October 02, 2014, 09:00:11 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 - risc32

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 33
16
EOS Bodies / Re: How can we improve on 5D3 to 5D4?
« on: September 17, 2014, 07:57:34 PM »
actually i wasn't kidding at all. i get the sense i know a great deal more about Ti and carbon fiber than you guys do. not only that you guys must not very active people, tons of stuff is made from these products these days. you certainly can buy a Ti carbon weave racket just about anywhere. expensive? well, not in the amount we're talking about for a camera body. In the fields of racing/aero/space these items have been around for decades.... my watch is solid Ti, my motorcycle is made up many large pieces of Ti, carbon, aluminum, mag, a ceramic aluminum sintered matrix, and some good old steel as well. i know what i'm talking about. berylium? please, how about econel? you don't know nuthin' about metals or tennis.

17
Lenses / Re: Lenses that you want Canon to release next
« on: September 17, 2014, 07:15:22 AM »
100mm f1.8 usm macro IS. AF like the 85mm 1.8/100mmf2

18
EOS Bodies / Re: How can we improve on 5D3 to 5D4?
« on: September 16, 2014, 08:45:29 PM »
-carbon fiber or Ti body. hell my inexpensive tennis racket from Walmart is made from a Ti carbon weave. it cost like $30-40 weights nothing, is super tough.  really, get it done canon.
-better DR (cause, i don't know if you guys have heard, but it sucks to the point of making the camera a paperweight)
-red Af confirmation"squares" in the viewfinder
-a battery that can give it that 1D speed, even if shooting rate stays at whatever it is. 6.5 or something. i never know what to do with that .5 a frame anyway actually so you could just make it 6 fps.
 make the second card slot, whatever it is just as fast as the main, you know, so i could actually use it for backing up my RAW files as i work. i mean, jpg back ups are better than nothing, but really?
 - eye control AF, or at the very least make the af points cover the areas around the 1/3rds marks. the center is good to, sometimes it is like i'm having target practice at the range, but most of the time, i don't put the "target" in the center of the frame.
  -i'm out

19
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Features seen in the past and absent today
« on: September 10, 2014, 07:50:09 PM »
hush your mouth PWP! i had a 30d, xti, and still use a 5d and 5dmk3. i have shot a good deal of 120-220, 135, and some 4x5 slides, and your statement does not align with me one bit. If one was to even take a quick peek at a slide on a light table or even just held up to a light source i can't see how you would be so willing to throw film under the bus. scans, i have no idea. i don't know nuthin' about no scanning. i'm not even going to speculate. so, do you have a Mamiya that you don't need anymore  ;D
  now i'm going to say damn right PWP! eye focus! give it to me!! I bet if they came out with it now, most consumers would think that it's the newest thing and would marvel at it. i'd much rather have eye focus on a digital body due to the fact that if it wasn't 100% i would just over shoot to compensate. no big deal as PWP just pointed out, we have memory card space.
 no really, so you looking for a caregiver for that mamiya?

Hah! Yes the original transparencies looked brilliant through a lupe on the lightbox, but to be commercially useable means scanning. Drum scanning delivers the highest achievable quality.

The Mamiya RZ67? As an early adopter of digital, I haven't even owned a film body since around 2002 when I got the FF Canon 1Ds, so the Mamiya is now a very distant unsentimental memory. Dropping film made complete sense commercially. In an average year my film and processing bill was around $40,000. With digital, that dropped instantly to zero, yet I was sending out bigger invoices.

-pw

understood. it's one thing to fool around with film as a hobby (like i do) and something else entirely when it's work. i don't shoot film for work. i wouldn't dream of shooting a wedding all film. but i do happen to have right next to me a little box of sleeved film rolls that i shot of my kids that somehow looks better than anything i've done on digital. i don't know why that is, and i guess it doesn't really matter.
   Now bring on that eye control focus!!

20
Canon General / Re: How do you cull your photo's?
« on: September 08, 2014, 12:25:31 PM »
faststone. left click to view full size for focus check, super fast, free.

21
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Features seen in the past and absent today
« on: September 07, 2014, 09:44:02 PM »
hush your mouth PWP! i had a 30d, xti, and still use a 5d and 5dmk3. i have shot a good deal of 120-220, 135, and some 4x5 slides, and your statement does not align with me one bit. If one was to even take a quick peek at a slide on a light table or even just held up to a light source i can't see how you would be so willing to throw film under the bus. scans, i have no idea. i don't know nuthin' about no scanning. i'm not even going to speculate. so, do you have a Mamiya that you don't need anymore  ;D
  now i'm going to say damn right PWP! eye focus! give it to me!! I bet if they came out with it now, most consumers would think that it's the newest thing and would marvel at it. i'd much rather have eye focus on a digital body due to the fact that if it wasn't 100% i would just over shoot to compensate. no big deal as PWP just pointed out, we have memory card space.
 no really, so you looking for a caregiver for that mamiya?

22
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: I had a Blowout... On a Hasselblad.
« on: September 02, 2014, 06:17:36 PM »
my 4x5 lenses are the smallest i own. smaller than a 135 teleconverter in fact. but that thing looks about the size of my MF Fuji 90mm 3.5

23
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: August 31, 2014, 09:37:05 PM »
when i got my 5dmk3 i was expecting it to behave better than my 5dmk1 in terms of DR. i thought that with the time that had past since the mk1 and then when they didn't really change the megapickle count from the mk2 i thought, hey, maybe they did alot of work in other areas like DR. but then i saw that it reacts pretty much the same. i really like my mk3. it's the best camera i have. but if i could shoehorn a 20-25mp sony sensor in it, i would.
  on the other hand i'd rather canon stick around and make good business choices. maybe not investing in sensors is better. maybe all that sony has spent isn't getting them market share. maybe canon should just start purchasing sensors.

24
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7DMk II or the 1DMk IV
« on: August 30, 2014, 09:23:47 PM »
the only thing i would say with 100% certainty is that the 1dmk4 will have far greater focus speed than any non 1D level camera. i had a 1dmk2 and while i wasn't happy about many things with that camera, focus speed in good light wasn't one of them. in fact when i got my 5dmk3 i was pretty bummed that it didn't have that level of speed. i thought it just might, having essentially a 1D AF system, but i wasn't accounting for the 1D's massive battery.
 

25
Software & Accessories / Re: Shuttercount Now Available for Windows
« on: August 28, 2014, 08:13:22 PM »
so it's not just me. when i read the headline i thought how this would have been interesting and maybe useful in 2004, but i wouldn't think it would be now, but what do i know?

26
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D replacement: What is a "fine-detail" sensor
« on: August 27, 2014, 08:56:04 PM »
it means it's "NEW AND IMPROVED!!!"

27
i really shouldn't say as video isn't my thing, but those settings f-stops and shutter speeds look way out of line to me.  Do you really find that you need those values to maintain good focus? perhaps you are after the look given by those higher shutter speeds, and if so cool, but if that wasn't your goal, i would have thought something in the 1/60th range would be a more "normal" speed. 
  anyway, exposure isn't even what you are asking about, so i guess i'm no help. sorry, i'm sure people in the know will be along shortly.

28
i would be interested in seeing something slotted in between the 1.8 and 1.2 from Canon. give me a 1.4 with quick accurate AF, with good build quality priced somewhere between the 1.8 and 1.2 and i'd give it a serious look. the coming Sigma would come in to play though, and if any recent trends continue, the sigma would probably prove to be the IQ equal with good build for a fair bit less. it's just that AF tracking thing... 

29
Lenses / Re: 85mm f1/2L II and event photography?
« on: August 22, 2014, 12:03:11 PM »
as a photographer i've always been interested in the 1.2, but for now i run the 1.8. Sure I'd like to get my hands on one to play around with, but without the 1.8's AF speed it just wouldn't be able to fully replace the 1.8 in many conditions, and unlike most photogs i don't like collecting lenses. still, i can't say i'm totally pleased with the 1.8's AF accuracy( i can't recall anyone else saying that, so i don't know what to make of my findings, not that i would expect better of the 1.2) or purple fringing.

while i think that the ability to have defocused areas in photos is one of the main advantages of proper cameras. as has been stated i also think this OOF thing gets carried away sometimes. for me, as a wedding photographer, i would have deleted both of these posted shots. without hesitation.

30
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM
« on: August 17, 2014, 09:33:32 PM »
I got mine at launch or nearly so, and i haven't had any issues at all. it performs like it did when new.
that must be one super 24-105mm you have there. i had one and we got along okay for a while, but it was replaced with by the sigma. when i got the sigma i did some rough test shots to compare them, and the 24-105 just had to go.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 33