December 21, 2014, 01:07:27 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 - risc32

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 36
256
Underwater / Re: Advice on inexpensive underwater system
« on: December 19, 2012, 07:58:20 PM »
just read an ad in my local paper for a nikonos. i think it was "V" model with strobes, and i believe the guy was asking $250. 

257
Lenses / Re: Fellow stargazers & nighttime landscape loners!
« on: December 18, 2012, 08:24:42 PM »
please let us know how that tracking mount works out for you. I'd love to play with one, but if i bought one more photography related item, my wife..... it wouldn't be pretty.

 i had a 17-40mm that i used for many things including star shots. it was okay. then i replaced it with a 16-35mmv2. it was better only because of now i was at f2.8, and it was noticeably(just) wider. i've since sold it and now have a pro-optic 14mm. I haven't gotten a chance to do much of anything with it yet, but i'm hoping to give it a go with the night sky over the christmas holiday.

258
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions
« on: December 17, 2012, 03:06:38 PM »
photozone seems to lag behind a bit. nothing against them, what they do it very nice, i like it a lot. If i was in the EU i would be offering up some lenses to them for testing.

DXO just posted their thoughts and findings on the SIGMA, so that might tide you over.

259
Lenses / Re: New Sigma 35mm f/1.4 for Canon getting awesome reviews
« on: December 17, 2012, 03:00:23 PM »
Am i the only guy who thinks the canon lens socks are useless? at least the sigma has some real protection and can attach to my belt, and that's my plan for it. i'll keep my samyang 14mm in it, while the sigma 35 is on my cam. then switch out as needed.

260
Lenses / Re: 2.8 vs F4
« on: December 17, 2012, 02:56:18 PM »
okay,i think i understand what you're saying. yes, i do the same.  I would say "2.8, and f4". it just seems to make things clear. if i just said "4", that could mean "4 seconds", or "for" or "four". never really noticed it.

261
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: "shadow" at the bottom of frame/shot...
« on: December 17, 2012, 12:22:13 PM »
mirror lockup? holy cow.

 Well, if when i typed " also, i don't think this is the problem here", people thought i was saying this is what i think your problem is, i really don't know how to fix that.
  as for the flash duration topic i mentioned, my studio strobes ARE slower than 1/500th under some conditions. that is one head, at higher power settings. many are.
 
  I've posted before about my love of crappy flash synch speeds, and again, i know all about it, and why they suck. Nobody seems to understand how i don't care about all that, i'm 100% certain some clever guys could make it happen. hell, i've got a fairly good idea for a work around, but i haven't the time.
 
 anyone care to argue with my recommendations for the OP?

BTW- with an alienbees trigger/receiver combo i could net 1/400th with a speedlight set on full tilt with my 1dmk2.
yes, i know it's aps-h, just saying.

262
Lenses / Re: 2.8 vs F4
« on: December 17, 2012, 12:02:26 PM »
I think i'd respond to this if i had any idea what you're talking about :D

263
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Problem: slow AF 6D
« on: December 17, 2012, 09:45:03 AM »
send it back.

264
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: "shadow" at the bottom of frame/shot...
« on: December 16, 2012, 10:08:27 PM »
what these guys said ;)

 If for some reason you need 1/200th in this situation you could just take a step back and then crop the frame a bit to remove the edge. OR you can fiddle with trigger timing, or you could just lower the ambient some and you won't need 1/200th.
 
 
I also think a shutter synch speed of 1/200th is a bunch of hoohaa! i want 1/500th. 

  also, i don't think this is the problem here, but depending on what lighting gear you are using you could possibly be coming up against the flash duration. I think that(flash duration and how it would come into play) and the lack of people asking for it, mostly cause they don't understand it, are the causes for us still having crappy flash synch speeds.

265
Lenses / Re: Zoom vs Primes?
« on: December 13, 2012, 09:56:00 PM »
yeah, rlphoto, i haul more a good bit more stuff than that to wedding shoots. My brother works video at weddings all the time, and he says i use WAY more than anyone he's ever seen at a ceremony/formals, then i use way less the rest of the night. probably cause i'm tired! Although i've sworn i'm done carrying my speedotron 2403 and 3 head around. done, totally, never again, i don't care how nice it would be to have that much power, i'm not doing it.........

(yeah, i'll probably do it the next time i think i'll need it. )

266
I only shoot fun videos of my kids, but i have some exp here. I use a sandisk ultra 30mb/s 64GB SD card. it's not fast, but it's roomy and it's fast enough for me. from what I've seen the 5dmk3's SD card slot is heavily handicapped, so i don't think any faster SD cards will show their potential. actually, my relatively slow card is beyond the 5dmk3's scope. On 2 occasions my camera stopped recording when iwas using this card and pushing it hard, ie 720 at 60fps all-i and 1080i at something all-i. I was just foolin around. now that i don't use all-i i haven't had a problem at all.  as for flushing a load of RAW files, that's a different story, but not one any video shooter should worry about.

267
Lenses / Re: Quick decision help: canon 24 vs zeiss 21
« on: December 07, 2012, 08:24:51 AM »
I agree with what was said above about manual focusing a wide angle. Sounds easy, but i'm finding it more difficult than expected. I'm sure the Zeiss is awesome, but from what i've seen at places like photozone.de, at any given fstop that both lenses can do, (2.8 and narrower) the canon eguals the zeiss, and you have the option to go up to 2 stops faster with the canon if need be. sure the IQ of the canon at these larger openings would be less than the much slower zeiss, but the option is there. Plus, 82mm filters are more expensive, and not as useful across multiple lenses. that of course might not be true for you personally, maybe you have other glass that uses 82mm filters, or perhaps you don't really use any filters anyway, so no problem.

268
Lenses / Re: New Sigma 35mm f/1.4 for Canon getting awesome reviews
« on: December 06, 2012, 08:52:55 PM »
Cool, i'm looking forward to seeing what you have to say about the two. I was hrs away from ordering the canon 35L, when i read Roger at lensrentals words. Then within minutes i ordered the Sigma, and i've very pleased. What I can say to anyone out there with Sigma doubt due to whatever they've seen from them in the past. forget it, this is something else entirely.

269
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions
« on: December 02, 2012, 09:36:54 AM »
photozone guys always mentions how he's never seen a really great bokeh from a wide or semi wide lens, esp one with an asph element. it looks like it can be nice sometimes, maybe 8/10 times, but then there are times when it's just a mess. from what i've found though, it doesn't take much of a distance/framing change to really change the OOF rendering with these wider lenses. i guess it's like most things with wide lenses, a few inches here of there, and you have something very different.

270
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions
« on: December 01, 2012, 08:10:48 PM »
FYI- if you follow that link that was posted a page or so ago to that korean site you'll see a very nice side-by-side with the sigma and canon.  And if you dig a bit deeper (page2) you'll find the same side-by-side stuff with the sigma -vs- others. namely a converted Contax, the Samyang. if you want to skip to the end, just know the sigma beats them all.

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 36