December 18, 2014, 07:41:58 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 - meli

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12
1
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: 40-50mm for a7r
« on: Today at 10:29:16 AM »
Second hand and slightly expensive but worth a look: nikon's 50/1.2, Olympus Zuiko 55/1.2

2
Lenses / Re: Sigma 18-35 1.8 or EF 16-35 2.8 for 70D
« on: December 03, 2014, 02:18:33 PM »
18-35 is really great but no wide enough, 16-35 is meh, you should consider 10-18 for landscapes

3
Technical Support / Re: Canon Rebel XTI Error 01
« on: November 28, 2014, 05:39:02 PM »
Sama's link is correct apart the "ftp" in the beginning, try this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9qwrWbS0d0

4
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma Opens Up About Their Roadmap
« on: September 22, 2014, 02:07:32 PM »
Sigma's 24-70 & 70-200 are mediocre at best and need an update and  that'll come in 2.8 i believe. Although I'd be all over a 24-70/2 it doesnt make market sense and it'll probably be a niche piece. I think a 24-50/2 or 28-50/2 seems more plausible.

5
Lenses / Re: Lenses that you want Canon to release next
« on: September 18, 2014, 06:48:52 PM »
8.  EF 300/1.8L USM.  Canon has designed and patented it, at least on paper.  It would be a beast, but without a doubt, there would be nothing remotely comparable in the 135mm format world.

Well, there was.., Nikon had a 300/2 back in the 80s

6
...
Here are A4 and A3 printouts resolutions at fine 720dpi and superfine 1440dpi
...
  So from above it is clear that in fact even most Buyer sensor MF cameras can not over perform standard quality 720dpi A4 printing resolution.
...
I dont think you understand what those 720dpi & 1440dpi means

7
You should really have a look at the 18-35 1.8 Sigma, that lens will make you happy.

8
Susceptible to eczema outbursts I guess?

9
Lenses / Re: DxO ... a little help please!
« on: February 13, 2014, 01:52:00 PM »
... all this got me thinking that for a company like DxO that is capable/equipped to conduct sophisticated lens/sensor tests, what stops them from comparing lenses/sensors at 10 different ISO measurements and in 10 different conditions with 10 different subject movements and then come up with scores in a chart, so people can come to a more informed conclusion :-\
...and with 10 different samples of the same camera/lens picked with appropriate criteria.
They probably could, but they wont. What you wish takes time, personnel, and money. And all this to run a free service. That doesnt fly really well.
Quote
For example they could, in controlled environment, throw a ball and see how well the camera/lens can auto focus at various apertures and then come up with several scores for sharpness ...
Dxo doesnt do AF. Its a whole other beast and frankly its difficult to come up with an objective/exhaustive suite of lab/field AF tests.

10
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII - too grainy or not?
« on: February 09, 2014, 06:41:34 PM »
Nope. In the jpg the values for face & arm are already @ 252+ and actually parts of his nose and lips are already clipped; if you think you could add another 2.5stops and be able with your LR 4+ to bring'em back then damn, pls torrent us your LR cause it must be some pretty special sauce ;D
Note that you're only looking at the JPEG. The RAW version would have significantly more highlight data than what is shown in the rendered JPEG. I've dealt with this countless times with clouds that appeared to be blown out in the JPEG preview but actually weren't in the RAW version... especially with 5D3 RAW files.

Oh no doubt you might have been able to salvage something from this raw, but you claimed you could salvage it even with an additional 2.5stops on top.

11
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII - too grainy or not?
« on: February 09, 2014, 05:59:10 PM »

Lightroom 4+ would have no problem recovering highlights even if this scene were 2.5 stops brighter.

Nope. In the jpg the values for face & arm are already @ 252+ and actually parts of his nose and lips are already clipped; if you think you could add another 2.5stops and be able with your LR 4+ to bring'em back then damn, pls torrent us your LR cause it must be some pretty special sauce ;D

Who said again that Canon doesn't need more dynamic range :-p ?
Thats why i'm a dual camper  ;D

@OP, you should bump up iso and sync

12
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII - too grainy or not?
« on: February 09, 2014, 02:27:18 PM »
This is a classic example of underexposure. Take a look at the histogram in Lightroom and notice how most of it is bunched up on the left side. You want the histogram to be about 2.5-3 stops more to the right. You have some options..

Nope. This is not a classic example of underexposure and it would be silly to overexposure by 2.5-3 stops this particular scene since the subject's highlights are already bordering on overexposure; doing so would result in no noise in the bg and a white hot blob in the center

13
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe site hacked
« on: October 06, 2013, 08:27:18 AM »
 It appears that the breach of Adobe‚Äôs data occurred in early August of this year but it is possible that the breach was ongoing earlier.

http://gigaom.com/2013/10/04/adobe-source-code-breech-its-bad-real-bad/

Given that the source code is out, it might be a really good idea to stop using adobe's pdf reader.

The irony is that someone using pirated photoshop is actually safer than someone on the cloud.

14
Lenses / Re: Best 35mm wide open????
« on: September 26, 2013, 07:12:37 AM »
Im in the market for a 35mm for my 5DMK3.. Out of the option which is best wide open for nice bokeh??

You are going to get quit a few Sigma suggestions. This is normal, it is a popular lens that many can afford.
Pride in ownership will generate fanfare. Many answers come from what they own, not what may be best.

But the answer to your question the Zeiss 35mm F/1.4 is the best. Is it $1000 better than the L or the Sig? It would be to me, but not to most people.


Ah yes, confirmation bias, you should see how strong it is with those that think that since they bought the most expensive toy then it must be surely the "best".

15
Lenses / Re: the future of 1.2 L lenses ?
« on: September 20, 2013, 12:46:52 PM »
There are also other issues related to fast lenses and bayer sensors, CA for example: http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/6147351879/#

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12