CamRanger,anyone tried it?
« on: May 13, 2013, 04:48:29 PM »
Does it do tethered with Lightroom?
No ... CamRanger has its own app for iPad/iPhone/iPod and it only works with that app ... but that app is excellent and works flawlessly.

Great, thanks! Oh, and it's the same app for mac.

872
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: CamRanger,anyone tried it?
« on: May 13, 2013, 12:37:30 PM »
Sweet, thanks all for your very helpful insights!

873
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: CamRanger,anyone tried it?
« on: May 13, 2013, 08:38:58 AM »
Only that it is excellent and works as advertised, then it|s good enough for me! I saw that it was for iPad/iPhone, but later saw it works as Beta on Mac aswell, which is my intended use. Does it do tethered with Lightroom?

I will be using it for the 1d X. Came across it when I was searching around for that DIY wifi-solution.

Thanks!

874
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / CamRanger,anyone tried it?
« on: May 13, 2013, 08:00:58 AM »
Hi guys!

Saw this http://www.camranger.com/ and wondered if anyone had any experience with it? Also if there are any deals around.

Looks cool :D

875
Save yourself a lot of anger and frustration and get Focal right
Away. It gives me the accurate results I
Need. I use the 1dx with 50 L aaaaall the time. And after I bought the EC-s focusing screen it got even more fun.

876
Software & Accessories / Re: ColorChecker passport, what's wrong?
« on: May 10, 2013, 05:25:14 PM »
I actually bought the QP-card, but cancelled my order when I learned it's a piece of cardboard that comes already scratched and splattered ink and poorly glued together. I love the Passport as it is rugged and can take being used extensively and always be in my bag.

Another reason I decided to stick with the CC is that I learned that the best results isn't by using the X-rite software, but Adobe Profile Editor. And after a small amount of testing today I absolutely agree! All the things I didn't like with X-rite's results, to saturated colors, blues too blue and often off reds, is not the case with Adobe PE. It gives by far the most natural accurate results from everything I tried.

Can't wait to try outside tomorrow in different light!

878
Software & Accessories / Re: ColorChecker passport, what's wrong?
« on: May 09, 2013, 07:00:21 AM »
I have tested all reference card and software solutions,and  I can tell you people that qp-card with their software solution and new smaller  color card are fast and  better than any other  reference card and software  solution on the market today to create a own color profile to your camera in different light.  And the same result has  the tester at the Swedish photographer covenant concluded in their test.

Do you have link to where I can get one? I like to try everything :oP

879
Lenses / Re: 35 & 85 or 50 & 100 for photographing kids
« on: May 06, 2013, 09:36:54 AM »
I use the 24, 35 and 50 when shooting the kids, I used to own the 85 (a bunch of times) and it doesn't keep up with two-three year olds. The 35 L is my favorite, I like the contact you get with the subject with wide apertures and that focal, really pops. I have gotten a few fun, cool images laying on the floor with the 24 also. i recently bought a 24-70 mk1, and that is veryvery useful with kids, I set my desired focal and move my feet to frame instead of zooming to frame, that way you can control the perspective and best of all, change it in a split-second. I find the 70-200 also very useful (and I am a prime guy) and I see people mention the 135, I have also owned that a few times, but for ME I can't really find a place for it, it's too long or too short for me. The 70-200 on FF is awesome for all sorts of people shots.

880
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM
« on: May 06, 2013, 02:26:18 AM »
I had a chance to finally try the Sigma out and it looked cool, it felt heavy and big for a 35 f1.4. Loved the focusing ring, very good color and contrast. I used LV to focus, since it wasn't afma'd, and I wouldn't trade my 35 L for it because of sharpness, others will. But all of that wasn't really important. I wanted to see if the AF is indeed "same as the 35 L" as I've seen claimed, I have always doubted that, because the 35 L is fantastic. And I was right, the AF of the Sigma feels like the 35 L in slow-motion.. VERY slow... I'm not sure if people who have tested the Sigma vs 35 L have used a 5d, and the 1d X spins the 35 L faster because of the higher battery voltage, but it's not even in the same leauge as the 35 L.

So I'll take my small light, VERY sharp, superfast AF 35 L a million times over.

881
sharpness is a result of a properly focused image.

nonsense....
if the lens does not deliver the optical sharpness, no focusing will solve that.


Quote
It's nice of Sigma to actually deliver the USB dock, but the fact is Sigma should tighten up its QC process so we don't NEED to use the dock.


well canon should be the first then to make lenses that need no AFMA.  ::)

Lol, yes I would much rather have a lens that is veryvery sharp but can't focus over a lens that is very sharp that focuses perfectly with very fast
Movement every single time .

882
I finally got my hands on a Sigma and tried it today. I liked the sharpness , although that wouldn't alone be at all a reason to sell mye 35 L. I like the built quality, but not the weight and size
Compared. I really liked the color and contrast and the bokeh seemed similar. The
BIGGEST QUESTION for my wanting to test it was in terms of AF speed, all info I have found point to the direction that they are very much a like, but that's
Completely false, it's WAY slower, very dissapointing. I haven't done any research if the 35 L is faster on the 1dX and other people have tested on a 5d not seeing the difference. But on the 1dx at least the AF of the Sigma is much slower and to me, that will always be what I look for in a lens.

Get the 35 L sharpness is a result of a properly focused image.

883
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: New Zeiss 55mm Lens
« on: May 03, 2013, 04:50:55 AM »
for the price and MF only i'm not super concerned with it
I would like to try one out on my 5Dmk2 with brightscreen though to see how it is hitting focus wide open
without the brightscreen on a lens like this i think it could get frustrating wide open

I'm getting my EC-S in the mail in a few days  ;D I'll FINALLY get a definite answers as to how the metering will work.

*UPDATE* The EC-S meters just as normal without telling the camera it's another focusing screen than the original (which isn't supported anyway). At least with the 24, 35, 50 and 24-70. Will have a go with the 70-200 tomorrow. VERY nice!

884
Canon General / Re: new canon lens caps
« on: May 03, 2013, 04:46:57 AM »
i dont know why, but to me, the new caps are butt ugly compared to the old ones. they simply look cheap

It's because we are used to seeing the same pinch-caps with Canon logo, but from dirtcheap off-brands ;)

885
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: New Zeiss 55mm Lens
« on: May 02, 2013, 02:44:37 AM »
It uses an 82 mm filter which allows very little vignetting, it uses a retrofocus design and will cost about EUR 4000.

If you're still in the game, expect it to be in the shops near the end of the year.

It's the price, size and weight that's so intriguing to me. It's what makes it seem like a no compromise piece of glass. I've stated a bunch of times, if I can carry a 70-200 with that size and weight, I can certainly carry that weight with a ultimate-IQ 50 also.  ;D

Pages: 1 ... 57 58 [59] 60 61 ... 133