August 28, 2014, 01:33:23 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 - sandymandy

Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 40
481
Lenses / Re: Poll: 35mm Vs 50mm Primes
« on: September 14, 2012, 05:45:54 PM »
I voted for the 50 cuz im using a 35mm on my APS-C so thats roughly a 50mm Fullframe. Id love to use a 35 on my aps-c but i dont find any appealing 20mm lenses.

482
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Should I stay with Canon or moving to Nikon
« on: September 05, 2012, 03:25:16 AM »
I am now using EOS600D for 1.5 years and I am also now deciding to upgrade my camera. However, many of my friends encourage me to switch to Nikon with the following reason below:-

Sounds to me like Fanboy talk. Just use whatever camera you like. Your friends ever got experiences with canon cameras? And i mean REAL experience (several lenses, bodies, situations) not just touching it in the store for checking the haptics :P Somehow i doubt it.

If you look at photos and are asked "was this shor with a nikon or a canon?" theres no way u can tell a difference so just choose whatever brand you like...

I stick with canon cuz i just prefer their lenses

483
Bigger sensor so of course it gives more details since its not just bloated up in size. Same like large format gives u more details. Just imagine APS-C being 1/5th of its size then maybe its easier to imagine it will show less details in the photos.

484
Which software are you using?

485
Hopefully ISO wont go higher but will deliver better quality :)

486
EOS Bodies / Re: I love Primes.
« on: August 27, 2012, 08:59:58 AM »
Primes only my way to go :P

487
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MK III Focus Hiccup
« on: August 26, 2012, 05:23:04 AM »
Does this happen with different lenses?

488
It also depends a lot on your lenses what kind of "stars" you will get.

489
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X Structural Weakness
« on: August 26, 2012, 05:19:30 AM »
Thats really a pity! Did you have any huge ass lens attached at the same time?

490
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Flektogon 2.8 m42 Need Help!
« on: August 25, 2012, 05:48:13 AM »
double post

491
Third Party Manufacturers / Zeiss Flektogon 2.8 m42 Need Help!
« on: August 25, 2012, 05:30:47 AM »
Hi,

recently i got a Zeiss Flektogon 2.8 "Zebra" version, m42 Mount /w adapter on my eos 1100D.

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6188/6071754657_6531f96493_z.jpg

Im really happy with this lense, i got it for cheap and on my APS-C the field of view is quite standard.
I just got one problem and if i set the aperture to 2.8 and twist the focus ring out to the maximum so i can get really close to subjects. The aperture ring starts to shift a little. I wonder why its like that?
I first checked if its perhaps just loose but its not and when i set it to minimum focussing distance there is no way of moving the aperture ring back to 2.8.
I also tried holding the aperture ring in place and then just focussing to minimum distance but that doesnt work. The Focus ring will just block.

Ok i just checked again and it seems the aperture ring moves a little bit when im focussing. Any idea why?


*edit*

I found this online:

Quote
Let's start with the f-stop ring set at 2.8 and the focus ring set at infinity. Now I begin to turn the focus ring clockwise, getting closer to the shortest distance of 0.18m. As the focus ring passes the 0.3m mark, it begins to turn the f-stop ring counterclockwise. Ever so slightly. By the time the focus ring is at 0.18m, the f-stop ring has turned to position f/4.
What's more strange is that the aperture blades are still in the fully o

and the reply:



Quote
The lens is really designed to be used with a hand-held exposure meter; probably it was built in the days before through-the-lens metering was available (certainly the case for Exakta). As you move into to close focus, you need to open up the aperture some more to keep the same effective f-stop, so for example an f/2.8 aperture setting on a close focus might only give as much illumination as f/4 would at infinity. If you had a through the lens meter, it would see the reduced illumination, but a hand-held meter simply does not know the distance to the subject or the focal length of the lens, so it can't compenstate. The Flektogon had a built-in mechanical compensation as I remember it. As you focus to shorter distances, it opens the aperture up. Of course, if you start off at f/2.8, it has no where to go, so instead it rotates the aperture ring to at least tell you what its effective aperture really is.

Experiences? thanks already.

492
Lenses / Re: CORRUPTED! Firmware Version 1.2.0 for EF 40mm pancake
« on: August 22, 2012, 02:51:46 AM »
U shouldnt upgrade anyway if u dont have issues.

493
Thats nice of them but a bit too much bokehlicious :()

494
EOS Bodies / Re: 1dX dust in viewfinder
« on: August 18, 2012, 12:05:51 PM »
Just send it in get free cleaning.....profit!

495
Portrait / Re: Quality of Portraits
« on: August 16, 2012, 10:46:04 AM »
Someone who is really good at taking photos but doesnt earn money with it for a living. Thats also part of being pro. Selling your work well :)

Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 40