December 21, 2014, 04:54:39 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 - Quasimodo

Pages: 1 ... 27 28 [29] 30 31 ... 65
421
Lenses / Re: 24-105L or Sigma 35.1.4 for 6D walk-around
« on: April 28, 2013, 12:07:38 PM »
I've been pretty happy with my 50D kit for general travel/nature/event photography, but I've been wanting to pick up a FF camera to achieve shallower DOF more easily for portraits and lower noise when shooting indoor events (e.g. my son's plays in dark theaters). I downloaded RAW samples from DPR for the 50D, 6D and 5D Mark III and played with them all in LR 4, and I was shocked at the difference between either FF and 50D (easily 2 stops in noise and better contrast across the board). I was leaning towards a 5D mark III, but I just can't justify the extra cash (as an amateur) and don't want the extra bulk and weight for travel, so I've settled on a 6D for its smaller size and GPS.

My dilemma, though, is whether to buy the kit with 24-105L or skip it and put the $500 towards a Sigma 35 1.4 HSM. I already have a 17-40L, 70-200 F4is and 85 1.8, so that wouldn't leave too big a gap in FL, and since what I'm really missing with my 50D is DOF control the large aperture 35 seems really appealing (particularly after the reviews I've read here). The 35 at 1.4-2 looks better than 24-105 at 5.6-8 to my eye. I used to shoot fixed FL lenses exclusively in my film days, so I know the pluses/minuses of that from a creativity standpoint and have no problem "zooming with my feet".

Any opinions of 24-105 vs 35 1.4 for a walk-around would be appreciated. Either way I intend to keep the 50D for now (probably bolted to the 100-400L for zoo/wildlife work).

Thanks

-Wade

Get both :)

For a walkaround the 24-105 is brilliant. To get creative, or low light, or street,- get the 35/1.4. I have both and they are both great, but with different uses. I had however a strange flarephenomenon that affected sharpness on the 35, as I wrote about in another thread here. The result is that I don't use it in studio, but for many other situations.

422
Lenses / Re: 24-105L or Sigma 35.1.4 for 6D walk-around
« on: April 28, 2013, 12:01:22 PM »
So if am getting this right my 135 is actually f 3.2 on my wife's 600D? Is this true even if it does not exist any FF options?

Yes, for equivalent DoF, the 'crop factor' applies to aperture as well - the APS-C equivalent to the 135/2 on FF is a hypothetical 189mm f/3.2 lens.  The FoV changes because of the smaller sensor; the DoF changes because to get the same framing with the cropped FoV, you need to be further from the subject (e.g. to take a head shot, you're further with a 135mm lens on APS-C than FF), and increased distance means deeper DoF.  Exposure isn't affected (metering is the same), although obviously you can use a higher ISO on FF for the same amount of noise.

Ok, thanks. I learn something new every day :)

423
Lenses / Re: 24-105L or Sigma 35.1.4 for 6D walk-around
« on: April 28, 2013, 11:39:49 AM »
What do you plan to shoot while walking around with a 'walkaround' lens?  A 35mm prime doesn't offer a lot of flexibility.  FWIW, f/4 on FF is like f/2.5 on APS-C for DoF.  The 24-105L is a great general purpose lens on FF.

RE keeping the 50D, at low ISO the 6D image cropped to the APS-C FoV will give equivalent IQ (but only 7.8 MP); above ISO 800 the cropped 6D's IQ will be better.

Just re-read. Is it opposite? I.e. That the 600D and 135 is actually f1.25?

424
Lenses / Re: 24-105L or Sigma 35.1.4 for 6D walk-around
« on: April 28, 2013, 11:28:27 AM »
What do you plan to shoot while walking around with a 'walkaround' lens?  A 35mm prime doesn't offer a lot of flexibility.  FWIW, f/4 on FF is like f/2.5 on APS-C for DoF.  The 24-105L is a great general purpose lens on FF.


So if am getting this right my 135 is actually f 3.2 on my wife's 600D? Is this true even if it does not exist any FF options? I am contemplating the new x100s  and it has a 35mm equivalent, and a f2.0. Does this mean that it is really 35mm f3.2?

425
Abstract / Re: Crusty
« on: April 28, 2013, 03:45:46 AM »
I like your idea and picture. I am fascinated by various textures, yet your image does not seem sharp.

426
Canon General / Re: The best camera is the one....
« on: April 27, 2013, 02:19:48 PM »
I stand by my signature line....
I was thinking of you and your signature line just two hours ago. Here in Phnom Penh the rainy season is just starting, we just had a huge thunderstorm passing by the city a few hours ago. In the aftermath I went to pick up pizzas around 6 PM our time and the light was just fantastic. I saw two fantastic images, I had nothing to capture them with, one towards the setting sun over a couple of taller buildings and one to the east, with the sun behind me lighting up an old Soviet apartment building that is falling apart. I often bring my S100 in the car but just forgot this time and I missed it. I'll bring it tomorrow though.

Have a great weekend!

J

....is the one in my hand when I need it :)
Two weeks ago, after a winter of shooting a great grey owl at considerable distance, on the only day I didn't have any camera with me, there he is, perched on a limb 2 meters away.... I watched him for thirty minutes thinking that you could have gotten great shots with even an iPhone...... A camera sitting at home is useless!
We live and learn. There'll be more raim the coming week. I will go and get that shot with the setting sun on that building and post it here. Framing will be difficult, but if I can get near what I saw today I will be happy.

:)

A experience we all share

427
Thanks for bringing this photographer to our (my) attention. Just googled Andre Arment. Really enjoy his photography.

+1

428
I found this review informative, and I don't want this camera any less after reading this :)

http://m.cultofmac.com/cultofmac/#!/entry/fujifilm-x100-is-the-best-digital-camera-i-have-ever,5176a4ab94f4be71694adc2b/1

429
Canon General / Re: The best camera is the one....
« on: April 27, 2013, 09:37:30 AM »
I stand by my signature line....
I was thinking of you and your signature line just two hours ago. Here in Phnom Penh the rainy season is just starting, we just had a huge thunderstorm passing by the city a few hours ago. In the aftermath I went to pick up pizzas around 6 PM our time and the light was just fantastic. I saw two fantastic images, I had nothing to capture them with, one towards the setting sun over a couple of taller buildings and one to the east, with the sun behind me lighting up an old Soviet apartment building that is falling apart. I often bring my S100 in the car but just forgot this time and I missed it. I'll bring it tomorrow though.

Have a great weekend!

J

....is the one in my hand when I need it :)

430
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Why do we buy Canon? What idiots are we?
« on: April 27, 2013, 02:59:48 AM »
I admit being an idiot. Clicking on this thread proves it

431
Lenses / Re: 24-70L II is fantastic
« on: April 26, 2013, 06:26:21 PM »

Scanning the City by Jesse Herzog, on Flickr


Kensington by Jesse Herzog, on Flickr

Cool and creative first shot, but the shaddow of the person seems amiss. Is it pp later on?

432
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM
« on: April 25, 2013, 04:14:28 PM »
with that USB docking thingy from sigma it looks like we can adjust focus at 4 different focusing distances for primes. Sigma posted a video of it in action. looks very clear and powerful to me.

Link? :)

433
I can't help you with the stacking thing unfortunately
but I gotta ask why use f/8?
I use 2.8 on my 16-35 with the focus set to infinity..
That way you can keep your ISO down to a minimum and get less noise at
the same amount of time.. using the 600 rule...
If you have a 30 Sec exposure using ISO 6400 @ f/8 you can go down to
ISO 800 @ f/2.8 and still have a 30 sec exposure..
You'll still get the sharpness you need..

What is the 600 rule?

Thanks,

C
A rule of thumb method to calculate the maximum exposure time, for a particular focal length, before star trails become noticeable. It's simply 600 / focal length = exposure time (in seconds).

For a 50mm lens, 600/50 = 12 seconds.
For a 15mm lens, 600/15 = 40 seconds.

By keeping the exposure to those times or less, the stars appear as dots, not trails.

THANK YOU!!!

Wow...talk about a VERY informative post for a noob!!!!

Thank you very much!

C

ps. Do you have any insight into what stacking photos are? Is that similar to HDR photography?

There is many programs who can help you with stacking, and you use stacking for many things, which among them are stacking panoramas, HDR or focus stacking. There are great tutorials on this if you enter these names on youtube. I use Photoshop CS 6 for this, and Photoshop 5 before that and I think it works great.

Example one Panorama picture (and you can see the result earlier in this post with my shot from Shanghai). I used a 5D II with a 16-35 II. I turned the camera to portrait mode (vertically, to get more sky) and shot eight pictures free hand. What I normally do is to make sure that the pictures overlap with about 25%. After getting them on the computer just go to photoshop - file - Automate - Photomerge and then choose the option that work best for your shot.

Example two Focus Stacking. Although a lowres version of this picture, this picture is taken with the 17mm TS and is comprised of 28 pictures in one.

Focus stacking can be especially useful in macropictures as DOF is very shallow.

Good luck.

434
I can't help you with the stacking thing unfortunately
but I gotta ask why use f/8?
I use 2.8 on my 16-35 with the focus set to infinity..
That way you can keep your ISO down to a minimum and get less noise at
the same amount of time.. using the 600 rule...
If you have a 30 Sec exposure using ISO 6400 @ f/8 you can go down to
ISO 800 @ f/2.8 and still have a 30 sec exposure..
You'll still get the sharpness you need..

What is the 600 rule?

Thanks,

C
A rule of thumb method to calculate the maximum exposure time, for a particular focal length, before star trails become noticeable. It's simply 600 / focal length = exposure time (in seconds).

For a 50mm lens, 600/50 = 12 seconds.
For a 15mm lens, 600/15 = 40 seconds.

By keeping the exposure to those times or less, the stars appear as dots, not trails.

Thank you :) I did not know that, but it is very useful information.

435
I'm actually doing a Workshop end this month with Pak Rarindra here in Jkt, dropped a 2 week Dive Trip so I could attend a 4 Day Private Workshop, My skills as a Landscape Photographer hopefully will be improved.

Do you mind filming it? ;) I would not mind to pay for a step by step video tutorial!

Pages: 1 ... 27 28 [29] 30 31 ... 65