January 30, 2015, 07:49:55 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 - 3kramd5

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 34
Single hard drive and max 8GB memory is not my dream. Nice display, but all in ones still feel to me like immobile laptops.

That's the minimum config.  You can upgrade to 32Gb memory and a 1Tb SSD drive.  Also has two thunderbolt ports and 4 USB 3 ports.  You would typically add a thunderbolt RAID for your photo storage, leaving the internal for the OS and applications. 

This would be similar to what you would do with  a maxed out MacPro that contains 12 cores, 64Gb, a 1Tb internal drive, 6 thunderbolt ports and 4 USB 3 ports that can handle 3 4K displays or 6 thunderbolt displays.

Ah, I read "up to 8GB."

Regardless, one internal drive with a built in display kills it for me. YMMV

Single hard drive and max 8GB memory is not my dream. Nice display, but all in ones still feel to me like immobile laptops.

I usually use the best practical hardware for the shot that gives me the results I want.
Sometimes I have to use what I've got available.

Thus impeaching the notion that you have higher standard of image quality than those who also use what is practically available despite of better equipment existing (e.g. using a D810 in the studio rather than an IQ180, or using a Sigma 50 Art rather than a Zeiss Otus).

I wasn't able to find any kind of landscapes on the first day that had high dynamic range (traffic held me up earlier in the day, when I finally got deep enough into the mountains, the sun had set before I found a scene.)


My goal was to provide data.

There's a slight contradiction here; no one was asking for a pictorial masterpiece, simply a genuine but EV challenging landscape shot into, or across the sun.

Be that as it may, can you blame him for wanting to find something beautiful to shoot with short-term rented gear?

MY image quality standards are higher than YOURS

go ahead, debate that. ::)

I'll give it a shot

(argument from boredom :P)

1) What is, in your professional opinion, the camera body which produces the best quality images?
2) What are, in your professional opinion, the lenses for that body which produce the best quality images for the variety of scenes you frame?

Do you exclusively use 1 & 2?

If so, I concur that you have higher standards than [whomever].

If not, I assert that, while you may have high desires for image quality, you don't have higher standards.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon is less expensive then Nikon
« on: October 01, 2014, 10:42:49 AM »

The Canon 1D C — a 4K camera geared toward filmmaking — costs $9,999 and a Canon 800mm f/5.6L IS will cost you $13,499.

There ya go. 1400 bucks saved.   

Sweet, now I'm 3% of the way towards that Canon 30-300 L lens I need for my 1DC!

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: iPhone 6 gets an Exmor
« on: September 29, 2014, 06:05:50 PM »
Er... Does it shoot RAW?

Probably not. Exmor should improve DR across the board though

Anecdotally, my HTC One (no clue who builds the sensor) seemed to have significantly wider DR than my iphone 6 has. The former's camera was generally awful, but occasionally I'd look at a picture and truly wonder if I could replicate it with one of my SLRs in a single exposure.

Not much to show for the rental time, other than more familiarity with the A7r. I still think it's a mixed bag, with the mix leaning towards "Needs Improvement."

Me too. I'll keep mine for situations where I really want resolution (which tend to be situations where I'm sitting around with my tripod waiting and thus have the time to work around the interface), but it is quite ponderous to use. 95 times out of 100, I'll take a 5D.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 25, 2014, 05:13:09 PM »
interesting. I postprocess my images to make them look the way I want them to look. :-)
Which is not necessarily the way I saw a scene. Or imagined it. Or what the scene would have looked like to some other people.  :-)


And I shoot thin (macro) DOF sometimes. But even my f/2.8 portraits don't look on screen/print the way the model and particularly what's behind the model looked when I saw them.

I also blur moving water, use polarizers, etc.

If every photo I shot looked like what I saw, I'd have a pretty boring library :P

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 25, 2014, 03:13:55 PM »
Thought for you guys: how much of this 'problem' with Canon being so far behind is due to the rising prevalance of Photoshop and significant amounts of post processing? 

I have never been huge on all the PS work that a lot of folks do to their work.  To me I like pictures that look like what you saw when you took them.  But, that's me. 

Still, because one can do so many kinds of things in PS, it seems like at some point we have started to measure cameras against how far they allow you to take PS.   PS has become where the image is created, and not the camera.  The cart is before the horse, no?

Just food for thought.


I post-process every image, and that's because I like the final result to look like it looked to me.  The out-of-camera JPEG or default raw conversion rarely looks like that.

That's exactly what I was about to say. Postprocessing is usually essential (to my eye) to get an image that resembles what I saw.

I think you guys are probably in the minority. I read "I want it to look like what I saw" quite often, but then the people writing it load up their flickr streams with razor-thin DOF and desaturated images, water blurred to a fog and polarized skies. Things I have personally never seen in real life.

Canon General / Re: DRones vs. anti-DRones: how to resolve the controversy
« on: September 25, 2014, 11:35:22 AM »
I for one hope that canon doesn't start procuring Sony sensors for its SLRs; that's too many eggs in one basket. Aptina, Samsung, anyone other than Sony.

However, if low-ISO dynamic range becomes a major market differentiator, I suspect Canon is more comfortable with its vertical integration and will invest in a new fab.

EOS Bodies / Re: Just for Jrista: 2014 Market Data
« on: September 22, 2014, 03:45:11 PM »
A 1DX with a 400mm f2.8 IS MkII and a trip to Manhattan beach doesn't make you a surf photographer.

Agreed. Surf photographers know to aim about 50 miles further down the 405. :P

Reviews / Re: Tony Northrup - D810 vs. 5D Mk3
« on: September 19, 2014, 01:43:38 PM »
The only reason (aside from corporate pride)

Yah, that would be almost as bad as farming out the heart of the camera (the sensor) to another firm!


I think Nikon would rather sell Nikkor lenses than facilitate people using Canon lenses on their bodies.

Reviews / Re: Tony Northrup - D810 vs. 5D Mk3
« on: September 18, 2014, 11:08:37 PM »
Why is someone whose portfolio is full of glorified snapshots so concerned about his equipment?

Hacks need to make money too.

Reviews / Re: Tony Northrup - D810 vs. 5D Mk3
« on: September 18, 2014, 08:29:39 PM »
Are you saying you can slap on a fast prime, focus dead center, and then rotate ("recompose" generally involves much more rotation than translation, obviously) the camera about its own axis so the initial subject as seen by the AF unit goes from one side of the frame to the other (or at least from the borders of the PDAF sensors) and significantly out of the DOF and it will track it?

If so, that's cool and I do not believe my 5D3 could do such.

LOL, thank you for writing this :) And, yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Again, just watch this video:

It doesn't look like the camera is rotating much (maybe 5 degrees with a rather wide DOF).

I'll give it a shot this evening with a 5D3 just to satisfy the curiosity.

Okay, it's hard to replicate since my camera doesn't illuminate the point it's using during tracking, so I took some snaps at extremes and, looking at them in LR, it did fine.

However, putting a pronounced object like that on a continuous white background isn't really indicative of real world performance; that's about the easiest scenario imaginable. With a complicated background, I don't know how well it would keep up.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 34