October 23, 2014, 02:25:08 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 ... 42 43 [44] 45 46 ... 62
646
Lenses / Re: 100 f/2.8L or 135mm f/2L
« on: November 15, 2012, 03:01:59 PM »
85L II = 135L

They're are very, very close in producing great photos. So close I consider them Equal.

I have the 135 and love it, and I am borrowing the 200 F2.0L for an indefinite timespan (a bit big to carry around, but great). I have borrowed the 85L II several times, and it has left me wanting. I am no expert to be able to speak with umph on which is best, but my impression is that the latter has an extra thing to it.

647
Lenses / Re: 100 f/2.8L or 135mm f/2L
« on: November 15, 2012, 02:06:35 PM »
I agree with several here that 135 on a crop body is a bit long indoors. My wife uses my 135 often on her 600D, but mostly outdoors. However... If you go for the 100L (which is also a great lens), you not only give up a stop, but also speed on the AF. The 135 is very fast in AF. Second, I would also think about another point, which is that when you are about to invest in L glass as you are now, I would also think past your current camera. Don't know if you are thinking about going full frame or not, but if you see yourself going that way, I would argue that the 135 is the third best portrait lens in the Canon lineup (200 F2.0L, 85L II, 135L). A great lens will outlast a body..

648
Lenses / Re: Best Lens for photographing children
« on: November 14, 2012, 05:19:19 PM »
I would agree with several here about the 135 and 85L II. they can separate the kids from the crowd, and you having a 5D III gives you quite a range in ISO performance. AI Servo will be good though. I have lost a lot of shots of my two young boys trying to capture them in One shot mode :)

Myself, I don't have the 85L II (I got the Siggy 1.4 which is also great, at least until you have tried the 85L II :( )

650
Video & Movie / Re: First attempt with my 1d-x
« on: November 11, 2012, 11:18:24 AM »
Technique fine, content like a 14 year old boy's fantasy.

651
Sports / Re: motorsport photos
« on: November 11, 2012, 08:46:21 AM »
Not much amateur over these shots :) Brilliant, and welcome!

652
thank you Neuro and KBmelb for your answers. I have had this as one of my most wanted lenses for a long time. I will still get it after what you say, but not with eyes wide shut :)

653
Lenses / Re: Lens recommendation -newborn shoot
« on: November 06, 2012, 07:49:40 AM »
I shot this picture of my youngest son with a 5DII and a 100L HIS : http://500px.com/photo/2197306

and it is fun for eyes and body parts and such.

I don't have a 85L II myself unfortunately, but coupling the buttery bokeh of that lens with the incredible texture of newborns and their cute clothes is imho a match made in heaven :)

654
Lenses / Re: Lens recommendation -newborn shoot
« on: November 06, 2012, 02:28:23 AM »
Just my two cents: (have not had time to read other than your original post).

I would rent the 85L II, and if you want to have some fun artistic shots, use the 100L too :)

655
The camera's WB doesn't affect RAW images, so that's possible only if the camera outputs JEPG whose WB processing algorithm is "better" than that of computer processing software.

But I read somwhere that cameras collect data for different channels RGB and than applies WB. Too technical for me so maybe I explained it wrong. However, some say that even though one can play with WB in post it is not as precise as one would hit it the very first time.

My idea of using expodisc was a bit different than suggested. I'd like to use it in a room with multiple sources so I woud just point at the scene not each source and help camere make a good balance. Does this make sense?

Just my two cents:

I my mind it makes sense, whether you use a Lastolite, like shown over (could very well be better than expodisc, but bigger to carry around by the looks of it (it is not like you don't have enough to carry around if you're doing a shoot)). I have a warm expodisc and it works great. However when I have forgotten it, I have often just used a regular xerox paper (they are not perfect white), or a recycled napkin (brown/greyish) and it works great too. If anything goes wrong in your opinion, you can fix it in pp.

The way I do it (and I am not a professional in the sense that this is my main income), is that I put the expodisc on the lens and shoot at the person's face very close to get the best reading. If you are using strobes or Speedlights, you would want to have a remote trigger (ST-E2, or ST-E3 if you have the 600 RT EX, youngno, or Pocket wizard or whatever). The reason you would want a remote trigger is that if you use a 580 or 600 as a master it will (not sure if they can trigger without emitting light?) cast light when you are standing next to your subject to get a reading, and that will affect the reading in a wrong direction. If you have the remote, you put up the flashes where you want them, then trigger them while taking a reading next to the subject, and then put in the reading as your custom white balance. If you don't have a expodisc, lastolite, cube or whatever, try with a xerox paper. What I do is to turn of the AF on the lens, put the paper right next to their face, make sure the lens is out of focus, take a shot, and it immediatly becomes better than the AWB will give you in my experience.

G.

656

Has anybody tried using Expodisc? Apparently produces great results, but it is a bit expensive, though.

I remember I read somewhere that even though one can correct WB in post it sometimes leads to wrong colors afterwards. Like, changing WB in post doesn't treat all colors the same, for example blue becomes darker blue while red doesn't and I belive some cast was mentioned. Does anybody have an idea about this issue?

I have one for 77mm thread. It works great, but I found that using a normal A4 sheet of paper or a napkin does the job as well. Save the money for something else :)

657
Just my two cents:

I would try to scrape together a few more bucks and get the 70-200 II, and if not, get the 135L, one of the few lenses you never hear anyone say anything bad about, quite the opposite. I would stay put on body, since the 60D is a brilliant crop body with a good sensor. Also put on body, since I would expect like many other here a 7D II in the coming year, which will change the game again. Have you shot with a full frame before? It is a different ball game.

G.

There's always a few more bucks available... but then I have to hear crap from the wife.  Actually I hear crap from her when I buy and sell lenses and put the profit towards new gear.  For those out there who aren't married... feel free to stay that way. 

I'm probably going to get the 135L and I know there may be a second version coming out, but I find it difficult to believe that the next version will be heralded even more than the 135. 

I haven't shot with a full frame before, but I do understand the 1.6 crop factor.  I'm constantly doing the math with my lenses saying X would be approximately Y on a full frame.  I know I don't use all the functions on my 60D, but I am looking for better low-light iso performance.  And I won't find that in the crop sensor market.  So I'm basically eliminating the 7D mkii (presuming it isn't just a rumor) and the 70D.

I hear you:) I am married and have two boys. If not, I would have had a 1dx, and many more lenses by now :)

I would be audacious (not sure if that is spelled correct) enough to say that to me; if they release a 135L II, I could care less, given that it is the best lens I have from Canon. Could it be better? Possibly, but the world is so big, and there are many more lenses I need (I think). For portrait you can hardly find any better from Canon, except for the focal lenght limitations. This is the reason why I would love to have the 85 F1.2L II as well :). I have the Siggy 1.4 now, and it is great. However, and this is a big curse, I get to borrow pretty much all Canon lenses there are, and it is a curse, because once you have tried the 85 II, the other in that range suddenly don't cut it anymore :)

The reason why I put the 70-200 first (and believe me and all the others in here who have it, it it truly a great lens), is because given your limited amount and focal range of lenses (not trying to be rude here), I would opt for a more choices in range, before going for the nirvana of fixed focal lenghts.

G.

658
You have some good glass already, but it might be better to get the telephoto or nice prime at this stage, then look at what new bodies are on offer in 2013, so keep your 60D until then. Who knows, the 6D may be a great camera in terms of IQ and a 7D2 may appear, so best to keep your options open and extend your lens collection.

+1

659
Lenses / Re: Canon 24-70 II Or Primes Particularly 50MM 1.2L
« on: November 04, 2012, 10:40:30 AM »
I really don't understand the question :) I want both, not to mention your camera...

I tried the 24-70 II on a 1DX and it was an awsome combo. the 50L is however a brilliant lens which gives you creative opportunities that the 24-70 will not give you. Hence I will get both, I just need some persuasive work towards my better half :)

660
Just my two cents:

I would try to scrape together a few more bucks and get the 70-200 II, and if not, get the 135L, one of the few lenses you never hear anyone say anything bad about, quite the opposite. I would stay put on body, since the 60D is a brilliant crop body with a good sensor. Also put on body, since I would expect like many other here a 7D II in the coming year, which will change the game again. Have you shot with a full frame before? It is a different ball game.

G.

Pages: 1 ... 42 43 [44] 45 46 ... 62