March 02, 2015, 02:05:04 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 - dilbert

Pages: 1 ... 104 105 [106] 107 108 ... 238
Sports / Re: F1 Photography Advice
« on: November 19, 2013, 05:28:44 PM »
One thing that is both a plus and a minus (you may know this already):  2014 sees all new smaller V6 engines and chassis, with state of the art turbo charging that is all combined with electric motor assist/batteries (I don't like this part)...but it's possible the cars might be a bit quieter than the current V8's.  Obviously they won't be as quiet as normal "turbo" cars can be.

I just got back from the USGP, and I feel very fortunate that I got to hear the 2.4L naturally aspirated V-8s screaming away at 18,000 rpm one last time. While I appreciate the technology involved with next's year's turbo V-6s, the sound is much more subdued.

Meh, you should have heard them when they did around 20,000rpm.

Sports / Re: F1 Photography Advice
« on: November 19, 2013, 05:20:40 PM »
Here's some advice for you that you won't appreciate until after the event: leave your kit at home and enjoy the race. Leave the photography to the pro's.

That is probably one of the best advice the internet has ever hosted! After all, why would anybody want to do something that he likes just for the fun of it while pros can do it much better and are paid for it. And that is also a reminder that pros are born pros and never gained from experience.

Obviously you have never been to a F1 race.

Third Party Manufacturers / Nokia Pureview 1020 beats Nikon D800
« on: November 19, 2013, 07:49:44 AM »

Note what the reviewer says at the bottom:
"Could the Nikon beat the Nokia on every image? A definitive yes. The lens 28-105 appeared to fall short of the resolving power a 36 mpix sensor could muster. Choosing a better lens, choosing to use a tripod, choosing to use mirror lock up could easily have turned this into a Nikon shutout. This is to say nothing of the boundaries you can push the Nikon's astounding RAW files."

But as a walk-around camera, the Nokia 1020 seems to do surprisingly well with 41MP.

Why would you want to take a DSLR with half the megapixels with you when you walk around a new city on holiday?

Sports / Re: F1 Photography Advice
« on: November 19, 2013, 06:13:07 AM »
My F1 photography advice is that take pics of grid girls. We've all seen the cars from all kinds of angles already. From my own F1 pictures I like the grid girl pics the most.

And the girls are models so they love to have their picture taken and will pose for almost anyone!

Sports / Re: F1 Photography Advice
« on: November 19, 2013, 06:11:53 AM »
I went to the Austin F1 race last year and was sitting in a grandstand at the end of a long straight.  I took a lot of pictures which can be found at .  Most of these are heavily cropped and I pretty much loaded all but the God awful up on pbase so it should give you a good idea of what worked and what didn’t.  As I recall, I was using my 70-200 2.8 for most of these.   It also appears that I took most of them at f/4.  I also used my 1.4 extender on a few.  Therefore, your lens selection may work out great.

All of the ones I looked at showed 800mm...

The most important thing to bring is ear protection.  The sound is painfully loud and you will suffer hearing damage if you expose yourself to this for any extended period of time.  In Austin, the sound is magnified in the main straight as it is a canyon between large grandstands on each side.   

Walk around a bit before the race with a good walk around lens.  Some of the people attending the race are a spectacle in themselves.

Especially those of the fairer sex :*)

The crowds, fences and limitations on movement on race day make photographing the race action very problematic.  If you have a press-pass with access to the areas with holes in the fences or scaffolding to shoot from, that is a different matter.  For everyone else, my thoughts on race day are to bring what you have, take a few shots and enjoy the experience.


Sports / Re: F1 Photography Advice
« on: November 19, 2013, 06:04:22 AM »
I'll be going to the Malaysian F1 Grand Prix next year and i'm looking for some advice on what kit would be best to take.  I have grandstand tickets on the pit straight for all three days and also might get pit lane access probably on the practice day through a friend who works for one of the teams.

I currently have an Eos 50D, Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon 28-135, and Canon 55-250.  I have been considering selling the 55-250 and getting a 70-200 F4.  Would this be a good idea or would the extra reach of the 55-250 be more useful.

Here's some advice for you that you won't appreciate until after the event: leave your kit at home and enjoy the race. Leave the photography to the pro's.

Lenses / Re: Comparing 16-35 to Nikon 14-24 and Zeiss/Leica primes
« on: November 18, 2013, 02:52:53 AM »
Since my experience five years ago, I have noticed a proliferation in focus calibration tools and software.  I also wonder how many people are disappointed after the first day or week with a new lens, and return lenses with perfectly good optics, because their AF is not spot-on.  The same thing goes for assessments or comparisons.  First impressions are not always the right ones ...

Soft lenses:

Lenses / Re: Comparing 16-35 to Nikon 14-24 and Zeiss/Leica primes
« on: November 17, 2013, 05:12:06 AM »
He did a similar thing with a Leica prime vs Nikon 24-70 vs Canon 24-70 Mark I
and went one praising how "superior" the Leica was in term of sharpness

It was the biggest facepalm to me.
You need compare zoom vs zoom.

What's wrong with comparing primes to zooms?  Because everyone knows primes are better?  Perhaps - but how do they know unless they compare?  Besides, in more than one discussion here you will find people telling us how the Canon 24-70 is at least as good as a collection of primes in that range, and presumably they know that because....

Yes it's ok to do so until he drew a conclusion that therefore Leica is superior than CaNikon.
That's when I have problems

Let me get this straight. You don't mind people doing comparisons except when a 3rd party lens manufacturer is shown to be better?

Well at least now we know that you're biased whereas before we would only have suspected you for being a fan-boi.

Lenses / Comparing 16-35 to Nikon 14-24 and Zeiss/Leica primes
« on: November 14, 2013, 10:53:35 PM »
People like to wax lyrical about how good the Nikon 14-24 is. Well at 21mm, it ain't that much better than Canon's 16-35.

Yes, that's Ken Rockwell but just look at the picture detail. The Canon and Nikon lenses are both close to unusable wide open.

Yes, it is unfair because it is pitting zooms against primes but will people please stop saying how wonderful the Nikon 14-24 is and Canon's 16-35? (This is also directed at those who would diss Zeiss primes.)

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 Distagon
« on: November 14, 2013, 07:45:29 PM »
I'm generally a Zeiss fan myself but the Nikon 14-24 (w/adapter) represents a much better value and is sharper across the frame when stopped down vs the Zeiss.

mmm, don't you love armchair experts?

Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 13, 2013, 02:09:12 PM »
BTW, why hasn't anyone considered some of those 8 lenses might be for cinema?
And also EF-S and EF-M...

In an interview with CEO Imaging of Canon, he says:

"The concept of the EOS M is to make an interchangeable lens camera as small as possible while retaining the quality we would expect from an EOS product. It must be able to support a wide range of lenses - without that support, there's no point making it. Looking at the data, we're not seeing the EOS-M users making use of a variety of lenses. So one of the challenges is to roll-out a lineup of attractive lenses - that is our response to encourage people to use them"


Will be rather sad if Canon does not roll out more EF lenses....

EOS-M has been close to a failure in the USA so of course nobody here (feels very WASPish) wants more lenses for it.

The other interesting part here is that they're obviously aware of what sort of body-lens combinations people are using. I wonder if Canon, Nikon, etc, have a program where they are routinely looking at EXIF information on websites such as flickr to see what body-lens combinations people are using. They'd be kind of dumb if they weren't, wouldn't they?

Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 12, 2013, 01:01:42 PM »
I was about to get the 24-105 f4L for Christmas, but everything’s on hold as I would hate to miss out on something “new”.
My wish list of “new” models is as follows

EF 17-135mm f4 L USM IS (preferred option as this would suit almost all my needs and would be a permanent fixture on my camera)
EF 24-150mm f/4 L USM IS (dreaming now! :P)

Lets push the boundaries further, what would be your ULTIMATE dream lens??

I'm waiting for the 50-500/f1.4L IS USM

Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 12, 2013, 12:22:05 AM »
The 17 is a recent lens though and the 200-400 is something new with the built-in TC and 400mm performance like the old 400 2.8 version and the 70-300L is the best such small tele-zoom with that range out there, and the 24-70 II takes on the 24 1.4 II at 24mm when all the older ones were mush city at 24mm on FF edges and this one is just about APO. The 24-70 f/4 IS is the smallest little standard zoom with some macro ability that delivers pretty decent 24mm FF edges. 100L has hybrid macro IS.

The 55-250 STM is said to be pretty amazing for the size, weight, price.

I would personally like to see a cheaper & lower build quality version of the 70-300L with similar optics.  A proper update of the non-L 70-300 IS USM, in other words... Reason being that there are virtually no EF-mount telephoto zooms that are both short, light, and sharp.  You either have to go long with the 70-200 f/4L, heavy with the 70-300 f/4-5.6L, or long&heavy with the 70-200 f/2.8.  It would be nice to see short & light like the 70-300 non-L, but with the optics of the L.  It is pretty evident from the 70-300L's design that a lot of the size and weight is from the high quality build; while the build is good, I'd like to see a lighter less obtrusive design as well.

The 55-250 STM is a good example of light build + great optics, but it will not mount on full frame.  I don't like the plastic mount though, that is a bit TOO cheap :)

Canon says, "If you can afford a FF body, you can afford an L-series telezoom."  Not saying that I agree, but everyone who fills out the online registration for a lens gives them data on lenses and bodies owned, and income level.

I'd make some joke about Canon sharing that information with the NSA but the NSA probably already watch it go by.

Strange thing about salary is that everyone thinks that putting in the right information is good because it is a "See, look at how much I make, aren't I good!"

Never tell the truth with surveys.

Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 10, 2013, 09:58:02 PM »
Everyone thus far has forgotten to include the 16-50/L IS that was meant for this year:

2010: EF 16-50 f/4L H-IS
2013: 14-24 f/2.8L, EF 16-50 f/4L IS

2012: 14-24 after the 200-400.

I hope the above CR2 rumors (except for the 2010 reference) come true. Some awesome ultrawide FF zoom lenses are what Canonites need now: 14-24 f/2.8 and 16-50 f/4.

To add to the above...

The 45 and 90 TS/E:
2013: 90/2.8 TS/E
2013: 45 & 90 TS/E
2013: 45 & 90 TS/E

The 50, 85 and 135:
2013: Patents: new 50mm, 75mm and 135mm lenses
2013: A new 50 coming soon CR1 50/1.8 IS in Q1CY2014
2013: Canon EF50/f1.4 is in 2013 CR2/

The 35:

To summarise:
45 TS/E
90/2.8 TS/E
... makes 8 lenses. No big zooms. I wonder if someone just went through and counted up all of the patent and other rumors for Canon this year and created a new rumor?

Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 10, 2013, 05:26:53 PM »
Canon needs to step up its game. Sigma has made a killing recently with its cheaper but better alternatives (35mm f1.4 and the 18-35mm f1.8, and perhaps the 24-105mm after tests come out). Canon cannot hope to maintain a higher price tag for lenses with equal or lesser quality. I can understand a Canon costing more than a Sigma, but at least the sharpness, distortion, etc etc have to be the same. The red ring along isn't going to fool customers into paying extra anymore.

You can only speak for yourself. As far as myself is concerned, I think that the logo "Canon" means the foremost quality possible, and the red ring is almost the equivalent of the Holy Grail. You see, there's a reason why they say: You get what you pay for!!!!

And with the 16-35, 17-40 and 24-105, Canon means crap corners at the wide end.

Pages: 1 ... 104 105 [106] 107 108 ... 238