April 16, 2014, 07:55:56 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 - Sella174

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 38
You spelled Carburetors wrong   :P ........

British English, aka Queen's English ...  :P  :P

The latest photography gadget might get more attention in the short term but it'll soon be forgotten when the next one is released whilst the 5D mark 3 will carry on selling.


Lenses / Re: How many radioactive lenses do you own?
« on: February 03, 2014, 09:03:55 AM »
I think everyone is missing an important factor: ... The white balance might have to be adjusted.  :o

Actually, yes. I really don't use my Takumar lens enough in bright sunlight, so the thorium has turned the Canada balsam the colour of raw honey.

Lenses / Re: Is There a Definitive "Best" Landscape Lens for Crop?
« on: February 01, 2014, 12:31:22 PM »
Would it be wrong to replace my 35 2.0 IS with a 24 2.8 IS and 50 1.4?

On an APS-C system, I'd add the 24mm, along with the 35mm you already have. Forget about the 50mm on crop, but if you want a short'ish portrait lens get the 85mm. But this is just personal preference ...

1st choice for 2nd body, same as the first.
2nd choice, if using a FF for the first and desire a crop for the 2nd for reach, use the body with the most similar ergonomics and best high ISO noise control.

Yip to both, in that order, as well. And I would add batteries that are the same to the "2nd choice" option as essential.

This Americanism of using the word "shoot" instead of "photograph" always makes me wonder, as in this particular advert, of whether he's selling a gun or a lens.

Lenses / Re: Lens filters or not?
« on: February 01, 2014, 03:32:36 AM »
Off-topic, but what the hey ...

and Steel Toe shoes= yes

I work in an agricultural environment and steel-capped boots are a big, huge NO-NO.

Photography Technique / Re: Answer: UV
« on: January 31, 2014, 12:29:17 PM »
It's not showing incorrectly, it's showing correctly! That's ultraviolet light.

Mmmmm ... I wonder if a UV filter would ... erm ... filter it out.

Lenses / Re: Is There a Definitive "Best" Landscape Lens for Crop?
« on: January 31, 2014, 10:56:12 AM »
It depends on the type of "landscape" photographs you do. Personally I don't like these ultra-wide lenses that produce heaps of foreground, and prefer a 24mm on an APS-C camera. And, FYI, for many years, like in twenty-plus, I used a 55mm lens on my film camera for landscapes ... which is the same in "equivalence" as your 35mm is on APS-C.

Lenses / Re: Lens filters or not?
« on: January 31, 2014, 10:51:33 AM »
A good filter is as much an investment as the lens itself ... I always sell a lens without the filter and keep it for continued use on another lens.

I wonder if there is any advantage in a type of digital Twin Lens Reflex camera?

Consumers would have to buy lenses in pairs.

Canon would love it if this concept ever got off the ground ... you'll be needing two EF 24-70mm f/2.8 blah Mark II lenses and two EF 600mm blah blah lenses. Instant doubling of sales. Whoohooo!

Unless I missed it somewhere, the OP never states what EF lenses are in the equation ... and there's lots of iffy EF lenses that actually perform quite decently on APS-C, but sucks on an astronomical level on FF.

There's actually only a few lenses. They are:
EF-S 17-55mm/2.8 IS USM
EF 50mm/1.4 USM
EF 100mm/2.8L Macro IS USM
EF 70-200mm/4L IS USM

Based on your current investment in lenses, yes, go full-frame. But ... the 50mm will not be suitable for portraits anymore and will become your general purpose, walking lens; the 100mm will be excellent for individual portraits and, of course, macro; and the 70-200mm for group photos and a walking lens when outside the city.

Second but ... based on your "usage list" I'd also have a serious look at a secondhand 5DII, instead of the 6D camera. I'm saying this, because I don't think the 6D offers anything much better than the 5DII ... for instance, I read up on how the GPS part works and, based on the literature, I feel it is badly implemented and will lead to severe headaches for the serious geotagger ... but I'm probably wrong, as usual.

Lenses / Re: How many radioactive lenses do you own?
« on: January 31, 2014, 09:53:35 AM »
How do ya know ? Is there some kind of a list ?

Yes, there's a list.

Lenses / Re: How many radioactive lenses do you own?
« on: January 31, 2014, 07:13:42 AM »
One, the Asahi Super-Takumar 1:1.4/50 (Mark II).

Lenses / Re: More EF pancakes?
« on: January 30, 2014, 03:26:15 PM »
I agree with the "no", because "pancake" lenses have smaller apertures (or higher f-numbers) than their "normal" siblings, and right now, today, large apertures are what sells lenses.

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 38