April 16, 2014, 10:31:53 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 - privatebydesign

Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 106
376
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon Macro Ring Lite MR-14EX II Preorders
« on: February 11, 2014, 10:04:05 PM »
If that is real and they haven't put the RT protocol in there it is DOA.

377
Are you trying to get the shutters synchronized so they both work with the same flash pulse?

378
A set of three Yongnuo YN 603's will do it, so will the RF602's, they are older and not transceivers though.

What YN radio trigger are you using for the flashes?

But if you want one set of flashes to light for both cameras exposures you have another issue, same time is not the same as exact same time. If you truly need exact same time then I suspect you'd need Pocket Wizard Multi Max's or a custom delay programmable home made solution.

379
Photography Technique / Re: How (and Why) I Took the Shot #1: Overlook
« on: February 11, 2014, 04:56:47 PM »
Never one to be afraid to put my nose in where it isn't needed, without any ill will to Dustin who does some great work and reviews, as a matter of principle I am very much against pure outside links, indeed I am surprised CR allows such posts. There is nothing difficult about including an entire blog post and image here and including a link to the original for people who have more interest to go and see, and I think, on principle, that is the more honorable way of doing things. Pure links just smell of site traffic manipulation to me, I am sure Dustin has a good following and has been asked by people to post more stuff (heck people even PM me questions), but he can answer those personal requests with directions to his blog and site, that, to my mind, is very different from making people click to even see if they are interested in a post.

Just my 10c worth.
+1
If it is a long article, a short synopsys along with the picture would be OK and a link at the end. But I'm not sure I think it is OK to use a forum like this to promote your own site, which I beleive has commercial motivation.

As for this specific post, I am a bit surprised why you selected an image like this. You have posted lots of images it could have been interesting to hear the story behind. But, without getting into any debate over the image, this was not one that raised any interest with me.

But keep posting, I may enjoy the next one more.

Fair enough.  I absolutely am trying to drive attention to my website to continue building my brand.  I have no problem acknowledging that.

But what you may not know is that traffic back to LensRentals is typically in my top 4 clickthroughs from my website (#3 today, in fact).  I recommend that people rent lenses (try before you buy)and freely cite articles by Roger to direct people to Lens Rentals.  Anyone that works with web design/development knows how importance this ecosystem is.  Every clickthrough from this website (CanonRumors) to any other website helps build its brand and page ranking.  It is a bit of a symbiotic relationship, which is probably why it is allowed here.

Even from the kind reactions on this thread I sense that this particular post and image are not the sexiest I've ever shared.  ;D  I'll try to up my game next time 8)

And none of what I suggested impacts that symbiosis one iota, it would prevent people who are not interested going and seeing something they are not interested in, and what you did also prevents more nervous folks going and seeing your posts anyway, many many people simply will not use off site links because of security/phishing concerns.

Eldar's synopsis and image approach is probably the best compromise, viewers will know if they are interested in clicking to the full blog and those that are interested can rest assured you are probably not the Russian Mafia out to steal their souls, but an earnest blogger. Meanwhile CR, you, and LensRentals all get their hits and they are all from people with enough information to be using those links with interest, no "Friend farms" to worry about.

380
Photography Technique / Re: How (and Why) I Took the Shot #1: Overlook
« on: February 11, 2014, 03:06:10 PM »
Never one to be afraid to put my nose in where it isn't needed, without any ill will to Dustin who does some great work and reviews, as a matter of principle I am very much against pure outside links, indeed I am surprised CR allows such posts. There is nothing difficult about including an entire blog post and image here and including a link to the original for people who have more interest to go and see, and I think, on principle, that is the more honorable way of doing things. Pure links just smell of site traffic manipulation to me, I am sure Dustin has a good following and has been asked by people to post more stuff (heck people even PM me questions), but he can answer those personal requests with directions to his blog and site, that, to my mind, is very different from making people click to even see if they are interested in a post.

Just my 10c worth.

381
They are still readily available for less than $145, though some people are charging more.

383
If you have pre 2012 bodies the YN-E3-RT gives you serious additional functionality over the ST-E3-RT, so much so I believe (and I own both) that it is worth more than the Canon.

But I also believe the current price hike is due to over demand for the first batch, I suspect when they become plentiful again the price will ease.

If you shoot post 2012 bodies the YN is not worth close to the ST, it is not as well made and second curtain sync really isn't an important feature.

384
Canon General / Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1 X II Image
« on: February 10, 2014, 08:40:49 AM »
It seems logical that a new model would be named G2 X and not G1 X II...

Not if Canon follow the nomenclature they have followed for many years if they really do consider the G1X a pro tool, which they have always said they do.
That's quite a ...  pro tool  ;D

The G10 was used by a lot of pros. But here is what Canon say about the G1X
Quote
The Pinnacle of PowerShot.
Bright, fast and more creative than ever: advanced technologies come together for an exciting new camera that moves beyond anything the G-Series has seen before. The PowerShot G1 X digital camera will inspire advanced amateurs who have embraced the G-Series to explore new realms of photographic expression, and give pros an excellent camera that complements their creative demands.

Just pointing out that whilst G2X makes some sense, so does G1X II, it isn't like we haven't had a 5D MkII, and MkIII, and a 1D MkI, and MkII, and MkIII and MkIV is it?

385
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Medium Format
« on: February 10, 2014, 08:14:32 AM »
Hello dear friends.

What do you think -  Canon need this market ?
Will we see any MF cameras and lenses of course any soon ?

No and no, would be my guess. The returnables are just not there as the market is just too small, all the money, effort, and R&D that might have gone into a MF line is going into the C line anyway.

386
Canon General / Re: *UPDATE* Canon PowerShot G1 X II Image
« on: February 10, 2014, 08:08:30 AM »
It seems logical that a new model would be named G2 X and not G1 X II...

Not if Canon follow the nomenclature they have followed for many years if they really do consider the G1X a pro tool, which they have always said they do.

387
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII - too grainy or not?
« on: February 10, 2014, 12:10:58 AM »
Don't forget this is a flash illuminated action shot, if HSS is not an option then 1/200 could well be it for shutter speed, that means everything else is a work around, the sync speed is often the only hard limit in this type of shooting situation.

If shots like this are the primary reason for the camera then much more though needed to go into sync speed.

As for the background, there is still zero indication from the OP as to what he wanted the background to look like, I am sure, as he was using flash, the intention was to intentionally under expose the background, in which case a touch of noise reduction and a lowering of flash power is all he needs to do.

388
Reviews / Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« on: February 09, 2014, 10:19:22 PM »
Anyway, it was five stops under exposed and..just displays your complete lack of post processing ability.

5... That's pretty good, and you certainly know how to make good use of Photoshop to clean it up.

I'd have no hesitation about pushing files from your 1ds3, a camera with a rep as one of the better low ISO performers made, or even my faithful old 40d. (anyone ever hear me complain about my 40D?)

But there are only 2 bodies I've experienced that are horridly noisy; the 7D, and the 5D2 that I had.

I'd like to see what you can do to try a stripey 7D file under the same conditions, and see how much work you'd have to put in, and what kind of results could be obtained.

Even doing this as a proof does not exempt the fact that some bodies have a lot of FPN and are not suitable for any push-processing in post, certainly not if you have to do a lot of that.  Unfortunately for me, I had both of those bandy bodies and stupidly kept them when I should have just returned them.  They did have some other redeeming features, and still provided plenty of usable shots, but frustrated the &%^$*$@#! out of me when I had to push low ISO files.

And yes, I'm no Photoshop guru, but neither should I have to be.  Far quicker and better for future-proofing to just choose better tools that don't require me to fix such things in post.


I did nothing in Photoshop that I couldn't do in Lightroom to that file. Indeed the heavy lifting was done in Lightroom, a vastly simpler and cheaper product. But don't forget, that processing was only "needed" because of a flash misfire, not an intrinsic sensor limitation or fault.

The 1Ds MkIII and 5D MkII are a hairs breadth away from each other regarding shadow noise and FPN, maybe half a stop, at absolute most a full stop, that still leaves four stops of lift capability in 5D MkII files. Send me some RAW files, 7D and/or 5D MkII, I don't care, I'll even do another video on what I did to them. The 1Ds MkIII has such a good rep because people who owned them invested the time to maximise their output, we don't flit from camera to camera chasing a magic bullet, there isn't one. In the immortal words of Arno Rafael Minkkinen, "Stay on the f*cking bus." If you want the best for your photography you have to learn it all, starting with exposure! But that includes post processing, yes you do have to learn it. Sure if other cameras have a metric that is much better for a personal style, be that DR, frames per second, size, whatever, then it makes sense to get it, but that does not mean that cameras with slightly less DR, fps, are bigger, etc are not very capable tools in others hands. Yes, the Sony sensor has more DR than the Canon one, but it is not a huge difference and it shouldn't be a serious limiting factor to image making. Yes we all want "more", DR, fps, smaller, lighter better AF etc, but the way you guys harp on about it you make it sound like it is impossible to get a good image with a Canon sensor, when that is very far from the truth.

I understand you struggle with the 7D and 5D MkII, but you need to realise that is because you don't expose with them properly or process them properly the vast majority of the time you have "issues", you can't give the opinions you give without people counterbalancing your opinions with those facts.


389
Canon General / Re: Gear envy
« on: February 09, 2014, 09:05:19 PM »
I wonder why they bothered with the 5ds. Why not just have one model to track?  Does the 5d do something the 1D doesn't?

SILENT MODE. It beats the living S___ out of the 1DX for being quiet and that is a very important consideration at this level.

390
Lenses / Re: Confusing info on Lens Compression
« on: February 09, 2014, 07:48:32 PM »
Forget the term "lens compression" it is a complete misnomer. The only thing that changes is perspective, all lenses shot from the same place irrespective of focal length or sensor size have exactly the same perspective (and "lens compression).

To work out equivalence, that is how to take exactly the same shot with different sensors with different field of views, just read this. http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/

So my three images, first demonstrates equivalence, and the fact that different focal length shot from the same place do not change perspective (or "lens compression"). The second is two shots from the same place with the same camera, one with a 17mm the other a 200mm, obviously they are very different fov's, but when you crop the 17mm shot down to the same framing as the 200mm shot the perspective ("lens compression") is identical, the third shot.

To be sure, perspective (lens compression) only changes if you move.

Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 106