December 22, 2014, 08:16:40 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 ... 111 112 [113] 114 115 ... 220
1681
Lenses / Re: FoV difference between Tamron 70-300VC and Canon 70-300L
« on: February 18, 2013, 03:18:07 PM »
Remember that focal length is specified when the lens is focused at infinity...so your newspaper or brick wall had better be rather far away!

So what you're saying is that the FoV difference is simply a result of "focus breathing" which is something that I did consider as being a possible cause.

1682
Lenses / FoV difference between Tamron 70-300VC and Canon 70-300L
« on: February 18, 2013, 09:33:12 AM »
I was wondering if there is anyone else out there that has shot with both of these lenses and noticed the rather substantial field of view (FoV) difference between the two lenses.

If the Tamron is 300mm at 300mm then it feels like the Canon is maybe 290 or 280. A brick wall or newspaper test makes this very readily apparent.

Has anyone else noticed this?

1683
You need to learn how to use keywords and keyword hierarchies.

Start with using both date and location based keyword hierarchy.

1684
Technical Support / Re: How do you store and archive your images?
« on: February 17, 2013, 08:59:02 AM »
1st backup onto an external hard drive that is periodically connected

2nd backup to DVD/BluRay

1685
EOS Bodies / Re: What if the rumored 5Dx is actually a 4D?
« on: February 15, 2013, 12:49:03 PM »

And as you said elsewhere on this site, without high fps, you can't take good photos :P

Obviously the mods removing your previous remark and susequent rebuttals to the same effect wasn't sufficient to prevent you from having another go at the expired horse....

Thank you for your insightful comment. Now would you like to comment on the topic of the 5Dx/4D?

...and thank you for flagrantly misrepresenting what I said.  Now would you like to provide a link to where I stated, "Without high fps, you can't take good photos,"

You repeatedly insisted that high fps were required to take good photos and that skill was no replacement for this which obviously leads one to conclude that you're insisting that high fps is required to get good photos.

Quote
or, perhaps you'd like to suggest that the 5Dx/4D will actually be a lens, and not a camera?

Nope - It's going to be a horse, of course.

1686
EOS Bodies / Re: What if the rumored 5Dx is actually a 4D?
« on: February 14, 2013, 05:37:38 PM »

And as you said elsewhere on this site, without high fps, you can't take good photos :P

Obviously the mods removing your previous remark and susequent rebuttals to the same effect wasn't sufficient to prevent you from having another go at the expired horse....

Thank you for your insightful comment. Now would you like to comment on the topic of the 5Dx/4D?

1687
EOS Bodies / Re: What if the rumored 5Dx is actually a 4D?
« on: February 14, 2013, 12:09:36 PM »
Either way, high MP will mean low fps.

And as you said elsewhere on this site, without high fps, you can't take good photos :P

1688
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: DPReview: Canon EOS 6D Reviewed
« on: February 13, 2013, 06:21:04 AM »
"smack solely of product differentiation…..”

Well, that kind of says it all, doesn't it?

And people wonder why there are Canon haters...

You could be hard pressed to say that the conclusion of the review was praising it.

1689
Lenses / Re: Canon 200-400 video review
« on: February 12, 2013, 07:44:03 AM »

1690
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Camera in 2014
« on: February 12, 2013, 06:49:24 AM »
Sure, it may be the only way to "get the shot" but from a photography perspective it's kind of like cheating because there's no skill required on the photographer's part in knowing when to snap or compose.

That is so unbelievably naive I don't even know where to start!!! Go read Art Moriss' blog, or any one of the worlds most renown bird photographers. MOST will tell you they are not good at BIF (Birds in Flight), because it takes a tremendous amount of detail-oriented SKILL. Good BIF photography requires dedicated practice to get right, as there are so many factors to consider, all of which must be continually addressed in real time!

It is not simply a matter of point, frame, and shoot. Achieving and maintaining correct exposure, particularly of birds, while they are in flight against a constantly changing background, is one of the most challenging things in photography. You've just shown your excessive naivete with the claim you've made above. Snap and compose my ***. You just insulted the entire community of bird photographers, particularly the experts at Bird in Flight photography.

Same for sports too. Even with tons of fps you still need a lot of skill. A newbie with 30fps will get much worse sports shots than a talented sports shooter with 4fps.

That is exactly my point. More fps doesn't give you better pictures, it just gives you more of them. Or to be more precise, it gives you more images that you delete so your keeper ratio is lower.

And your point is being stated because???????????????????  What?  There are many shots I couldn't have gotten during fast-action basketball games, that I did get, simply because of fps.  I guess at the end of the day, who really cares when I got the shot and you didn't.  It's hard to print an 8x10 of something you don't have.

Point being that if you went there with (say) a 1DC, you could shoot 24fps at 4k resolution (~8MP) to get an 8x10 if you just shot in video mode. Now do you get it?

1691
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Camera in 2014
« on: February 11, 2013, 10:32:59 PM »
Sure, it may be the only way to "get the shot" but from a photography perspective it's kind of like cheating because there's no skill required on the photographer's part in knowing when to snap or compose.

That is so unbelievably naive I don't even know where to start!!! Go read Art Moriss' blog, or any one of the worlds most renown bird photographers. MOST will tell you they are not good at BIF (Birds in Flight), because it takes a tremendous amount of detail-oriented SKILL. Good BIF photography requires dedicated practice to get right, as there are so many factors to consider, all of which must be continually addressed in real time!

It is not simply a matter of point, frame, and shoot. Achieving and maintaining correct exposure, particularly of birds, while they are in flight against a constantly changing background, is one of the most challenging things in photography. You've just shown your excessive naivete with the claim you've made above. Snap and compose my ***. You just insulted the entire community of bird photographers, particularly the experts at Bird in Flight photography.

Same for sports too. Even with tons of fps you still need a lot of skill. A newbie with 30fps will get much worse sports shots than a talented sports shooter with 4fps.

That is exactly my point. More fps doesn't give you better pictures, it just gives you more of them. Or to be more precise, it gives you more images that you delete so your keeper ratio is lower.

1692
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Camera in 2014
« on: February 11, 2013, 10:30:24 PM »
...
I like the Osprey example....

I wish to take a picture of an Osprey picking a fish out of the river.... this happens pretty fast, about 2 or 3 tenths of a second. This is faster than my reaction time so I have to anticipate the action and hope that my picture is taken at the right time... and with the speed things are moving I only get one shot.

Beside me is another photographer with a 1Dx set to take a burst at 10 frames per second. The other photographer starts thier burst before the Osprey hits the water and it continues until the fish is well clear. My picture is of the claws going into the water.. my timing is off. The other photographer has a string of twenty or so pictures from the Osprey approaching the water, through the grab, and as the catch clears the water. I have a great shot. The other photographer has twenty great shots, one or two of which show the intended image.

That is an indisputable reason for the use of bursts and how they can improve composition.

You might as well take a high resolution video camera...

And indeed that is what various people used to do to get good action shots of animals: they used film to capture lots of frames to get the one they wanted and blow that up large.

Sure, it may be the only way to "get the shot" but from a photography perspective it's kind of like cheating because there's no skill required on the photographer's part in knowing when to snap or compose.

I sincerely hope that you take all your photos in manual mode using manual focus and don't bother to look at exposure displays or anything else, because that would be like cheating.

Well I actually do use "M" for about 80% of my photographs, including indoor photographs, so go figure.

Quote
Burst mode is a tool, to help you in times where action happens too fast for you to react.

These are all tools to enhance your abilities and creativity. Only a fool ignores good tools.

Depends on your perspective. Lots of FPS is like saying you don't know if a good photograph will appear with what you're doing so you capture lots on the pretense that at least one will be what you want. I've seen lots of people do it - including those with large format cameras.

1693
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Camera in 2014
« on: February 11, 2013, 06:32:58 PM »
...
I like the Osprey example....

I wish to take a picture of an Osprey picking a fish out of the river.... this happens pretty fast, about 2 or 3 tenths of a second. This is faster than my reaction time so I have to anticipate the action and hope that my picture is taken at the right time... and with the speed things are moving I only get one shot.

Beside me is another photographer with a 1Dx set to take a burst at 10 frames per second. The other photographer starts thier burst before the Osprey hits the water and it continues until the fish is well clear. My picture is of the claws going into the water.. my timing is off. The other photographer has a string of twenty or so pictures from the Osprey approaching the water, through the grab, and as the catch clears the water. I have a great shot. The other photographer has twenty great shots, one or two of which show the intended image.

That is an indisputable reason for the use of bursts and how they can improve composition.

You might as well take a high resolution video camera...

And indeed that is what various people used to do to get good action shots of animals: they used film to capture lots of frames to get the one they wanted and blow that up large.

Sure, it may be the only way to "get the shot" but from a photography perspective it's kind of like cheating because there's no skill required on the photographer's part in knowing when to snap or compose.

1694
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Camera in 2014
« on: February 11, 2013, 06:24:01 PM »
For the 5DC, 7D and rebel-crowd, I'm sure the 5D3 is a great upgrade. :)

...and for the 5DII crowd who shoot things that move.  ;)

You're telling me that using a 5DIII with the same shutter speed and aperture as a 5DII will result in better photos of "action"?? I'd like to know how you work that magic. Do things automatically go slower when they sense a 5DIII is taking a photo of them?

Thanks, now I understand you.  Your dislike of the 5DIII (or maybe Canon, in general) has completely eliminated any objectivity you may have had.  This assertion is even more ludicrous that others you've made.   If you honestly believe that the better AF system of the 5DIII cannot yield better images of moving subjects than the 5DII, then I feel comfortable dismissing your arguments on the subject as biased to the point of irrelevance.

Pity that you didn't understand what I wrote.

What makes a sharp photo?
Shutter speed + lens + focus

If the speed of the object is such that the shutter speed isn't enough to freeze the object then it don't matter how good the focus is, you're still left with a blurry image.

Pity that you don't understand what you wrote. 

What makes a sharp photo?
Shutter speed + lens + focus


Since the 5DII and 5DIII can obviously be set to the same shutter speed with the same lens, the difference is the AF system.  "Focus" - your word. So...what you wrote suggests that you think the 5DIII's AF is not better than the 5DII's.


I didn't say that the 5DIII's AF wasn't better than the 5DII's. However the way you and everyone else talks about the AF, you could be forgiven for thinking that AF was the only factor in obtaining good action shots.

There is a certain range of subject motion for which the newer AF does make an improvement but it isn't complete.

Quote
I suppose I shouldn't be surprised...you also argued that the Canon DIGISUPER 75 broadcast TV lens was a camera, and you were way off base there, too (despite the fact that you refused to admit your mistake).

Well given that it was the only marking that could be seen on the entire device was on a lens that was not easily discernible as being a lens, one could easily be forgiven for mistaking the entire thing to being a camera.

1695
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Camera in 2014
« on: February 11, 2013, 08:07:27 AM »
For the 5DC, 7D and rebel-crowd, I'm sure the 5D3 is a great upgrade. :)

...and for the 5DII crowd who shoot things that move.  ;)

You're telling me that using a 5DIII with the same shutter speed and aperture as a 5DII will result in better photos of "action"?? I'd like to know how you work that magic. Do things automatically go slower when they sense a 5DIII is taking a photo of them?

Thanks, now I understand you.  Your dislike of the 5DIII (or maybe Canon, in general) has completely eliminated any objectivity you may have had.  This assertion is even more ludicrous that others you've made.   If you honestly believe that the better AF system of the 5DIII cannot yield better images of moving subjects than the 5DII, then I feel comfortable dismissing your arguments on the subject as biased to the point of irrelevance.

Pity that you didn't understand what I wrote.

What makes a sharp photo?
Shutter speed + lens + focus

If the speed of the object is such that the shutter speed isn't enough to freeze the object then it don't matter how good the focus is, you're still left with a blurry image.

Pages: 1 ... 111 112 [113] 114 115 ... 220