September 30, 2014, 04:36:07 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 - Marsu42

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 312
I think more modest gear makes no difference to your enthusiasm, indeed it seems many are just gear hounds with self described "GAS", which I find kind of pathetic.

It can get even worse - too complicated gear can backfire on you. I contribute an impression just from last weekend: I met a tourist around in the countryside when I was shooting horses, and we started discussing gear. Turns out he has a d610 (or d600, I don't quite remember) and a 24-70/2.8, i.e. better gear than me.

But: He didn't touch his camera for three weeks because he cannot get anything in focus. I had to explain to him that the dof of f2.8 on full frame is thin and (in so many words) that expensive gear doesn't replace skill. Actually he was thankful to get to know it isn't entirely his personal fault. I can vividly imagine what Internet forums and sites made him buy something "good" to get "good" shots right from the start...

The other thing that happens when people stretch to buy more expensive gear, they are less inclined to take risks with it, I have never babied any of my gear, cheap or expensive, so can't understand getting an expensive camera and being afraid of getting it wet, but that is just me.........

Same with me, the second reason I didn't end up with a 5d2+70-200L/2.8 but with a 60d and my old lenses from the '90s ... dropped them, banged against all possible trees and such, shot with them laying on the ground instead of a tripod. But all in good faith that it's not that expensive. I have very bad memories of people over-protecting gear (cameras, cars, whatever) that exceeded their budget.

Looking at some posts about dslr beginners reasoning what camera bodies and lenses to buy, I'm asking myself: Does it really matter if you start with a 7d1 vs. 7d2 or 5d2 vs. 5d3? Do you need a 16-35L/4 instead of a 17-40L/4? Or isn't it smarter to save the money, learn a lot and then buy the next better model in a couple of years?

I know for me, "just" buying a 60d was a smart choice - a 5d2 would have been wasted. With the €1500 saved back then, I now bought a 6d basically for "free" and can even profit from it as my skill is up to it by now.

What about you? If you would have had top gear right from day one, would have it been "worth it"?

Lighting / Re: First Flash
« on: Today at 02:06:16 PM »
The hard part is that my wife doesn't like me to buy camera stuff, so the 600 is out.
Are they reasonable concerns?  If so, is there a mitigation?  Can you two work out a budget.

If it's about avoiding issues in a relationship, you might not want to go for salami tactics but really calculate the "total cost of ownership".

And, to be truthful, this can be hilariously high, as it's not only the initial purchase, but software, filters, lighting equipment like diffusers and reflectors, accessories like batteries, grips and memory cards. Last not least: repairs(!). Considering this, a full-fledged (radio) multi-flash system will blow the lid of the budget in no time.

Lighting / Re: First Flash
« on: Today at 10:02:52 AM »
Consider the Yongnuo 600 clone, if it works like the Canon one then it is worth it for the interface and the power.

If. Which it probably won't considering the bad performance of their rt transmitter... and if it's actually working, it won't be cheap.

430 ex II.

+1, like many here my first flash, should be rather cheap by now on ebay. The only drawbacks are that the head isn't as flexible, the power isn't great for outdoor hss & the display is tiny - but all that doesn't matter when "learning flash" with on-hotshoe bounce or an ettl cable with a bracket.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Posting about sensors and DR!
« on: Today at 09:49:41 AM »
BUT there is another part in the process that uses the same lower bits as shadow lifting: color reconstruction during debayering. No matter what you do to control contrast or suppress noise in software - color suffers one way or the other.

Interesting, I never considered that. I'd really like to see some samples of the influence of shadow noise/pattern on color fidelity/accuracy on ettr vs ettl to see how much real world impact this has and if it's only a problem for high-gloss fashion or for the rest of us, too.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Posting about sensors and DR!
« on: Today at 06:37:27 AM »
But with less noise and cleaner images, we escape from having to waste the time with extreme processing of the images....

That's "just" a software problem, but I agree there's room for improvement here as long as the data is in the image at all and not clipped.

At least the current ACR/Lightroom isn't designed to handle high-dr images that fill the histogram left to right, and you need to take a lot of hassle using tone curves and locals... I hope they'll improve here, DxO seems to have better "one-shot hdr"-like settings.

Point taken, but I think a company's service record should cover every facet, not just a particular area.

God forbid - someone has to pay for it after all. Why would I want to pay with my camera body and lens purchases for people who need basic operating system and application usage support? I could even do w/o Canon developing dpp, but if they do it certainly shouldn't support "free" 24/7 on-site support.

I've updated the original post with a set of example images from this weekend.

Thanks for all this work, it is interesting. One the one hand, as expected (at least by me :-p) there is a clear difference in shadow resolution, but fortunately for us Canon people you really have to push the exposure to see it. The difference in tonality is there, but you need side-by-side shots and Canon seems to be "good enough" for what I do. Last not least, I reckon the 6d has improved a bit over the older 5d3 in the deep shadow department.

One experiment would be nice though: Do a blind test or deliberately exchange and mis-label the Sony/Canon shots next time and see how many people still comment that Canon is sub-par and really needs to get a grip :-p

Canon General / Re: How Soon We Forget!
« on: Today at 03:20:42 AM »
So there's this "swagger factor" that can be applied, too.  But only if you own the "right" stuff.   ;) ;) ;)

Having a big white lens really helps. I vividly imagine the crowd in the local zoo parting in recognition of "here come's the pro" even with my mediocre 60d :-). So my ego has to thank Canon for painting the 70-300L white, as there's absolutely no technical reason to do so - there are no fluorite elements, and the lens isn't really large.

Canon General / Re: How Soon We Forget!
« on: Today at 02:50:13 AM »
With all the chatter today about needing more MP or DR, let's not forget where we were just 10-years ago.  For those of you under 30-years-old, 10-years ago seems like a lifetime.  For those of us over 60-years-old, 10-years ago seems like yesterday!

I'm in between, but I skipped the first generations of dslr cameras because the evolution was so fast and the (precious) money seemed wasted to me. I only re-entered with the "good enough" 60d and 18mp sensor, so my memories only include the film area:

* EOS 620 (1/4000s shutter, 1/250 x-sync) and Canon technical date back ... great camera. You could simply exchange the grip for a bigger one for bigger hands, nowadays you have to buy a semi-pro camera for that :-p ...
* EOS RT: nearly zero shutter lag and you can see the moment the picture is taken which all other dslrs don't manage because of the mirror blackout. Loved it ...

I think there's photographers and there's people who talk photography. For photographers, it's important to take pictures, for the others, it's all about chat-chat-chat!

I don't see this distinction at all, you can very well like chatting about THE next great lens or body that will rule them all, and still be able to have a serious, quality and matter-of-fact photog side. But for me, the strangest user category bordering on schizophrenic are those posting in an internet forum that people should get a life and participating is a waste of time :->

We can't know for sure because it would only have recorded it if he was logged in to the forum.

But we do know how many responses you can generate from a trollish post, that's the Internet for you: 39 and counting...

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Posting about sensors and DR!
« on: Today at 02:22:20 AM »
And that is what the debate is all about.... cleaner images. We all want the same thing

Nope, I disagree here: For me, dr is not about cleaner images, but about being able to capture a high-contrast scene with movement at all.  This is my one and only point in the whole discussion.

Yes, you can do perfect exposure all the time to make use of 100% of the histogram, you can do extreme postprocessing and lift shadows until you end up with 1 bit resolution, you can even try to bracket scenes with movement and composite bright parts like the sky.

But basically, for me this is about speed, flexibility and freedom of shooting what you want - ignoring that these matter is lacking a bit of imagination what windy landscape/journalism/daylight spots & wildlife/... might need.

so why are we attacking each other over this. Let's get along and try to be respectful.

+1 for that, the reason why CR is the only forum I participate in are the (usually...) nice and helpful interaction between regulars and new members alike. This and and the invisible pro moderation w/o "cleaning up" threads or throwing rules around in every thread.

I understand it is annoying if people feel some point is ignores because of brand loyalism, or on  the other side of trolling or lack of photography knowledge. But personally, I feel we've got a very low level of either fanboyism or trolling around CR - look at some other forums and then return happily to CR :-)

What causes the annoying halo?

It's caused by the hdr software being dumb and just assembling the source brackets according to exposure with no concern for the image content (how could it?). I find this to be a great problem with a *lot* of tonemapped shots, even with ones that are considered good by their authors.

Esp. with parts of trees or something else tall reaching into the sky, it's a halo and/or the top part of the object going suddenly very dark. The latter probably like our eye sees the world, but it isn't supposed to be in a single image.

There is no such thing as "accurate colors" from RAW files, nothing can be rendered without a camera profile/picture style (well it can but you don't want to see it, it is green and dark with no contrast and a gamma of 1.0) choose one better to your liking, it is as simple as that.

Good point there, and it's easy to miss since at least in Lightroom the most important setting is at the last position of the development module - so usually you get to work with "Adobe Standard" which, after some consideration, is not my choice.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: iPhone 6 gets an Exmor
« on: September 29, 2014, 03:45:58 PM »
Is this a Good Thing™ or a Bad Thing™?

This is a Totally Awsome™ thing because now we can intimidate all these Nikon fanboys by stating that even mobile phones have their Sony sensor, so it cannot be any good! And anyway, who wants to own a camera from a manufacturer that cannot even produce its own sensors :-p

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 312