July 28, 2014, 01:42:45 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 - jebrady03

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 16
136
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D a New Benchmark in ISO Performance?
« on: July 02, 2013, 10:22:22 AM »
Thanks!
Obviously this part of the 70D rumor mill was way off.

137
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D a New Benchmark in ISO Performance?
« on: July 02, 2013, 09:19:10 AM »
Where exactly was stated or who said, that 70D will set a new benchmark for High ISO? ..

Yeah, I came back to this thread wondering the same thing.  I haven't seen anything in any of the announcements, hands-on previews, etc., that addresses ISO performance being better than before.

Anyone have any info I may have missed?

138
PowerShot / Re: Canon France Denies Large Sensor Compacts
« on: June 28, 2013, 11:40:02 AM »
to those who think that canon is upset about the large sensor compact post I would suggest that they're probably upset about the 70 post.

139
Lenses / Re: Marco Equipment for Baby shots
« on: June 19, 2013, 12:52:12 PM »

140
Animal Kingdom / Re: Reptiles and Amphibians
« on: June 10, 2013, 09:31:48 PM »
EXCELLENT shots!  BEAUTIFUL critters!  NICE JOB!

141
I think a sensor that actually does provide a 10 stop advantage at equal or better image quality would absolutely have a place for SOME photographers.  Not sure why people think that their use of equipment is the only valid use and that they must immediately and decisively shoot down any other uses.  We see this same thing happen when a new camera is rumored/introduced - dozens of people disparaging it because it's not the absolutely perfect solution FOR THEM.  In this case for instance, I'd find 10 stops EXTREMELY useful for natural light macro photography (I think that in general, flash-filled macro photography looks like crap and very fake - not always, but in general).  I'd also find it useful for low light indoor photography with enough depth of field to get more than just the eyes in focus without cranking up the ISO.  In my house, 1/200 at close distance with f/8 and ISO 100 is an all black picture of my baby.

So what that this wouldn't be an ideal solution for videographers or high fps photographers?  MOST people shoot one frame at a time and don't have the desire to shoot video with a DSLR because focusing (currently) is a PITA... SURPRISE!!!!  MOST people want to capture PICTURES with their DSLR and not have to sort through 4000 pictures a day because they sprayed and prayed.  MOST people are buying entry level cameras, not 1Dx's.

It's amazing how photographers seem to have such a unique perspective on the world.  Perhaps their hippie-like creative visions have closed them off to understanding the thoughts and needs of the masses.

142
I plan to handle it via monologue...

"Wow... so @holes like you really do exist.  You know, I read a thread on Canon Rumors one time where people discussed what to do if some jerk comes up and begins demanding that you throw away your legally protected rights because they're uneducated and insecure for some reason.  It went on for several pages.  The recommendations varied from smiling and apologizing - for what, I'm not sure, since I have the legal right to do what I'm doing - to flashing you this gun I have here in my camera bag, to swirling 4 lbs of metal and glass around my head like Crocodile Dundee and lodging it inside your ignorant @$$ head.  What you do next is going to determine what happens.  You can either tuck your tail and walk away or you can live the rest of your life as a vegetable.  I'll calmly await your decision with my gun in one hand and my camera strap in the other..."

At least... that's how it goes in my head when I ponder what I'd do... lol

143
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II
« on: May 16, 2013, 01:13:14 PM »
Canon would surprise a whole lot of people if they announced a non-18Mp aps-c sized sensor..

 It's so very sad how true this is.

You forgot "and hilarious"  ;D

144
Lighting / Re: Lighting question
« on: May 04, 2013, 01:34:57 PM »
Ok, so I could see using gels/filters to make the light on the subjects match (or at least approximate) the proper color temperature of a setting sun.  And off axis lighting definitely makes sense.  Can you folks toss up a couple of pics of it being done right?  Because thus far, everything I've seen looks unnatural (ie, color temp is off, wrong lighting angle, light too strong and the subject is overexposed compared to the scenery, etc.).

Thanks!!!!

145
Lighting / Lighting question
« on: May 04, 2013, 10:58:44 AM »
Does flash with the sun behind the subject look unnatural to anyone else?  For instance, when I see a picture of a bride and groom on the beach and the sun is setting behind them over the water, but the photographer has used flash to illuminate their faces - it just looks really awkward to me.  Am I the only one?

146
EOS Bodies / Re: 60D on the way out?
« on: May 04, 2013, 04:59:01 AM »
the 60D is really unuseful today; more or less the same features of XXXD line

You know, it's true.  I bought a 60D over 2 years ago and it's just sitting around collecting dust now that it's become "unuseful".  It used to take great pictures and fulfill ALL of my needs but now, it's pretty much just a piece of crap - barely useful as a paperweight.  It's weird too - my needs haven't changed, but somehow the camera has.  Odd...

I think I'll just throw it away.   I wouldn't want to burden someone else with such a "unuseful" piece of junk.  DAMN YOU CANON!

/s

On a serious note - you'd think photographers (who are MOSTLY a reasonably intelligent group of folks) would understand that NO camera is designed to be EVERYTHING to EVERY PERSON.  But somehow this goes over the head of most...

147
Lenses / Re: Lens sharpness and distance from subject
« on: April 27, 2013, 08:44:59 PM »
Look into Canon's new DLO tool in DPP. It will help to correct some lens problems associated with distance and aberrations. In fact, you can even adjust the distance info to fine tune the corrections. It's not info like you were requesting, but it could be at least a partial solution if you're experiencing a problem.

148
Software & Accessories / Re: When and how to use DLO in DPP
« on: April 27, 2013, 07:03:26 PM »
I'd only use it on a image that I planned to print large, larger than 20 X 30.  It would be best I think for landscapes or images with lots of fine detail.  I wouldn't bother for portraits.
 
Remember, your CR2 files grow to very large size, 3X their normal size, so its not something to use on the 800 images you shot last night.
 
I tried it a year ago when it first came out, and haven't used it since.  I do not take the type of images where I need it.

Good info!  Thanks so much!

149
Software & Accessories / Re: When and how to use DLO in DPP
« on: April 27, 2013, 11:17:20 AM »
It is going to depend on each individual image and the way a user perceives it.  I do not believe there is any magical number that works for all.

You're killin' my dreams buddy ;)

So, are there images you shouldn't bother using this tool on?  How do you know when going through this step isn't going to result in an appreciable difference?

Should I basically just use it like sharpening?  View at 100%, start at 0, go up until I see problems, then back it down?  Then recheck at normal viewing size?

150
Software & Accessories / Re: When and how to use DLO in DPP
« on: April 27, 2013, 10:58:53 AM »
Well, it is a new feature to DPP so I suppose it makes sense that many may not be familiar with it.  Here's Canon's site on it... http://web.canon.jp/imaging/dlo/index.html

Unfortunately, in the "using the Digital Lens Optimizer" tab it doesn't explain why/when/how much you should use.  It's obviously a "to taste" type of thing, but I feel like I could use more info - and I just can't find it.  There's DEFINITELY a point where sliding the slider too far to the right damages your pictures.  So I want to know, are there pictures you shouldn't use it at all on?  Etc.

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 16