November 28, 2014, 12:22:34 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 - revup67

Pages: 1 ... 33 34 [35] 36 37 ... 42
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Is Canon 7D a good choice for my next DSLR
« on: February 07, 2012, 01:49:57 AM »
The 17-55 2.8 is also a nice choice for fast glass but for me personally, I would not spend $1K for a lens that I could only use on a crop sensor body unless you never plan on going FF

yes, I would agree with this as well.  one lens that pried me away from this theory was the 15-85 EF-S lens, well under a grand and razor sharp even compared to the 16-35 mkii (I own both).  See for yourself at Choose Tools, ISO 12233 then do a compare with the 15-85 and the 16-35mkii..note the edges about the same.  It's quite possibly one of the best (if not the best) EF-S lenses canon makes.  I use it as my main walk around lens and you can see from my arsenal (in sig.) I do have a decent selection to choose from.  My alt. choice if I had it would be the 24-105 just too duplicitous at the moment.  if I dump the 7D then the 15-85 goes with it and "hello" to the 24-105.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 7D for studio work
« on: February 07, 2012, 01:36:33 AM »
I am an owner of the 7D for almost 2 years now and like anything else you can sometimes find ways to work around its deficits.

My work has been published in the news paper and about twice a month on KABC-TV Channel 7 HD Los Angeles for weather broadcasts as well as Channel 5 KTLA in HD and on various web sites for our local county (yes I know web is 72dpi) and so I am told a few newsletters.  The pics look pretty darn good (not a one complaint from any source about noise).  I view the broadcasts on a 65" HD TV (no discernible noise that I can see).  I won't go the battle of the 5DMkii vs. the 7D noise comparison, OK fine the 7D loses - we all know that esp. beyond 400 ISO.  A lot can be done in post work to truly mitigate (not eliminate) the 7D's weaknesses you just need to know the ins and outs of post work and have the right software.  I avoided the 5D MKii due to its lack of features (no getting around this such as FPS..a dog) since its ideal primarily for portrait work and very limited outside this but if that's your bag then the 5D should be your choice.  I used to recompose but rarely if ever do I do this any longer.  Watching Canon's Rudy (forget his last name) training demos on the BandH web site has taught me much more about the 7D and also the Blue Crane DVD's so I can exploit its features to its limits and are now more keen of its weaknesses.  There are many features of the 7D I'd be pressed to be without.  Perhaps since we are on the helm of a 5D Mkiii release I'll go this route after seeing on this site what's to be expected but for the time being, I try and shoot 100 ISO to 200 ISO only unless I truly want the shot no matter and then post process until its done satisfactorily never expecting perfection from a noise standpoint.  I hope this helps you in your decision and quest.

It all depends on what you can live with and what are you priority needs.

I know people who actually "see" in B&W when they're shooting, so they're always on the lookout for suitable scenes, with texture and shapes or moods,

^^^^^Comment of the Day^^^^^^

I completely get this.  Perhaps after having your own dark room for so long and developing only in B&W for many years it causes one to see things in this manner.

Macro / Re: Super Macro
« on: February 06, 2012, 12:03:41 PM »
it looks more like a plastic, so that will light up itself, unlike paper...

After closer inspection I do agree.  This prompts me with another idea.  I've got some clear Remo drum heads and white painted over clear drum heads that I should test out...hmm..ideas can be endless

Macro / Re: Unknown Bug
« on: February 06, 2012, 02:30:18 AM »
You can go here to help identify this insect

Macro / Re: Super Macro
« on: February 06, 2012, 02:27:32 AM »
Re:  Calix

Nice job on diffusing the light which can be a big issue especially with insects such as Beetles with hard shells as their reflective properties can be troublesome.

I am amazed that the pop up flash (are you using FEC?) can actually burst light through that paper dish or perhaps I am misunderstanding how you have diffused and softened the light.

Macro / Re: my first post here
« on: February 06, 2012, 02:19:56 AM »
While on a recent outing I bumped into an entomologist named Bug Bob.  He had sent along this web site which was most helpful in identifying bugs.  Note the Guide section

When you have an MP-E 65 or other macro lens, having good bug ID resources is key.

Hope this helps

Macro / Re: Canon MP-E 65 1x-5x 2.8 Macro Lens example photos
« on: February 06, 2012, 02:14:30 AM »
This particular insect is within the Bug Assassin species.  I found him on the side of my SUV in roughly 70 degree weather (farenheit).  I'd not seen one of these before and wanted to test it level of skittishness.  He was not alarmed by my attempting to gently prod it with a pen.  I put him in a container and head for home.  I placed him on an indoor plant and for the most part he was rather still, not alarmed and a perfect subject to photo via the MP-E 65.  Since he did move every 10 seconds or so trying to get more than 7 images was not possible.  I wish I had spent more time and put the MT 24EX on 1/2 manual vs. E-TTL as there would have been less harsh light on its hard shelled body.  Taken at 2.5 magnification, 7 stacked images via Macro Rail.

What's For Dinner?  (Zelus tetracanthus) by Revup67, on Flickr

Revup67 – I actually never have used the ISO1233 tool before, thanks for pointing out this useful comparison tool!  I enjoyed taking a look at that flickr group, I think I’m leaning towards the 15-85 now…  You mentioned the 100mm 2.8 L is also in your collection, do you have the tripod adapter and do you consider it necessary?

Personally, the ring adapter I feel is not necessary for this lens as it is rather lightweight though I carry around a 400mm prime frequently..maybe my arms are use to the weight of the 400mm so when the 100mm is on the 7D its like a feather.  Mounting the camera body on the tripod with the 100mm and without the ring should be fine.  If in need of a superb tripod head may I suggest the Model GP-s which can fit nicely on a Benro Travel Angel or any standard tripod Boegn, etc.  The GP-s head also acts as a Gimbal head.  No plates come with this however so you can pick and choose.  I got one for the 7D and 400mm.  The plate for the 7D with the 100mm attached is plenty as would be for a 5D mkii.  This head is rock solid - be sure to look at the instructional videos on this site.  It's a chunk of change but there's nothing worse than watching a $4000 rig fall to the ground because of a crappy tripod / head.  Luckily I caught my rig before it hit the sand.  The cheap tripod was in the trash moments later.

Lenses / Re: How do you think we should spend the money?
« on: February 06, 2012, 01:45:15 AM »
the cards are good but take too long this you just pop on the lens snap a shot off in the general direction and set your custom balance,
here is a review of them

I've not used one of those though I know there are a variety of brands  ranging up to $125 USD as I recall.  For me the cards (specifically the WhiBal same guy makes LensAlign) are pretty quick (they have a target for instant focus) but most importantly I found them most on.  No right or wrong it seems as long as one is cognizant not to use AWB or post processing without a proper WB snapshot(s) prior. 

A good B&W relies on a lot of colour information. Many B&W digital specialists will actually increase saturation to the point of oversaturation before the conversion, to deepen the tones.

Yes, this is very true.  I've done this technique myself as well as tweak the contrast which also helps.

I tried my 7D and 15-85mm EF-S at a very low light high School Play last week.  Most of the images did not have enough light or were noisy, but here is one that managed to come off at ISO 1000.  Even at !SO 1000, the 7D is noisy.

Did you shoot this in RAW?  If so, the DPP software program allows some excellent tools to mitigate any noise on the 3rd tab called NR Lens AIO.  I use it whenever I feel there's a noise issue and it does a great job of squelching.  Also check out the Blue Crane DVD's..some great tips in there such as not to use the Auto Lighting Optimizer as it can increase noise (doing this from memory but believe that was one way to also knock it down).

Lenses / Re: How do you think we should spend the money?
« on: February 05, 2012, 03:15:21 PM »
I use flash a lot - including bright sunshine - as it lets you control the light to bring out the subject from the background, I find turning down exposure compensation (-1/3) and flash exposure up (+1/3) just lifts the subject out of the background without using blur

Yes, this is a great idea. If no flash is permitted as you point out at a reception that raises a whole other issue with the WB.

Whatever the situation flash / no flash, higher ISO lower ISO , I would think a White Balance card needs to be included.  If a wedding photographer used the AWB or any presets that would be a cause for concern from my point of view. 

Lenses / Re: How do you think we should spend the money?
« on: February 05, 2012, 05:28:44 AM »
I know everyone of the 5D users likes to bash the 7D with the ISO and it is true but are you really going to be using a high ISO if you have a 580 EXii flash?  that was my point.  It's hard to discern with the naked eye on an ISO 100 in RAW from a 5D to a 7D unless it's blown up to a poster size.  on an 8x10 I would be curious to know if you would truly see a difference.  Also, the original poster stated he had a limited budget in mind and trying to stay within that find limitation.  I might be hard pressed to go backward in time with a 1Dmk3s and the small LCD.  I think the 7D would out pixel this camera regardless and hold up better distortion wise.

Also, all the concern about a higher ISO with the 7D might be moot.  It would seem pointless to take those shots anyway as they wouldn't be much good no matter what camera is used.  You're gonna get noise from about 800 onward.  I'd keep the flash on for anything 800 and over

Here's a 1600 ISO shot in RAW on a 400mm 5.6 @ 1250 at dusk then shrunk to a 5148 pixel JPG then shrunk again to a 1920 pixel JPG.

Snowy Egret .......(not at the Zoo, in the Wild) by Revup67, on Flickr

Wickid - I do agree and the specs on this are rather strange as you suggest.  It's probably one of those things where they got results of an ND1000 on one lens therefore can propagate the filter can go that high.  They wouldn't dare put a disclaimer stating won't work on 99% of the lenses out there cause then sales would bomb.

In either case, I'm not sorry I acquired the filter, it was clearly worth a shot, I knew it, took the gamble and the seller had agreed to do a full refund.  Only loss was the shipping.

Pages: 1 ... 33 34 [35] 36 37 ... 42