August 27, 2014, 03:07:47 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 ... 31
I don't have anything to add that hasn't already been said as to your possible cures, but i rather like the first shot you got. to me it's not lost at all. it's fantastic. I have the 70-200 2.8, and i find it to be a fabulous lens. i'm sure it's not the match of my 300 2.8 on my 5dmk3, but on my 5d i can't tell any difference. It's not a myth, it's a legend.   i should copyright that. 8)

Lenses / Re: DXO - lens reviews - 300mm f/2.8 IS II - that bad ???
« on: October 15, 2012, 10:44:13 AM »
have no fear, the canon 300mm2.8, any version, is awesome.

This is really starting to annoy me, as i use DXO software, almost exclusively, and i'm very pleased with it. but after a while of hearing and reading some of the silly things DXO says it makes me question what it is they are doing.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1dx, or d800e?
« on: October 14, 2012, 11:06:30 PM »
So you guys like the 5dmk3's metering better than the 1dx? i've never really found any one meter to perform much better than any other, but i do remember a few on this site really talking up the 1dx's meter as such an improvement over the 5dmk3. hmmm. yeah, they all get tricked. lately i've been using my 5dmk3 with a +2/3 exp comp. your exp comp works to 5/8ths?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1dx, or d800e?
« on: October 13, 2012, 08:43:44 PM »
I would hold your ground. I have many makes of cameras, but my digital stuff is canon. It isn't very hard to keep all the little quirks under control when you are dealing with film cameras. but, for me at least, the current state of digital camera tech has gotten so complicated that i'd likely get myself confused if i was swapping between nikon and canon. I would also not like to buy and learn another flash system. 

I've been wondering what to do in the area also. I don't use anything like "portrait pro" or anything. I will spot fix little things on key photos, but nothing that takes more than a few minutes. I will remove things like distracting or nasty looking air return grates from walls in the background, but not for every shot. I'd do it for all the formal shots, but after that, nope. removing people from photos is one of those things that the bride might think is an easy thing to do, but it most likely will be near impossible. good luck.

Lighting / phottix odin, thanks
« on: October 12, 2012, 01:24:33 PM »
just wanted to thank you guys who've spoken so highly of these flash triggers. i bought a set last week and I'm happy, and impressed. Even the firmware update went smoother than i could have hoped for. I've got a wedding in two weeks that i'll be soloing and these are going to be very handy. Thanks.

Lenses / Re: Canon should change name to Coma
« on: October 09, 2012, 08:58:12 PM »
from what i've seen nobody else offers anything much better, but it still stinks. I guess they just aren't optimized for such things for some reason. but at least they made a 20a and 60a for star shooters. that is far better than anyone else has done.

Video & Movie / fun movie shot with 7d/5d.
« on: October 07, 2012, 08:23:28 PM »
not shot by me, but a friend of my brothers is either in this movie, or helped make it, or both... yeah, i haven't gotten that figured out yet, but i was told it was shot on 7d and 5dmk2 equipment, with nikon glass.

 :o   wow! I'd really like to see how well the leica wide lenses work on it.

really, 7enderbender? I have a handful of old manual focus cameras, and i find my newest camera, the 5dmk3, much easier to focus manually. Not as good as a split prism system at times, but better overall. besides, if i wanted that i could just get one for my 5d.

 While i don't think that one shot of the city at night looks any more like reality than the canon shot, i do understand what you guys are saying. thanks.

one thing though. the guy starts out by saying that the 5dmk3 is better for high iso work, then doesn't show any samples.  at what iso does the BMC start to fall down, and how far?

-daveswan- now it looks like you'll have to finance a super computer, and a BMC.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon DSLR's pass bbc broadcast test
« on: October 05, 2012, 10:52:04 AM »
I also read that it passed. Then i read that it had actually failed, so who knows...


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 5Dc as an entry for FF? yay or nay?
« on: September 26, 2012, 08:38:13 PM »
still use it. within it's limits it great. i even love how easy the menu is because it's not loaded full of BS.

you like to take photos of moving targets. zoom. no doubt. i have this lens, and whatever IQ advantage the 200mm prime may have is gone once you have to start cropping. Obviously, with a zoom you are doing all or at least nearly doing all your framing at the time of exposure, so you're always working with max resolution. not to mention when things get closer than you expected you'll still get a shot because you can go wider. Honestly, i think something might be wrong with you guys who would recommend a 200mm f2.8 prime over a 70-200mmf2.8 for action.  some sort of prime sickness i guess.

- i just read your last post, and i'm trying to still give you solid advise, while thinking of your racist statement. that and other things like a makeshift monopod? man, a decent monopod is not an expensive item ..... why... forget it. i think you need a 24mmTS.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Adobe RGB or sRGB please?
« on: September 25, 2012, 05:38:18 PM »
I shoot RAW, so as was just pointed out I can just select whatever colorspace i like after the fact. But i always use sRGB. years ago i took some test shots and printed the images myself in both adobe and sRGB. The images had lots of green foliage. The human eye is most sensitive to green, and if memory serves me green shows the largest improvement in colorspace range when you compare sRGB to adobe. So if adobe was going to be an improvement, this would show it. End result, the images looked slightly different, but just barely and I couldn't say i liked the adobe more.  stick with sRGB. you don't want to start fooling with adode unless you have lots of time and money to spend. you don't want to start moving sliders around , adjusting an image when you can't really see what it is you're doing. so you need a new monitor. you probably don't want to see what they cost, and that's only the beginning of the fun.

It's actually a fallacy that Adobe vs sRGB is only about the greens. People base that on a single 2D slice of the 3D gamuts and all they see is a giant chunk of green added.

Crazy saturated intense greens are actually somewhat rarer to come across in nature so it's actually reds, purples, oranges, yellows that are where you'd see the most difference between say ProphotoRGB and sRGB viewing on a wide gamut monitor. Try to make a deep red rose or deep purple petunia look realistic in sRGB and it just can't be done, same for many flowers, use prophotorgb and a wide gamut monitor and suddenly they look vastly more like real life. Shoot a sunset and in sRGB some bright saturated cloud bands disappear but pop back right out at you on a wide gamut.

No, it's not. Look at the 3d colorspace map and then look at a CIE chart and understand it. Besides, i never said it was ALL about the green, just that green shows the most improvement, and that any green improvement would be the most noticeable anyway because the human eye is far and away most sensitive to green. It's theorized that it'd due to us looking at, and hiding in foliage from predators since the dawn of man. But that is another topic all together. This is one of those simple matters that can be solved with 5 dollars worth of prints, but nobody wants to do it.   Also, could you do me a solid and stop posting 3-4 times in a row.

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 31