November 23, 2014, 02:47:47 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 - Marsu42

Pages: 1 ... 179 180 [181] 182 183 ... 337
Lenses / Re: Lens Help - 17-40 & 70-200 f/4 or 24-70 f/4
« on: January 29, 2013, 01:16:47 AM »
I don't like variable apertures... especially if you are shooting in manual... it can be a pain having to do the math on the fly to make sure your exposure is right.

The latest magic lantern have an "exposure lock" option for m mode that keeps exposure constant when changing t/f/iso (and that includes changing f by zooming in or out) :-)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« on: January 29, 2013, 01:14:03 AM »
because no competition have anything like APS-H, the image quality drop vs full frame is minimal unlike the wonderfull APS-C.

Well, I understand your point and I'd probably even buy an enthusiast aps-h camera - but as discussed all over expanding the dslr market share doesn't seem to be Canon thinking, for them it's most important to grab as much money as they can get away with while while keeping a strong position in the pro/cps-segment - and the latter is mostly ff :-\

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 6D flash sync
« on: January 29, 2013, 01:09:11 AM »
Does this mean that magic lanterns software will allow the use of 1/8000 because that's a big deal

I wouldn't count on it, Canon obviously has an interest to prevent it, and even if ml manages it then it might wear down the shutter faster because it isn't designed for it. I really don't know if the x-sync and shutter speed limits are due to firmware crippling or based on cheaper hardware than the 5d3/5d2.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« on: January 28, 2013, 05:18:54 PM »
Lots of discussions on if APS-H is really dead, or has an opening to return...

Why would Canon do that - it's loose-loose for them, they'd sell less expensive tele lenes for the well-off people while loosing ef-s compatibility and alienating the 7d crowd who bought a 17-55 or 10-22 lens.

The only reason for Canon would be if the competition went ahead and many Canon users would consider switching, but in Nikon-land it's also either 1.5x crop or ff.

So much for all the b*** ***t about Canon using outdated sensor technology.

You're confusing "outdated" with "bad": yes, Canon is behind the competition in sensor design (low iso sharpness, shadow noise, mp & dr) and no, that doesn't mean that Canon sensors cannot be an appropriate tool for most jobs - actually even my 60d is.

Lenses / Re: Lens Help - 17-40 & 70-200 f/4 or 24-70 f/4
« on: January 28, 2013, 03:44:26 PM »
I do a lot of walking/hiking.  I don’t like carrying a ton of stuff, and almost never bring a tripod.  So my landscapes tend to be handheld wherever I am.  I wasn't into people pictures until we had our first kid.  Now she seems to dominate my subject matter.

Then the 17-40L is not for you - you can shoot @high iso with the 6d and thus gain higher shutter speeds that compensates for the missing IS, but at the same time you will loose a lot of dynamic range that is important for landscape. And if you're shooting hdr brackets, it's best with a tripod or at least IS so that the frames overlap as much as possible.

Only you can determine if you'd miss the 17-23 range, it's quite a lot, but it's not "general purpose" on full frame and as KR (in this case correctly) says: an uaw lens is not for "taking it all in" landscape but for the uwa effect, esp. when shooting objects near to the lens (the 17-40L has a very good min. focusing distance).

As for the tele zoom, I'd also recommend to have a look at the 70-300L because of it's small pack size (extending zoom) vs. the internal zoom of the 70-200s. Then add a used 24-105L and you're good to go, the overlap of the two lenses is nice because you can skip changing them when outdoors or in a hurry.

As for the 24-70/4: Yes, completely overpriced, near-macro capability sounds nice but it lacks working distance - and the 70-300L has a good max. magnification because of 300mm + small min. focusing distance.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« on: January 28, 2013, 03:15:09 PM »
Prices of many cameras will keep climbing, as long as the US Dollar stays depressed. Nothing new here.

Keep your head up, you could do worse - like living in Europe with the current € crisis :-\

Personally I'd like Canon to introduce a 6Dv version - no wi fi and gps but a mag alloy top plate  :)

For me a 6Drts-af please, with built-in rt flash master, swivel screen and 11 pt true crosspoint af @f2.8 - *then* I'm more likely to consider the €2000 price is justified...

Software & Accessories / Re: Any value in using DPP along side Lightroom?
« on: January 28, 2013, 11:05:27 AM »
DPP has better color profiles than LR
better contrast
no yellow casts

The yellow cast in ACR raw processing disappears if the "camera neutral" profile is applied, then the colors should look like dpp or in-camera...

You're right about that and this is why I can't really see why you would ever want to delete your RAW files. I'd never ever "lock" my work to a lossy, essentially non-editable format!

I asked the same question in some lr forum and got the usual answer "you don't really need/want that" :-p ... but I disagree, I have many shots I want to keep for reference (like "don't do this again", landmarks/signs, tech. crappy but still memorable shots) that I don't need to keep in raw. My solution: Export to jpeg w/o keywords in the same location, auto re-import into lr, then use syncomatic to copy the keywords etc to the jpeg.

A 60d dng raw file takes about 23mb, a compressed dng about 10mb, a jpeg about 1mb - that's something to think about no matter how "cheap" hd space has become.

Or is it nonsense since these instant printer machines arent that good anyway?

It isn't about "good", but about "different" - any printer might very well print colors from the raw file that aren't included in srgb. So the safe bet is to use photopro, the downside is that this isn't wysiwyg because your partly flying blind - the photopro space cannot be displayed on a lcd monitor either.

Your best option is to have a proofing file from the target printer and use softproofing like with lr4, that will make a much larger difference than juggling with colorspaces because it usually won't matter much unless comparing some far in between shots side by side.

Lenses / Re: Just bought a new Canon EF 70-300L IS USM lens.
« on: January 28, 2013, 02:30:13 AM »
I am seriously thinking about getting one of the Kenko tele's, but has anyone had any experience using the 2X tele's with this lens?

The 2x will most likely be worse than cropping, so it'd be only an advantage for very high iso shots - imho the 1.4x is the max for the 70-300L that makes any sense, not only because of the f11 problem.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« on: January 28, 2013, 02:28:39 AM »
serious rumors will only surface a few days/weeks before releasing the new camera...

A serious rumor imho isn't a rumor anymore - Canon simply is very secretive and never leaks any information on purpose to generate interest or divert attention from the competition (unlike other large companies), a habit that falls in line with them being a candidate for the "most conservative company of the world" award.

EOS Bodies / Re: Where are you EOS 70D?
« on: January 27, 2013, 06:04:40 PM »
As a matter of practicality, weather sealing generally seems to preclude the use of an articulating screen unless you are willing to take on the added risk that the seal may not hold, and could break at any point in time after you start articulating.

Afaik the degradation of sealing concerns any points, lens and buttons? Of course I recognize your point, but since I'm no engineer I've got the privilege to stay naive and still not entirely convinced sealing and swivel screen are mutually exclusive - after all people build space stations with some sealing that needn't replacement every other month...

... and concerning the 60d I just came back from 2h shooting in light rain with the swivel screen out and can happily report I've done that a lot of times and entirely trust the sealing to survive it, and that's the most extreme shooting situation I accept w/o running for shelter :-o

I wonder if a digital medium format camera has been considered by this photographer?

They probably wanted to leak the dslr spec the president was shot with and make him a man of the people (you can also afford a 85L!) rather than a leader whose picture is taken with a medium format camera worth the price of a porsche racecar - the man is a democrat after all :-p

Software & Accessories / Re: Any value in using DPP along side Lightroom?
« on: January 27, 2013, 01:05:29 PM »
The only thing DPP does differently than LR is the features like highlight tone priority. LR won't recognize them. I never use them anyway.

That's probably why you didn't realize lr recognizes htp just fine (at least by now), the only raw converters I know of that ignore the htp flag are some oss command line versions.

  • Picture styles are much more realistic than in Lightroom

Are you sure? I'm using the neutral style and the lr import looks just like the sooc jpeg or the preview on the camera.

  • Lens correction for the available lenses is better than in Lightroom

For complex distortions I'd use dxo, I don't know about dpp, but for your average ca/vignetting/distortion correction at least with my lenses lr works great, Adobe now has better profiles than in lr3 and the ca correction has been also improved. I haven't tried dpp and compared though.

Pages: 1 ... 179 180 [181] 182 183 ... 337