August 27, 2014, 05:18:53 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 - FatDaddyJones

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
16
Lenses / Re: Which pair of lenses to get?
« on: February 10, 2013, 02:47:59 AM »
You might consider the t4i with the two STM lenses (18-135mm and 40mm STM), since they have video autofocus. The new touchscreen touch-to-focus function is pretty awesome for shooting video.

17
I think that you won't go wrong with any of those choices. Just pick the one that best suites your needs and budget.

18
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 10, 2013, 02:37:04 AM »
Nikon may very well be leading in dynamic range during this round of camera bodies, however there are many reasons that one might consider Canon better. The fact of the matter is that any of these bodies (Nikon or Canon) have cutting edge technology that would have been unheard of just a few years ago and are light years ahead of the quality of past digital cameras.

The 5D Mark III is far from being "inadequate."  It's more than adequate for most photographers. If you need more than what the 5D3 can deliver, you should consider medium format cameras.

19
Software & Accessories / Re: Where are you posting your photo's?
« on: February 10, 2013, 02:19:03 AM »
Flickr

20
EOS Bodies / Re: Cost of Canon 5D mk III
« on: February 10, 2013, 02:15:02 AM »

5D3 sales for ~$2500 have happened already and are bound to happen again. Just get one then.

pardon my stupid question, but is there a way for me to know when such sales are going on?
I don't monitor this forum daily - should I ? would it be posted here? Or perhaps there is an easier way?

thanks

I bought a 5D3 in December from a deal I saw posted here. Yes, if you're planning on buying, it would be a good idea to keep an eye on this site.

21
EOS Bodies / Re: on the verge of buying, just need some final moral support
« on: February 10, 2013, 12:58:23 AM »
Do it! We all got your back, man. We're behind ya. Cheering you on! JIMMY! JIMMY! JIMMY! Go for it. Get it. Buy it now! Time's a-wasting. It's sittin' there on a shelf all lonely, wishin' that you'd buy it. Just think of that camera in your hands.... shutter clickin' away.... You could make beautiful pictures together. You know it in your heart. You need it. Life just isn't complete. Do it, Jimmy. Get it. Get it now.
:)

22
EOS Bodies / Re: Cost of Canon 5D mk III
« on: February 04, 2013, 08:11:10 PM »
There were several sales in the $2500 to $2750 range already. These are clearly is a wink-wink-nod-nod understanding between retailers and Canon, as even authorized dealers got in the game via ebay. This is how the companies manage price drops from initial high pricing which targets early adoptors who will pay a premium.

I think 5DIII will gradually settle down in the ~$2750. You will have periodic firesales at deeper savings like the one we saw couple of months back for $2500 or smaller rebates at $2800....but it is clear where it is headed.

However, once it hits the stable $2500 mark, I don't think further reduction should be expected until few months before the end of cycle for the body.

5D3 sales for ~$2500 have happened already and are bound to happen again. Just get one then.

+1

Very few actually pay MSRP for any product. I got mine for $2599. Others found deals even cheaper than that. Just keep your eyes open, and when you find a good deal, grab it!

23
Site Information / Re: Moderators: You are Too Sensitive
« on: February 03, 2013, 01:08:25 PM »
"The point was that it should be left up to the discretion of the site moderators as to what is allowed and not allowed"

I do not like the sound of that. Nope. As then it is not evenly fair. Please read MANY more fights on this forum which have not been deleted as the moderators did not find them wrong.

"There has to be rules". I like that. Then it is even for all...

In any case he is not my friend nor was the post important. Am out of here...

Peace!


I never said it was fair. But someone has to make the decisions, even if it is subjective. In this case, he broke the rules that were posted for this forum, so this wasn't just a subjective judgment.

24
Site Information / Re: Moderators: You are Too Sensitive
« on: February 03, 2013, 12:54:09 PM »
Most forum software deletes all posts and threads that were made by a banned member. Other posts in the same thread are "collateral damage." It's too much work to remove them all manually, and the threads usually wouldn't make sense anyway with some of the posts being removed. 

25
EOS Bodies / Re: making a case for that crop body camera
« on: February 03, 2013, 12:50:30 PM »
Neuro, what do you use as a standard zoom on your 7D? Or do you use a standard zoom on the 7D now?

26
Lenses / Re: Resistance to Larger Filter Size, Kills Great Lenses?
« on: February 03, 2013, 12:47:13 PM »
A google search led me back here to another post mentioning the 24-70 and a 95mm filter size. OP was the same that mentioned it in the other thread. Not sure where the info is from. Radiating, where did you hear about the 95mm filter size?

27
Site Information / Re: Moderators: You are Too Sensitive
« on: February 03, 2013, 12:40:33 PM »
I support free speech. I also support the right to kick someone out of my house that I don't like, or tell somebody to shut up if I don't like what they're saying, if they're in my home. The same should go for websites. Moderators have the right to moderate on a site, for whatever reason. It's their website, not yours. They have the right to allow or disallow any information they want. Someone said that moderators are required by law to remove posts. No they're not. Maybe in Iran or North Korea. Not in the free world.

I agree you have the right to kick someone offensive from your house.
I agree that it is their website and not mine.

I do NOT agree with "allow or disallow ANY information..."

I feel that when a website starts a forum, it needs to allow people to express themselves in any way they like as long as it is not offensive. A forum in fact is inviting people to participate, or else it would not exist. 'Offensive' can be subjective and the judge of that needs to be the moderators.

I felt (not having read the racist remark) that the rest was not offensive.

I mean we are not school kids. Really! We are working professionals who have to deal with lots worse during the course of our regular day.

Anyway no big deal and this is just my opinion. :)

The point was that it should be left up to the discretion of the site moderators as to what is allowed and not allowed - which is exactly the way it is, and the way it should be. I never read this "purple" thread at all.  The problem with total free speech with no rules or moderation on the internet is #1 Spam, #2 Trolls, #3 offensive speech that drives away traffic from your website. There has to be rules and enforcement of them, otherwise you get a bunch of foul language, arguments, and Vi@gra advertisements.

We remove very few threads, however, this is not a free for all.  In this case, We had a little more info than was apparent to many readers.  It was not about the many worthwhile posts, but the OP, and when he went, so did his posts and threads he started. 

Obviously, the OP was banned, and not just that particular thread removed.

28
Lenses / Re: Resistance to Larger Filter Size, Kills Great Lenses?
« on: February 03, 2013, 12:28:38 PM »
As I said before, if Tamron could do it, so can Canon.

29
EOS Bodies / Re: making a case for that crop body camera
« on: February 03, 2013, 12:26:47 PM »
Yes, I realize the FF equivalency. This is getting off topic from the OP's original post, but I've read numerous times online that the 17-55 is sharper. I don't have a 24-105 to compare it to. However, I've never been disappointed with the performance of the 17-55. Coupled with the extra reach (my 70-300 for instance becomes a 112-480mm and faster frame rate... and no, I can't afford the 1DX's 14fps) it was enough to convince me to keep my 7D as a second camera. I now shoot with both, and they make a great combo. The similar interface and body style makes switching between the two a seamless experience.

Bottom line is that if you can't take a good picture with a crop camera, then you can't take a good picture with a full frame camera either. As far as equipment goes, they're both excellent.

30
Lenses / Re: Resistance to Larger Filter Size, Kills Great Lenses?
« on: February 03, 2013, 11:49:24 AM »
So, why does it suddenly have to be 50% larger to add IS?

I'm not a Canon engineer, but I was thinking the same thing. Tamron did it with an 82mm filter. Why can't Canon?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10