October 24, 2014, 08:02:57 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 - Quasimodo

Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 ... 63
451
Lenses / Re: Photozone spanks the 24-70 F4 USM L IS
« on: March 04, 2013, 01:55:14 PM »
Not a wholly unflattering portrait of a lens. Yes price seems a little high for what you get but I am sure the little Japanese guys at canons advertising and marketing department know more than I do so they obviously think there is a market for this lens. I also assume the 24-105 will soon go the way of the dinosaurs or well see an update to that lens (I'd actually be really interested in that) probably at a much higher price point. Fwiw there seems to be little reason to buy this lens unless you have red ring envy or really care about weight, the tamron is cheaper, faster, and also has IS.

+1

452
Lenses / Re: Photozone spanks the 24-70 F4 USM L IS
« on: March 04, 2013, 01:53:53 PM »
I don't know if I would call that a spanking. The review is mostly very positive with one big gotcha. That big gotcha plus the high cost of this lens means I would expect few to choose it over the 24-105. Maybe that does add up to a spanking.  ;)

Well... Residual Spherical abborations, focus shift, soft @ F 4, and a not so compelling price.. I'll hold on to my 24-105 for a while longer. A lens that continue to deliver. ;)

454
Lenses / Re: Lens purchase strategy
« on: March 03, 2013, 06:08:43 PM »
While I do appreciate your thoughts and position, there is something inherent pragmatist in your reasoning. Did I really need the 8-15 or the Siggy 35 that I bought this Christmas??... Probably not, but I have to feed the dreamer within, and thus great pleasure in lying awake at night mentally constructing the great shot I hope to take. I not only have what I need, but what I might potentially need; if I was a better photographer than what I am! :)

Dreaming is key and I will not gainsay its importance in any creative endeavor. We will still be etching reliefs on the walls of caves if we didn't dream.

My comments were just directed at those who go after artificial marketing gimmicks that say "you need to have this cohesive grouping of UWA lenses" or this “trinity” of portrait lenses or this  be-all-end-all zoom for sports and everything else under the sun (yes, I am looking at you 70-200 f2.8 II fanboys ;)).

I hear you.

Fetischism (not sure about the spelling here, but understood in a Marxist way) is a part of all serious debates, whether it is photo, guns, cooking or... The secret is balance.. I convinced myself once that I HAD to have the 17mm TS, but today I would rather have had the 14L II. But who knows. Maybe one day I might use it, apart from the obligotary use now ;)

455
Lenses / Re: Lens purchase strategy
« on: March 03, 2013, 04:12:53 PM »
There is a "completionist" mentality amongst some of us...where we want most of the red rings even if our shooting style does not support the lusted-after purchases. Canon of course will gladly take our money; I think Canon has some of the best marketing strategist working for them.

I bitterly complain about weight here in the forum...being mostly a people photographer, someone like me even lusting after the 600L is just plain silly... And I don't. My shooting style doesn't require it, even if I could afford it, it is highly unlikely I would be able to carry it, or appreciate its full worth. It is clearly a superb product, but it is best left in the hands of those who will use it to it fullest extent.

I would be a completionist if I wanted the supertele just to have this range "covered"...how often have we heard similar refrains in so many guises?  "Oh I need the ultra wide range covered...don't have a sharp lens there"...

 The fact some of us shoot landscapes now and then does not make us a landscape specialist who needs to lust after the 14-24 L that doesn't even exist yet! The fact we took a semi acceptable picture of the tufted titmouse that visited our bird feeder doesn't make us a bird photographer who needs to lust after the 400 f/2.8 IS II.

Completion-ism also drives us to collect or strive toward artificial groupings like Canon's "holy trinity"...if you choose 35L as a standard then there is perhaps a case to be made for getting the 85L and 135L.... There is enough spacing between them. But say if you truly loved your 50mm as your standard?  Then the 35L is not that far, so most chose either it or the 50L. But here is the kicker...in this case, some recommend that you add the 24L instead to complete an alternate "trinity" along with the 85 or perhaps the 135L.

Onerous as the original holy trinity concept is, at least it losely encompassed the classic portrait lenses... yes, even the wider 35mm. But how applicable is 24L on a routine basis to people photography? You could argue that you take street shots with 24L, and surely 14L can take pictures of people...but that is not the most common use for these wide-angle lenses. This alternate grouping straddles disparate styles of photography unlike the original somewhat "cohesive", albeit still artificial grouping.

And why stop at a trinity? Why not a "penta-perfect?" or "super-six?". Or instead of the holy trinity...I'll make something up here...how about we stop at the "divine duality?" Say, 50L and 135L? ;)

So "completionism" makes us invent artificial grouping; like a hapless magpie, it goads us to collect things we do not need, use frequently, or employ to their fullest ability.

Stop the madness and look at your shooting style first; get the best lens you can afford in that range. Strive or dream about updating to the highest quality lens in that range as finances allow over time. Dump the idea you need an L in every single focal range that ever existed.

While I do appreciate your thoughts and position, there is something inherent pragmatist in your reasoning. Did I really need the 8-15 or the Siggy 35 that I bought this Christmas??... Probably not, but I have to feed the dreamer within, and thus great pleasure in lying awake at night mentally constructing the great shot I hope to take. I not only have what I need, but what I might potentially need; if I was a better photographer than what I am! :)

456
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Art Tool or Art Object?
« on: March 02, 2013, 12:45:57 PM »
Interesting, well written, thought provoking, and a welcomed perspective, I think your analogy to guns is acute to a certain extent. While both guns and cameras tries to stop action, only the former aims to kill or to injure, while the latter acts in a non-destructive manner.

Photography to me is art, a technical intellectual endeavour, at times a tideous task (when asked to shoot within strict parameters for money), intellectually stimulating, and finally an existencialistic journey. I feel your review touched much on the last, thus welcome.

If not already, I bet you would enjoy reading the French sociologist Bruno Latour. He is very much concerned with the essence of matters.

G

457
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Obama using Canon!
« on: March 01, 2013, 12:35:26 PM »
Ok, I was just hoping....

Hoping what?  That the President is under an NDA with Canon and is testing a 35L MkII?   :-X

What a great way to introduce it! ;)

458
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Obama using Canon!
« on: March 01, 2013, 12:03:40 PM »
Looks like a 35L, as you suggested.

Ok, I was just hoping....

459
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Obama using Canon!
« on: March 01, 2013, 11:53:21 AM »
He looks uncomfortable, I think he does better in front of the lens.   ;)

LOL.

Which lens though?

460
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Photos from Fuji X100s
« on: March 01, 2013, 11:48:01 AM »
I want this camera as a light weight carry-around!

461
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Obama using Canon!
« on: March 01, 2013, 11:38:35 AM »
Not sure if you have seen this? :)

Which lens is this? A 35 1.4L?

462
Portrait / Re: Post your best portraits(street, studio, candid etc...).
« on: February 28, 2013, 03:19:06 AM »
Here is a couple I took a couple of days ago. Critique is welcome. It was shot with 5D II and 135L @F2.0

463
Portrait / Re: Post your best portraits(street, studio, candid etc...).
« on: February 28, 2013, 03:16:30 AM »
Shot for Dodo Bird poster

I really like this one!

464
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 12,800ISO 5DMKIII Images
« on: February 27, 2013, 11:40:21 AM »
So this is the first time I have really used the camera above 3200ISO as I think the results at 3200 are amazing. In this case I couldn't be bothered to set up a tripod or my flash set up, so used this as a little test.

My car was in for a service and BMW gave me a new F30 3 series as a courtesy car. First time I have driven one and the interiors are really nice so thought I would take a few pics add them to the BMW forum im apart of.

Anyway the results are incredible. Minimal editing in post with a little NR 30 luminance on PS CS5.5. All was shot with available light, shot at night so that was the interior light of the car. Shot with my 24-105mm L and 100mm L.

Anyway if anyone else has any other images at 12,800 add them! What a camera.


BMW F30 3 Series interior by tom_scott88, on Flickr


BMW F30 3 Series interior, light console by tom_scott88, on Flickr


BMW F30 3 Series interior, centre console climate control by tom_scott88, on Flickr


BMW F30 3 Series interior, multifunction steering wheel by tom_scott88, on Flickr


BMW F30 3 Series interior, iDrive screen by tom_scott88, on Flickr

Brilliant shots, even regardless of the ISO. The composition is stellar imho, quite inspirational.

465
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Exposing to the left?
« on: February 25, 2013, 01:05:32 AM »
This thread and its like is one of the reasons why I keep coming back here. I am learning tons.

I have a question though (as mentioned in some previous posts here where you explain that you switched cameras and they expose differently). Did you use the same lens? I would assume that while the camerasensor, metering system, DR and so forth on one side, the reflective properties of the material (i.e. the degree to which the subject you shoot sends back light), and the lens which is also a medium that light have to pass through would alter the process?

Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 ... 63