January 30, 2015, 06:23:25 AM

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 ... 230
1681
I have submitted the issue to my host.

I've seen it quite a few times and just ignore it as being a function of cookies not being correct for a given URL or time that I visit a URL. A reload or clearing of the browser cache usually fixes things up. So it may not be a problem that the host can do anything about... or at least not completely.

1682
EOS Bodies / Re: New 5D3 Raw video samples mind blowing!
« on: May 14, 2013, 10:49:11 AM »
This is insanely awesome.

But keep in mind:
* no audio recording

The audio recording could be a bitch but then a clapboard will solve that problem for you.

Quote
* only 24 minutes of 1920x1080 24fps RAW video in a very expensive 128GB 1000x CF card

How many movies or TV shows feature more than 5 minutes of continuous footage of any one thing? (I suspect that even 5 minutes is a long take and that most are much shorter.)

So you've got plenty of room to video a take, transfer it to HDD, wipe the CF and do another.

1683
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III with Continuous RAW Video Recording
« on: May 13, 2013, 10:26:49 AM »
The ML guys have their resolution selection interface wrong.

It should be something like "16:9 (1920x1080)", "2.35:1 (1920x816)", etc.

1684
Lenses / Re: EF 14-24mm and Filters
« on: May 13, 2013, 08:35:18 AM »

how likely is it that a EF 14-24mm can be used with screw on filters?

will it have a bulged frontelement that prevents the use of filters?

The best way to handle filters for lenses such as this is to do what they do with the big telephoto lenses and put the filter at the rear of the lens.

1685
PowerShot / Re: Two New PowerShot Cameras Leaked
« on: May 13, 2013, 08:11:10 AM »
Afterall, which camera has done more innovation with digital cameras recently, Canon or Sony?
And which company has done as little as possible?
Oh, you're bashing Canon? Big surprise. No innovation the last year? Where have you been?

Well, that's dilbert for you. Confuses lenses with cameras and talks out of both sides of his mouth.  Just recently, dilbert started a thread about the SX50 being the best superzoom ever, and now Canon has done 'as little as possible'.  ::)

Look I could retaliate but to what purpose would that serve? Maybe it is better to play the ball (lets talk Canon) rather than attack people.

1686
PowerShot / Re: Two New PowerShot Cameras Leaked
« on: May 13, 2013, 08:08:14 AM »
So the thing Canon needed to upgrade, the lens, is no different then the S100.  The camera also looks much more slippery then my S100.  I'm guessing the sensor is the same and the only upgrade will be the digic 6 processor which will be of no help because you'll shot in raw.

Pity because if the RX200 rumours are true, it seems that Sony stepped up in the lens department:

http://photorumors.com/2013/05/05/rumors-sony-rx200-coming-in-june-with-a-built-in-pop-up-viewfinder/

I'd rate that as quite possibly true.

Afterall, which camera has done more innovation with digital cameras recently, Canon or Sony?
And which company has done as little as possible?
Oh, you're bashing Canon? Big surprise. No innovation the last year? Where have you been?

Ok, name one area where Canon has led the photography field with new innovation in the last year - and by innovation I mean something more than gizmos added to cameras.

1687
PowerShot / Re: Two New PowerShot Cameras Leaked
« on: May 13, 2013, 05:35:54 AM »
So the thing Canon needed to upgrade, the lens, is no different then the S100.  The camera also looks much more slippery then my S100.  I'm guessing the sensor is the same and the only upgrade will be the digic 6 processor which will be of no help because you'll shot in raw.

Pity because if the RX200 rumours are true, it seems that Sony stepped up in the lens department:

http://photorumors.com/2013/05/05/rumors-sony-rx200-coming-in-june-with-a-built-in-pop-up-viewfinder/

I'd rate that as quite possibly true.

Afterall, which camera has done more innovation with digital cameras recently, Canon or Sony?
And which company has done as little as possible?

1688
PowerShot / Re: Two New PowerShot Cameras Leaked
« on: May 13, 2013, 12:57:49 AM »
So the thing Canon needed to upgrade, the lens, is no different then the S100.  The camera also looks much more slippery then my S100.  I'm guessing the sensor is the same and the only upgrade will be the digic 6 processor which will be of no help because you'll shot in raw.

Yeah but it will have WiFi and facebook and GPS and other gizmos that people crave - who cares about the lens? I mean seriously?

1689
Lenses / Re: 17-40 f4 L discontinued???????
« on: May 10, 2013, 09:49:05 AM »
i would love to see a 17-40mm II with better optical performance.
the borders on the curent version suck, to be honest.

+1

1690
Animal Kingdom / Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« on: May 09, 2013, 09:30:26 PM »
I found the sky boring and added clouds to make it more interesting.

Do you think this is cheating? I really want to know.

Am very confused. I have made changes but not altered nature. Have I done something wrong?

What is your goal?

To create a piece of art or to depict reality?

If you're creating art then adding clouds is fine.

If you're trying to depict reality then obviously no.

1691
Street & City / Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« on: May 09, 2013, 07:35:21 AM »
So why am I so critical of night shots?

Well what makes one different to the other?

Just different lights and a different reflection. Maybe a little difference in framing. They are a phase that nearly every photographer goes through. I just don't see them as challenging. Why?

Because the light is always coming to you and it is relatively constant, everywhere.

1692
Street & City / Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« on: May 09, 2013, 07:32:41 AM »
Your a very Funny Guy Dilbert, you've managed to insult everyone in this thread that's posted an Image, with the exception of your own image, very credible.

I think you mistake my comments. I don't think it is a good photo. It wasn't a photo about the subject or a photo to parade photography skill but rather a remark on the 5D2 and IQ at ISO3200.

Quote
And it would appear you know about as much on the subject of "Fairy Penguins" as you do on Photography.

I originally come from Australia, I also Scuba Dive & do Underwater Photography, in the Southern waters of Australia, Fairy Penguins can be seen all day every day in their hundreds, if your close to Rocks & small Islands they're a PIA as they tend to surround you, all during the Day, you may be right about where they live "Under rocks", I wouldn't know about that as I don't live in that sort of neighbourhood.

So you see penguins in their hundreds in the water, yes?

1693
Street & City / Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« on: May 09, 2013, 02:02:26 AM »
I wondered how this thread ran up a high post count so fast - I was hoping for lots of images, instead it's just dilbert being a rude ass and the fallout from that.  How disappointing.  Dilbert, are you sure you know a good picture from a bad one?  It's a bit more subjective than knowing the difference between a camera and a lens, and since you have trouble comprehending the latter, I question your ability to judge the former.

How did you manage to use a TS lens with that and still come out with your parallels incorrect?

The left side of the image is ok (technically) but the rotunda is just all wrong. The right side is higher than the left? The dome on the top looks like it is mounted on a slope?

No, I'm not sure that I know a good picture from a bad one, but I do know an unremarkable one from a remarkable one. Most night time photos fall in the unremarkable category as far as I'm concerned.

1694
Street & City / Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« on: May 09, 2013, 01:53:35 AM »
Oh, I did mean to mention.

Dilbert, from memory this is what Penguins look like, for future reference.

Well when you're somewhere that emperor penguins are up and about in daylight, sure.

However fairy penguins don't come out during daylight. They're in burrows, under rocks or under water.

1695
Street & City / Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« on: May 08, 2013, 11:04:07 AM »

Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.

I just looked up your profile for more inspirational photos and found this one

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5334.msg103060#msg103060

I guess difficult for anyone to take this?

Wow, that is a penguin? It took me some time to understand, modernistic rendition of a penguin. Probably taking lots of penguin photos in low light will let that get out of the system too.

From time to time I go back to see if I can get a better one. It really is quite difficult because (a) they only come out on to the rocks after dark (b) you cannot use flashes so (c) you're left with very low powered artificial light and not to forget that (d) they're animals and thus almost constantly move usually requiring (e) a shutter speed of 1/100 (or more) so that you don't have blurry flippers. Maybe a 1DX would do the trick with clean ISO12800 - or rather an ISO12800 that works as smoothly as the 5D2 at ISO3200.

Pages: 1 ... 111 112 [113] 114 115 ... 230