Messages

46

Animal Kingdom / Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?

« on: May 21, 2013, 12:52:45 PM »

So again, where is that line in the sand? Is it as simple as ---if you can pull it off in lightroom it's real, but the moment it hits photoshop it isn't?  Oh wait, there's that spot removal tool in lightroom...

I think we all could agree on that with digital there is no binary "line in the sand", but for me it's good to get an awareness where the grey area is for me and other people - and one point certainly is adding information that wasn't in the original shot, while heavy lr postprocessing or single-scene compositing (hdr, blending) and some spot "cleaning" imho is ok and qualifies as (digital) photography.

Syl Arena writes (I can't remember the exact quote): "I'm a photographer, not a postprocessing artist" and that's why he tries to get it right in camera and not in photoshop.

47

Animal Kingdom / Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?

« on: May 21, 2013, 11:52:14 AM »

Disagree, I think both pixel peeping and photo ethics are perfectly valid subjects to discuss on a photography forum

+1 ... I cannot get my head around it that people read a thread they're not interested in, this one or technical "pixel peeping" and waste their time even more commenting how useless and boring it is and that they couldn't care less.

or perhaps even to begin "cleansing" a certain group of people...and I don't mean with soap!  "The end justifies the means..."

Personally I find a discussion about this informative and wouldn't subscribe to a relativistic and "there are no ethics" point of view - the latter has prominent protagonists in history who thought that reality is what you make it :-)

48

Software & Accessories / Re: Flickr is now 1 Terabytes!! For everyone!!

« on: May 21, 2013, 07:31:46 AM »

Question: My main issue with "free" Flickr is (or was?) that only the newest 300 shots or something like that are shown - has this changed or do I still need a paid account to be able to show older shots?

49

Animal Kingdom / Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?

« on: May 21, 2013, 07:19:18 AM »

Thanks for the share! In my photo, such clouds do exist in that part of the world.

What about the bushes you removed, are there bush-less areas up to the horizon so you could theoretically have gotten this shot around the corner at another time w/o editing? Aren't these cats often around bushes to get cover before attacking their prey?

These things decide if it's more of a "photo" to me than cleaning up distracting objects just for the sake of "a "clean" and perfect shot. I'm often unsure if I should "clean" up my own pictures in the background, it's really a hard decision if this alters it just a bit to avoid distraction or if it's already my personal "this doesn't feel right anymore" category.

50

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Unimpressed with 6D + 24-105. Am I doing something wrong?

« on: May 20, 2013, 06:13:31 PM »

Linguistic note:  "It's a Canon L-series and should be giving you excellent IQ," is a statement with two separate clauses, not a dependent clause, as in, "It's a Canon L-series and so should be giving you excellent IQ." 

You are supposed to be a surgeon or something like that, not a linguist or otherwise I wouldn't have dared to comment on your comment :-> ... though it's good you clarified this because some time ago I was under the impression all L lenses have to have top iq, and most salesmen offering them would tell the same :-p

The 24-105L is a very good lens, espeically stopped down to f/8 which the OP mentions.

No doubt, but as far as I have read about it you can still get softer results because the IS is older and it's not sharpest wide open (the latter like my 70-300L, 17-40L) - I mentioned this because the op's shot was wide open with strong bokeh.

I think this thread brings out a simple painful? truth. That is electronics have developed to the point, that the overwhelming advantage the FF cameras had some years back - is rapidly closing down.

But this is just because the 5d3 and 6d have failed to make any significant sensor update - ff has much more potential left for higher mp (look at the Nikon d800), so if your lenses can keep up ff has a bright future for many types of photography.

51

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Unimpressed with 6D + 24-105. Am I doing something wrong?

« on: May 20, 2013, 02:53:15 PM »

but it's a Canon L-series and should be giving you excellent IQ

I wouldn't draw such a straight conclusion (example: 17-40L wide open), for the current lenses I'd say the overall advantage of L is better build quality and (most of the time) sealing, for iq ymmv.

Any ideas? Problem with the lens? Am I doing something wrong and missed a setting somewhere?

As the others have noted, the 6d shot is either out of focus and/or motion blurred (IS never prevents this to 100%). My advice: If you want to test a lens after buying shoot a test chart or at least another similar object with a tripod, and not a live scene out of the window, only then you'll get a real result how the lens performs and what you need to work around - for example use afma or expect corner or wide open softness.

Other thoughts: Dynamic range is about the same and the color rendition is also great for both cameras.

Yes, the dr of the expensive Canon dslrs is still rather mediocre, it's a known issue *if* you happen to shoot high-dr scenes.

52

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: F/8 Autofocusing impressions

« on: May 20, 2013, 01:40:42 PM »

That's the problem with 3rd party manufacturers.

I'd say this is the problem with *2nd* party manufacturers (I guess the 1st party is us, the customers) - it would be no surprise if Canon, Nikon or whatever changes specs and didn't open their protocols just to +1 their own equipment. Luckily, the 3rd party just got smarter and Sigma now has an usb dock for lens fw updates...

53

Lenses / Re: 17-40 f4 L discontinued???????

« on: May 20, 2013, 01:31:16 PM »

i agree to that. i don´t need or want an IS version when it increases the price a lot.
but i would pay more for a (noticable) optical better 17-40mm f4.

+1

We're at 3 now.   

-1 ... you're at 2 again :-p because for €1000+ I'd rather buy a f2.8 lens I can also use for non-landscape purposes, or if I have money to burn t/s primes with less distortion and capability for architecture.

54

Canon General / Re: Which lens for my new 6D (my first DSLR)?

« on: May 20, 2013, 10:59:20 AM »

He's doing landscapes. 7d with 24-105 might be too tight unless he wants to try panorama.

That's correct, that's why I bought what I've got now - 60d + the very reasonably priced 17-40L is ok for landscapes, and it's a full frame upgrade path unlike an ef-s lens.

the 6d is a beast in low light so being limited to f4 shouldn't hurt too bad

... except if you're shooting high dynamic range scenes, because less iso noise on the 6d cannot repair the fact that dr takes a hit also on the 6d, though not as bad as the crop sensor: http://www.sensorgen.info/CanonEOS_6D.html

55

Canon General / Re: Which lens for my new 6D (my first DSLR)?

« on: May 20, 2013, 06:44:00 AM »

i was looking for 5DII at an un-authorised canon store(they ask whatever money they want to) and it was just $200 cheaper than new 6D at an authorised center, am from NEPAL

Sure, in this case and if you cannot get hold of a cheaper used 5d2 get the 6d, it's certainly worth the $200 more, I'll most likely also buy a 6d if the price stops dropping like it still does now.

56

Canon General / Re: Which lens for my new 6D (my first DSLR)?

« on: May 20, 2013, 05:49:19 AM »

great. i will surely look for 2nd hand MII and work out on 60D also.

Btw: for landscape the 5d2 has a bit higher resolution & is a bit sharper than the 6d (and even than the 5d3) - just the 5d2 iso is maybe <1 stop worse than the 6d and the 5d2 has more banding (ymmv).

The 60d is also ok for landscape @iso100, about same dynamic range as the rest of Canon, but the gradients are better on full frame than on crop, and of course low light is bad on crop (just up to iso800 is fine). The good thing about the 60d is the usability, same as 6d + swivel screen which is handy for tripod work, so it's a good first dslr to learn.

i will be doing lots of low light photography. Would you still suggest me not to go for 6D?

You should try to figure out what "low light" is exactly for you, i.e. what exact iso is required with the lens you'll use and if you want or can live with the shallow depth of field of a fast prime. The 6d is excellent  for hq available light or indoors w/o flash is you use a f2.8 or even f4 zoom, but with a f1.4 prime it's much easier even on crop and if you don't do large prints.

57

Canon General / Re: Which lens for my new 6D (my first DSLR)?

« on: May 20, 2013, 04:36:13 AM »

well am buying 6D, my first DSLR, and am on a very tight budget. As this is my first DSLR, obviously, i dont have any lenses either.

Sorry, I just have to mention this: You are aware of the fact that the lens takes the pictures, and that buying an expensive camera body (that quickly looses value) in combination with a cheap lens is the wrong way around- unless cash is coming in shortly and you're able to purchase more lenses & flashes?

Imho the 6d as a "first" dslr is only a good choice if you shoot in very low light often or need top quality in lower light - or of course if you really need the wifi function (you can get better gps via an external tagger). If you just want a full frame camera you could also get a used 5d2, for everything else look at the 60d and buy better lenses (sorry if I have given unasked advice, just couldn't help it :-p).

As a part of the kit, the 24-105 L is probably the best bargain Canon gives you in its entire lineup of L lenses.

+1 - another cheap but good option would be the 40mm pancake lens, it's wider but at least you'll have an unbeatable iq-size package.

58

Lenses / Re: Telezoom lens (70-300L vs 70-200 vs 100-400)- Advice

« on: May 19, 2013, 05:37:44 PM »

Just curious as to why you'd need a tripod ring for the 70-300L (and not the 70-200/4L?)...

I think Canon should have added it, esp. for this price ... I have got a China version which is very cheap and very sturdy (yes, both at the same time) since I figured out that shooting on tripod @300mm with the 70-300L doesn't work for longer exposure times w/o tripod ring.

59

Lenses / Re: Telezoom lens (70-300L vs 70-200 vs 100-400)- Advice

« on: May 19, 2013, 04:26:34 AM »

From everything you write the 70-300L is your lens because it unifies a small pack size (veeeery important when outdoors) with good iq (sharpness wide open, boekeh) and "always on" reach. For prolonged use it's important the weight is way below the 70-200L/2.8, and the 70-300L feels even less heavy because it's shorter, i.e. putting less torsion on the wrist.

When outdoors using a tc often is a pita since it takes time and it lets dust/sand enter the camera, but a Kenko tc (Canon doesn't fit) works fine with the 70-300L though the af performance/precision degrades somewhat, ymmv.

60

Lighting / Re: Speedlites help

« on: May 18, 2013, 07:08:06 AM »

I was given three brand new speedlites by my sister

Hey, why don't *I* have such a sister :-p ?

Why did she move to Nikon?

She probably just compared prices for the equipment she is going to purchase :-o  as she already didn't get multiple expensive 600rt flashes ... an d even the yn-622c for Nikon is better than the Canon version :-(

1 Canon 600ex-rt
1 yongnuo yn568ex
1 yongnuo yn565ex
and
4 yongnuo YN-622C triggers

The yn-622c emulate an older Canon flash type (optical-only 580ex2), so you cannot use anything in the camera menu that has to do with rt/radio or "group mode" - but the setup otherwise is fine. For 2nd curtain sync you have to disable even "optical wireless" entirely in the camera menu, or otherwise Canon equipment doesn't support it.