April 17, 2014, 07:03:32 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 - Daniel Flather

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 56
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 50 f/1.2L $1299 at Adorama
« on: August 17, 2013, 11:51:23 AM »
Years ago, I was taught that the 100mm lens was the best portrait instrument. Now, it seems, this 1.2 seems to be accepted as the lens for faces, softening the background. Well.... which is it? 100 or 50? I am assuming a full frame configuration....  Would not my 100 f2.8 do great for portraits?

And please, no snarky replies. It is really unnecessary to be superior.

Your 100/2.8 is great for portraits, mine is, but so is a 50/1.2 —Different tastes.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 50 f/1.2L $1299 at Adorama
« on: August 17, 2013, 12:11:14 AM »
And here come the posts about back-focus issues in 3, 2, 1.

EOS Bodies / Re: Crop sensors need cropped lenes
« on: August 10, 2013, 12:54:43 PM »
If I won a big lottery I'd put out a bounty for someone to build a lens like that if Canon didn't take it up.

Or just buy what's current and hire a assistant to haul your sh*t around.

Lenses / Re: TS-E 90mm f/2.8 Replacement Info [CR1]
« on: August 09, 2013, 11:49:49 AM »
A 100 TSE macro seems like a logical idea.  Any word about a replacement for the 45 TSE?

Lenses / Re: Sigma 24-70 f/2 OS HSM Coming? [CR1]
« on: July 30, 2013, 05:13:53 PM »
Erm... Bring the 70-200 f/2 too and damn I'll buy those two preciousssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
Doable, I guess, big and heavy for sure, and a filter size of 105mm+. Similar to size/weight of 120-300mm f/2.8 or 200-400mm f/4. Betting now the price will not be less than Canon 70-200mm II if it ever materializes.

Less than the 70-200/2.8?  The 200/2 is $5k+ so a 70-200/2 would be more costly and very heavy.

Lighting / Re: Guess what?
« on: July 27, 2013, 11:31:08 PM »
Use a leaf shutter, problem solved. 

1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: July 26, 2013, 12:26:30 PM »
the look on this kids face made me smile...hopefully you will too.

300 2.8is
iso 1600


Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon 50 f/1.8 IS
« on: July 24, 2013, 01:39:32 AM »
The 50/1.2 because of it's general performance,

What did you not like about your experiences with the 50/1.2L?  I have to assume you own this lens, have owned it in the past, or have used it in a rental or other situation. 

I have owned the 50/1.8, 50/1.4, and the 50/1.2 as per my sig.

Canon General / Re: Just For Fun!
« on: July 23, 2013, 12:17:53 AM »
61: folks thinking they're funny(ier than me)

61.5  folks with funny grammar (ier than I)
61.6  wise guys that correct peoples [sic] grammar.  Oh dear

People's (See #61 and 61.5)

Canon General / Re: Just For Fun!
« on: July 23, 2013, 12:08:53 AM »
68.  I bought X for $1000, do you think I was ripped off?

(Too late now.  WTF people)

And twist lock legs do suck.
That's a matter of personal preferences. Some prefer twist locks, some don't


As someone who used Manfrotto flip locks and now uses RRS twist locks, I find the latter easier on my fingers* and a lot faster to set up and break down.  Plus, ever tried cleaning sand from your Manfrotto leg locks?   ::)

Ever pinch your finger in a Manfrotto flip lock?  Extra points if you've done it in -25°c temperatures!!1!

* Modified quote.

EOS Bodies / Re: 7DM2 as a FF? Hmmm...
« on: July 22, 2013, 02:23:24 PM »
Right, because we need another 'entry-level full frame' to accompany the 6D.   ::)

That would be the elusive 6.5D, right?

EOS Bodies / Re: 7DM2 as a FF? Hmmm...
« on: July 22, 2013, 02:20:06 PM »
I heard aboot a mash-up between Canon and Sinar for the new 100*100mm sensor mini-view camera that uses the new EF-LF mount!

Canon General / Re: Canon Testing a 75+ Megapixel EOS-1 Body? [CR1]
« on: July 21, 2013, 10:03:56 PM »
upgrading to a Nikon

Upgrade how?

Canon General / Re: Bad Photography Rant
« on: July 20, 2013, 12:39:57 PM »
@ OP - any photos as s sample? I want to see it beacuse I after 6yrs in college, I don't make $100/hr. I can see my new carreer here :o

The Op's photog did not earn $100 an hour either.  100/2=50 the last time I checked, also factor in any travel costs and time if any.  I'm not defending the OP's photog in any way! 

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 56