December 18, 2014, 03:37:13 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 -

Pages: 1 ... 74 75 [76] 77 78 ... 106
Sports / Re: Shooting the Grand Rapids Mud Run tomorrow!
« on: August 24, 2012, 11:25:54 PM »

They're just as nutty there as anywhere, I guess.

I enjoyed Grand Rapids. Spent a few days there doing a story on Amway many years ago. Midsummer there was still light on the golf course at 10PM!
Yea it stays light out late mid summer, i remember playing beach volleyball til 9:45 pm :D
What was the story on Amway for?

Nothing exciting. I was working for a business magazine and wrote a piece on their distribution operation. I'm sure it's all different today. I did some pictures of their management folks on the golf course at 9PM, after work.

EOS Bodies / Re: I love Primes.
« on: August 24, 2012, 10:08:20 PM »

On the other hand, it doesn't mention lenses either.

Maybe he's asking about prime numbers? I think they're pretty special.

Or prime rib? Never had it.

I guess zoom lenses were just conspicuous by their absence.

I suppose, given the types of replies we're seeing in this thread making comparisons with zooms (which is not the apparent intent of the poll - which doesn't mention zooms at all), a better set of questions would be:

Do you prefer primes?
Do you prefer zooms?
No preference.

EOS Bodies / Re: I love Primes.
« on: August 24, 2012, 09:10:08 PM »

Interesting perspective. I hadn't thought of that, but thinking back to the seventies, I can't remember even having a zoom. Can't think of anyone who used one either.

Times sure have changed. I've been sitting here processing some stuff shot through an EF-S 15-85 and I'm stunned by the sharpness of some of them. No 35mm in the seventies would have produced such work.

Primes are what I used in the 70's because the zoom lenses sucked.

Portrait / Re: First Portrait shots!!
« on: August 24, 2012, 09:04:15 PM »

"You don't go out looking for a job dressed like that? On a weekday?"

-Jeffrey Lebowski -- the Big Lebowski
From the movie "The Big Lebowski"

Anyway, I like both images. Nice to have a good subject to work with.

I don't know what kind of job he wants, but my first thought was appropriateness of these pictures. Only he knows that. Your lighting seems to have dictated the whole shoot. Anyway, there's this thing they're now doing called "environmental portraiture." Puts the subject in an appropriate environment. If he wants a job as an agricultural extension agent, these shots are great -- maybe as a corporate lawyer, not so much.

Anyway, just general reactions. The first one, I really don't like all the negative space over his head. It looks MUCH better (I believe) when you crop that down to just over his head. The angle is good. I love the light on the crisp shirt, and the skin tone is warm and inviting.

Just as a general picture, I like the second one best -- although I can see it being criticized as an outdoor mug shot. His expression seems a little blank, as if he's wondering why he got arrested. But the contrast between his warm face and the brilliant, almost fiery background is great.

Keep up the good work, and I hope he gets the job he wants.

Sports / Re: Shooting the Grand Rapids Mud Run tomorrow!
« on: August 24, 2012, 03:31:25 PM »

They're just as nutty there as anywhere, I guess.

I enjoyed Grand Rapids. Spent a few days there doing a story on Amway many years ago. Midsummer there was still light on the golf course at 10PM!

EOS Bodies / Re: I love Primes.
« on: August 24, 2012, 12:46:56 PM »

I like a good lens.

Whatever one gets the current job done is the one I love best for now.

That's why I have a camera that allows me to use different lenses.


Since I was an English major who thought a Journalism Masters made sense, I wouldn't trust my math. That's what we have Big Brain here for.

On the surface, your simple analysis makes sense. Based on that, I'd put out the $2600 for the kit. To further complicate things, going refurb through Canon is going to add shipping and taxes -- and they are real dollars. B&H will send what you want with no shipping. And if you're not in NY and are willing to possibly flaunt your state taxes (if applicable) you get it today (or in a couple of days) for $2639 out the door (as the car salesmen say!).

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Cheap Camera Ideas...worth it?
« on: August 23, 2012, 03:53:37 PM »

No brain here, but what this situation needs is a Powershot S95.

Now $280 at Canon refurb shop.

EOS Bodies / Re: The next EF-mount camera: the iPhone 5
« on: August 23, 2012, 08:12:56 AM »

Smartest part for me is that he never looks to the camera.

He's talking to his imaginary friend!

Very well done.

EOS Bodies / Re: Anyone else preorder the EOS M yet?
« on: August 22, 2012, 08:07:29 PM »

I'd probably never buy one, but I am curious to see what a "pro" version of it might look like.

United States / Re: LinkedIn
« on: August 21, 2012, 04:07:28 PM »

A couple of years ago a friend (ex-coworker, magnificent photo artist) pressured me to join so I did. Perhaps because I was never very active with it, I got nothing from it. When it was hacked and the passwords placed in jeopardy, I bailed out. Guess I'm too old for that stuff!

EOS Bodies / Re: The Mirrorless Future
« on: August 21, 2012, 03:06:10 PM »

Very interesting and insightful comment. I seem to have similar sorts of feelings, although I'm not sure I can really quantify them so well.

On the other hand...if God had meant for man to fly, he would have given us wings!

An issue I have with mirrorless EVF cameras is that I feel more removed from the photography experience. It's hard to explain, but when I look at an EVF or "live view" I feel like I am watching the camera take a photograph.

Not ready to be a spectator.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]
« on: August 21, 2012, 12:22:01 PM »

This is why I like this site -- I learn so much.

Now, I know if I want a really stunning low ISO image, I'll put the body in the freezer for a couple of hours before I shoot. No more hot sensors for me!!

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Chuck westfall on the sharpness of the 5dm3
« on: August 20, 2012, 10:48:02 PM »

According to this logic, if a 5D3 had no video, it would sell for $4000 or $5000. Seriously, how many copies do you think they'd sell at such a price. They'd do well to get $2200 a copy for one, and that would be fine by me.

It's nonsense to think video inclusion has invoked some magical economies of scale. All it's done is increase the number of eager buyers, and Canon has taken advantage of that by increasing the price as any normal company would.

To paraphrase a line from the movie "The Princess Bride," maybe that word 'misconception' does not mean what you think it means.

This is one of those misconceptions that never goes away.  The inclusion of video most likely LOWERED the price of the mk3.  With video, the camera appeals to two market segments.  Without video, it would have only appealed to still shooters (selling fewer copies - Canon would have to price it higher to make up for lower sales).   Also, software R&D is SO much cheaper than hardware R&D, and video in DSLR's is almost all about the software...  So you might want to thank your video-centric brethren, rather than curse them.  :D


I have no idea where the "trigger" is, but the gunsight is obvious.

You clearly want a 5D3. Stop pissing around about it!

Pages: 1 ... 74 75 [76] 77 78 ... 106