Messages

1501

Software & Accessories / Re: Filters - Screw on or not ?

« on: July 06, 2011, 11:25:14 AM »

As others have mentioned, the circular ND filters limit your choices in how you use them to mask a bright section. For example, I've used ND soft filters to dampen down a single corner (think about 1/8th of the frame) which cannot be done with something that masks an entire half.

In terms of Cokin, you can get higher quality filters from Hitech and Singh-Ray. There may even be others.

The real challenge with filters is that the companies making them are having solvency issues due to the only style now desirable are ND and CPOL.

There are also cost advantages. A new lens with a new screw size costs me the price of the Cokin adapter rather than the price of a new filter.

1502

Site Information / Re: Warning: you have sent something someone could consider offensive.

« on: July 05, 2011, 04:49:42 PM »

to those who enjoy the use of asterix-laden words:

I get that you are using it to make a point (hopefully a mature one).  but if you're really telling me you have no better way of expressing yourselves than to resort to expletives ... I don't know, maybe a creative writing class should be your next christmas gift.  there's hundreds of years of powerful and/or hilarious writing and rhetoric out there that never has to use language that would be censored by CR's bot.

I'm not saying it's low or whatever, I know I use expletives more than I should in my free time.  but to feel that it's a neccessity to express yourself that way ... unneeded, I guarantee it.

Why shouldn't we write the way that we talk?

1503

Site Information / Re: Warning: you have sent something someone could consider offensive.

« on: July 05, 2011, 12:40:37 PM »

No assumption was made - the moderator edited the original post, replacing the word in question with asterisks.

Yes, we're all adults here.  But, civility and decorum are still virtues, at least to some.

Do you think that facebook censors out such words for minors in the interests of being "family friendly"?

If there were technical reasons (such as web filters/nanny or rating programs getting their nickers in a knot), I could understand it. But otherwise, thinking that members of your family do not have access to nor use such language is probably naive if they are on the Internet.

I should add that I'm not trying to argue that we should swear/cuss in every post or with every second word, rather have realistic goals and ideals.

1504

Site Information / Re: Warning: you have sent something someone could consider offensive.

« on: July 04, 2011, 06:27:02 PM »

Its a standard canned response.  I sent it.  This is a family friendly forum, and F*** words are unacceptable.

We want everone to find the site useful and enjoyable.

I'll see if I can't do a better job of letting people know what the issue is, but the SMF software does not have a easy way to point at the exact post.

Ah, it was something I said to myself, not in response to someone else!

Including a pointer to the exact post would be a great start.

I can't help but wonder though, if anyone is old enough and knowledgeable enough to use this website, what are the chances that they aren't already aware of the expanded English vocabulary? Or is this more to do with web site filters and programmatic rating based on observed content?

1505

Site Information / Warning: you have sent something someone could consider offensive.

« on: July 04, 2011, 11:53:42 AM »

Yeah, ok, great, but given that there is no link provided to the actual text or post that was deemed offensive, it's impossible to know what someone thought was actually offensive.

In other words, I've read it but I can't actually do anything because I don't know to what the problem is referring to, so I'll just delete it and effectively ignore it.

In addition, I'm apologizing in to the moderators for not being able to read their mind and know what they were thinking at the time. I'm also apologizing in advance for repeating whatever they think I said wrong because it seems more than likely that I'll do it again since I don't know what I did wrong in the first place.

Thanks guys!

p.s. The message generated includes a "Do not reply to this" but the email that I get includes as "to reply to this, click here." Someone actually tests this stuff before it goes into production, right?

1506

PowerShot Cameras / Re: PowerShot Rumor: S95 Replacement [CR2]

« on: July 04, 2011, 09:38:48 AM »

Being able to get rid of the view finder on compact cameras is the best thing the digital revolution ever did for that market segment. Seriously. Unless your view finder images through the lens, what's the benefit to be gained by squishing the camera up against your face?

I like to be able to frame my subjects when outdoors as well as indoors.

Millions of people around (including myself) the world seem to be able to frame their photos when using a P&S outside and without a view finder, why is it that you're not?

If millions can do it, billions cannot.  I'll take your word that you can somehow see that LCD display in Hawaii in the bright sun, but I've heard from lots of other photographers that they can't, and they were pretty irate about laying out big $$ on a camera that they could not use on their vacation.  I made the same mistake with the d90, never again.  I've helped several people find a replacement for their viewfinderless cameras, they do not want to get a useless camera again.

Ah, you don't actually have any first hand experience with using the S95 in daylight, whereas I do.

1507

Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes

« on: July 03, 2011, 06:47:37 PM »

This is one of my best, except that I ****** it up and didn't have time for a second shot...

1508

Landscape / Re: Yosemite national park

« on: July 03, 2011, 06:45:51 PM »

canon 7d with canon 10-22 at f 11 expousre time 1/160 ISO, 200
i need all your advice any time.

Well, for starters, you should have been at f 8, ISO 100.

1509

Landscape / Re: Yosemite national park

« on: July 03, 2011, 06:33:27 PM »

This is from my last trip to Yosemite, 18th of June, 2011.

1510

PowerShot Cameras / Re: PowerShot Rumor: S95 Replacement [CR2]

« on: July 02, 2011, 09:47:03 AM »

Being able to get rid of the view finder on compact cameras is the best thing the digital revolution ever did for that market segment. Seriously. Unless your view finder images through the lens, what's the benefit to be gained by squishing the camera up against your face?

I like to be able to frame my subjects when outdoors as well as indoors.

Millions of people around (including myself) the world seem to be able to frame their photos when using a P&S outside and without a view finder, why is it that you're not?

1511

PowerShot Cameras / Re: PowerShot Rumor: S95 Replacement [CR2]

« on: July 01, 2011, 10:08:21 AM »

I was about to buy an S95 as a pocket camera / back up to my SLR but looking back announcements for S90 & S95 have both been on 19th August in 2010 & 2011 repectively so I will hang fire to either get an S100(?) or cheaper S95 depending on what it delivers.  S100 sounds like evolutionary improvement on S95 which in turn was on S90 and is expected to be a 'better' camera following Canon's Kaizen strategy but I may not need it to turn out good pictures.

12mp would be nice but is not essential and wouldn't make me buy s100 over a cheap s95.
5x Zoom again good but better if wide angle goes out to 24mm (to 120) or even 27mm (to 135).   Wider + 5x zoom would make me get the s100.

This is my dilemma also. I've been umming and erring about buying an S95 for a few months and finally thought I might as well wait until its replacement comes out. No point in buying a camera just before it's due to be superseded, right? But if the speculation on this board is correct, I don't think it'd really be worth the wait. Might as well get the S95 and be done with it.

The only thing which puts me off the S95 is lack of viewfinder. My current compact is an SX210 IS, which replaced my Ixus 850 and I hate that it doesn't have a viewfinder. I know that makes me a dinosaur but I'm thinking of getting a G12 (or whatever comes next) just for the viewfinder.

Being able to get rid of the view finder on compact cameras is the best thing the digital revolution ever did for that market segment. Seriously. Unless your view finder images through the lens, what's the benefit to be gained by squishing the camera up against your face?

1512

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Large Sensor PowerShot? [CR1]

« on: June 29, 2011, 12:49:48 AM »

gmzra, sorry, I simply don't belive you, those images could not have been captured intentionally with a G camera.

The images that came out might be nice, but they aren't the images that you thought you were taking when you pressed the button, because what you were looking at and trying to record happened half a second or more before these. In the first image you probrably wanted to freeze the horse mid air as it was jumping and in second you probrably wanted the guy who'se been thrown from the bull in mid air too. Oh well, thats a G for you.

See my prior comment about knowing the sport.

Let me put this another way ... the first time I went to a Formula 1 race with an SLR (before affordable DSLRs existed), I ended up with a lot of shots without cars because I was side on at a fast part of the track. Even though the shutter lag was very small, the cars are very very fast. In short, even though I had an appropriate tool, I didn't know the sport and thus I didn't get the shot.

A few years later I was at a Formula 1 with a compact digital camera (DSLRs were still neither affordable nor ready to replace film.) Armed with prior knowledge, I knew where to go in order to get the shot and what to do to make up for the camera's shutter lag in order to get the shot. And I got better shots (and video!) with the compact flash than I did with an SLR.

Thom Hogan recently had a shot on his web page with lions rubbing heads. He got the shot because he knew his subject in addition to having the right tools. i'm confident that he could have gotten the shot even if he'd been using a Nikon compact camera and not a DSLR.

1513

PowerShot Cameras / Re: PowerShot Rumor: S95 Replacement [CR2]

« on: June 29, 2011, 12:38:32 AM »

Nobody missing a 1080p video recording?

Nope. It's a camera for family snaps and when I'm out...

Plus, playing 720p is much easier on more computers than 1080p.

I would also love to see it go wider than 28, and don´t care about hot shoe, viewfinder or more megapixel.

yup, going out to 24mm would be marvelous.

I was planing to buy the S95 for my wife, for our travel to florida in september. It´s going to be an addition to my Canon 7D.

Perfect handbag/purse camera.

1514

EOS Bodies / Re: 1D MK IV now in Stock at Canon Refurb Store

« on: June 29, 2011, 12:35:32 AM »

...but my 85mm f/1.8 might go away, its very good, but does not seem to get a whole lot of use on my 5D MK II...I'll probably have to think about letting the 85 go very carefully.

Mine went soon after I bought the 85mm f/1.2L II.  I still have a few regrets about that - the 85mm f/1.8 was quite sharp, and focused very fast (but then, snails move fast compared to the focusing elements of the 85L).  But, I used the 85mm f/1.8 on a T1i and a 7D, and since I really liked the focal length, after getting a 5DII I also got a 135mm f/2L. 

I find that for almost any situation where I'd want the 85mm f/1.8, the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II does just as well if not better.  If I really wanted to use the lens at f/1.8, then I'd want the option of going wider, too.

Now if only the 70-200/F2.8 IS II weighed the same and was as small as the 85/1.8 ...

1515

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Large Sensor PowerShot? [CR1]

« on: June 28, 2011, 06:28:43 AM »

Well it's more than just the sensor, the camera has to work, and based on the aweful G12 I've been messing around with I doubt they're on the right path.

The G12 is such an absolute piece of junk that I won't buy anything expect the absolute top of the range Canon again. I haven't owned such a useless camera since my very first Fed Zorki lll back in the mid 70's. How Canon created such a piece of junk out out what was an almost acceptable platform amazes me. My weekend with at the Montreal F1 GP was so tragic I just started laughing at all the pictures it missed, 19 out of 20, maybe 39 out of 40. No matter what I did to override its silly nanny habits it would still dwell and pause, missing every single bit of action, it was so stunningly useless that I'm actually amazed they sell any of them at all!

So, even if they put a bigger better chip in a pocketable camera, there is no guarantee that it'll be any use at all based on the disaster that is the G12!

Sorry to hear that. I hate to tell you that the G12 or any point and shoot is not suitable for action or sport photography. To shoot Formular One Grand Prix, You definitely need a Good DSLR with fast auto focus.

yeah that was user error i'm affraid, you got to know what your camera can do...  no compact (well except the GF3) has a fast shutter lag that can freeze sports..  you would need to use manual focus to stand a chance to capture such fast sports..  or as the other guy said, use an SLR...

If you know your sport, a compact can be used to take sports photos. Not likely to end up on the front cover of a magazine or front page (or back page!) of a newspaper, but they can be used.