August 23, 2014, 12:09:47 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 - BL

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 26
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: B&H or Adorama
« on: April 14, 2014, 12:05:45 PM »
Odd; when I go to that link I see, in red:

Please note: Although this item is temporarily out of stock, you can order it now and it will ship as soon as it arrives. Your card will only be charged once item is shipped.

Yeah, it's weird, i don't know what's happening then, as I can't see anywhere on the page telling me it's either backordered or out of stock

Here's what I see on my end as of this morning:

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: B&H or Adorama
« on: April 14, 2014, 02:34:57 AM »
@ Helen,

At the risk of my sounding real stupid (if the simple answer is easily there to be seen) is there any way to tell from an items webpage on whether or not the item is in-stock?

+1.  This is quite irritating.

This doesn't happen often, but for the 2nd time in a month, I placed an order for an item and was notified several days later the item was out of stock.  As of today, the item is still reported in stock on Adorama's site:

With the passover holiday closure, B&H won't be processing orders until the 23rd.  :(

6D Sample Images / Re: Shooting in Namibia with the Canon EOS 6D
« on: April 13, 2014, 07:15:35 PM »
With all due respect I would expect better photos from you.

yikes.   :o

oh the irony in your post!

Here's a real newbie question...

After reading more than a few threads here I've seen that one of the same lenses keeps coming up in conversation - Either one of the EF 24-70mm's...

Is this the MUST HAVE lens for everyone?

No, not necessarily.  There are some folks out there who generally prefer prime lenses in that focal length range for DSLRs (myself included) for various reasons (DOF, low light, size/weight, cost, etc.).  Come to think of it, the only zoom lens I own is the 70-200 II... might have to fix that eventually ;)

Canon General / Re: 16 MEGA-byte CF card!
« on: April 12, 2014, 10:11:56 PM »
At least mine is made for Digital camera ;)


you've got me beat haha

i wonder what the smallest size CF card is that can be found?

Canon General / Re: 16 MEGA-byte CF card!
« on: April 12, 2014, 10:09:02 PM »
Hi BL.
Did you try a jpeg or medium jpeg?

Great nostalgic find.
I have a hard drive that was removed from a pc when the pc was upgraded to a 256mb drive the original was 128mb!

Cheers Graham.

Oh that's right, my camera was setup for .CR2s but I'm sure a JPG would have taken

I'm going to use this to store all my customized camera settings, so I don't lose them when I normally format cards

There were some old JPGs on it from a super old Canon compact that I don't have anymore dated from 1997 haha.  It's so old, I don't even recognize the people in the photos, and I'm not entirely sure I even took them...

Canon General / 16 MEGA-byte CF card!
« on: April 12, 2014, 12:26:41 PM »
Guess what I found in the nightstand next to my Van Halen mix tape?  :D

I tried unsuccessfully to take a picture with it, but even 1 file exceeds its capacity and refused to write haha

i think this is what you would call a "x1.0" speed CF card :D

It's mind boggling to think how quickly technology changes.

Lenses / Re: Damaged 70-200 2.8 II, suggestions
« on: April 11, 2014, 04:36:24 PM »
Before sending back to Canon, why not have it checked out by your local camera tech?  I dropped my 80-200L (ages ago) and the filter shattered, bending the ring along with the metal threads.

I took it to my camera tech to have a look at it, he takes it into the back, was gone for maybe 5min, and brought it back fixed without charging me a dime.

Reviews / Re: Lomography's Petzval Lens - RLPhoto's First Impressions
« on: April 11, 2014, 04:26:54 PM »
I think the only thing holding me back is the issue of weather seal, or lack thereof.

that, and something tells me before the month is out, I'd lose the ability to shoot f5.6, f11, and f16 lol

EOS-M / EOS M Grip with integrated Arca Swiss plate review
« on: April 11, 2014, 03:10:56 PM »
Came across a grip on eBay that looked promising that I thought I'd share with you guys.  Been using it for several weeks and I really like it!

NOTE: I do not make these, and do not profit in any way from sales. 

It's made entirely out of metal, and feels great holding anything from the pancake to larger EF lenses with adapter.  What I like most is that it can still mount on any Arca Swiss compatible head without blocking the battery/SD door, does not block the strap lug, and it doesn't increase the overall size.  This combo still fits in my tiny Lowepro Dashpoint 20!

It's important to note however, is that the dovetail will block the EF adapter's tripod foot.  I don't use it, so it didn't affect me, but those that do might find this to be a deal breaker.  The other possible negative thing about the all metal construction is that it can be very cold to the touch outdoors.  I wish the grip itself was covered in plastic for this reason.  But overall, very pleased with this grip.  Here's a breakdown of pros/cons

+ Vastly improves ergonomics and balance
+ Arca Swiss compatible
+ Does not block battery door
+ Made entirely of metal (Aluminum?)
+ Relatively inexpensive (paid $45 shipped from China on eBay)
+ Does not increase overall size (still fits in Dashpoint 20)
+ Has a threaded tripod socket underneath
+ Anti-rotation lip

- Arca Swiss dovetail blocks the EF adapter's tripod socket
- All metal construction makes it cold when using in colder weather
- Metal construction means a heavier camera
- Blocks Canon logo, which is kinda ugly IMO

If you're interested in one yourself, try the link below:

Lenses / Re: Teleconverter advice
« on: April 11, 2014, 02:22:57 AM »
The main advantage for the mkIIIs is the improved AF with white super tele's.

Other than that, the optical improvement is not very noticeable.

I purchased both mkII and mkIII 1.4 extenders to do a test myself back when they were both available.

No regrets sticking with mkII and saving myself quite a bit of coin

Reviews / Re: Lomography's Petzval Lens - RLPhoto's First Impressions
« on: April 08, 2014, 12:18:43 PM »
Wow, what an interesting lens!  I'm actually quite bummed to have missed out on this, but it's nice to know it's available for pre-order now.

I was reading around for more reviews on this lens, and it would appear later lenses might have optimized optics and some of the mechanical workings of the lens (based on this user's review)

The lens tested initially, was a very early sample of the lens, with a two-digit serial number. Lomography invited us to test a later sample, as they are convinced it will perform better. The original Kickstater page does state that, 'The lens as well as its accompanying lens hood will also undergo small design changes,' so we will take a look at what has changed on this second sample provided.

The second sample supplied has a serial number of 4262 and the exterior is much the same as the original sample tested, except that the brass finish appears to have been polished to a shine. Focusing is much smoother, with enough resistance in the mechanism to prevent the lens elements from moving inside the barrel when the lens is tilted. The focus mechanism still has a very short throw though, so accurate focusing can still be quite tricky, although it is much easier than with the first sample tested.

Sharpness in the centre of the frame is much improved at every aperture compared to the first sample. In fact, sharpness in the centre is quite respectable, being good in the centre at f/2.2, very good at f/2.8 and excellent at f/4. Sharpness towards the edges of the frame is poor at fast apertures, but this is to be expected due to the effect this lens produces. To really see the effect, backgrounds with lots of regular detail are required, such as patterned wallpaper, or light shining through tree branches. Without this, images lack the swirly look the Petzval lens design is known for, which limits its overall usefulness.

Lighting / Re: Reasons to get a ST-E3-RT?
« on: April 08, 2014, 01:00:38 AM »
Without AF assist ST-e3 is useless for me. Don't see any reason to buy it.
I would only consider purchasing an ST-E3-RT if I could get it for a "steal."

At the time I felt the same way.  I "stole" mine for ~$150, and won't likely ever go back to 600s as master.

It's possible I don't push my AF hard enough.  I haven't needed AF assist as I don't have any problems locking focus in low to dim light.

Lighting / Re: Reasons to get a ST-E3-RT?
« on: April 07, 2014, 07:54:05 PM »
Must be a very dark studio... mood lighting for shoots?  ???

Yeah, when the panel is pointing somewhere else and not visible, it's really great to have speedlite control through the LCD.

EOS-M / Re: I fell in love with EOS-M again and again
« on: April 07, 2014, 07:48:58 PM »
Nice shots.  I have a love/hate relationship with the EOS-M.  It is great because it is small and convenient.  But, at times, the lag drives me crazy.  Here's what's good:

-Size (and not too conspicuous)
-Interchangeable lenses

And here's what's bad:
-Lag time
-No dedicated viewfinder

None of this is news to any of us.  I recently took the M with me on a quick trip to Boston.  By the end of the trip, I was thinking about selling it (seeing street photo ops that were gone by the time the shutter snapped and then the wait until the next phot could be obtained).  Then, reviewing the images, I remember why I got it in the first place because of the IQ even in the OOC jpegs.

So this camera is one to love but also to hate.  It fills a spot in my photo armamentarium, but is not the item I would use to shoot pics of fast moving kids, random people in action or anything moving.

That's what your 5D is for  ;D

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 26