Messages

121

Landscape / Re: The Ship

« on: August 18, 2012, 08:20:58 AM »

Well, here goes my take on this shot:
- I like the light rays on the ship but like the little boat on the left, too (which took me a short while to notice). I think cropping so that it looks like a panorama emphasizes that relationship between the two ships (tiny vs huge) and maybe how unfair life is (the sun shining only on the already privileged), and makes it easier to notice the little one;
- One other reason to crop is that the blue part of the sky kept drawing my eyes to it, as Freelancer said, so I got rid of it;
- I agree with Z on the green/magenta balance;
- I tried to overexpose the ship a bit, even though it's a JPEG and detail is not expected to come up by doing so.
Have I gone too far?

122

EOS Bodies / Re: Usain Bolt wins the 200 meters and shoots with a 1DX and 24-70 -Winner!!!

« on: August 10, 2012, 10:50:43 PM »

He obviously had to settle for a Nikon camera, no 1D X owner is going to chance having to run down Bolt to get their camera back. Although if he had snagged a 1D X... The photographer chasing him would have given Bolt the closest race of his life.

LOL

123

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: first portraits with my 5D :)

« on: August 08, 2012, 02:07:12 PM »

I like the 1st and the 3rd! Well done!
I agree with picturesbyme about the angle on the 2nd shot, so I would crop it to a head and shoulders portrait (but never discard it; that's a great expression on her face).
Keep it up!

124

Portrait / Re: Need some Photoshop/Editing help

« on: August 07, 2012, 05:07:50 PM »

I wouldn't fix anything. The first (unedited) is probably more faithful to what he really looks like in person, with the hair like that. I like the original better than the edits, and to me it feels like something is missing without the bags under the eyes.
Nice shot. I like it.

125

Lenses / Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 135 f/1.8L IS

« on: August 02, 2012, 12:15:47 PM »

I have found the following picture and I don't know what to think about it.
There were some texts below the picture but I don't know how to treat it.

"Dies ist eine Fälschung. Ich machte einen Witz von Ihnen. C'est une blague. Si tratta di uno scherzo. Esto es una broma. Это шутка. Đây là một trò đùa. Hii ni mzaha. 這是一個笑話。Ĉi tiu estas ŝerco."

Could it be new EF 135? Help, I must know when this is available!

It says, in many languages (but not in English, not sure why), that it's a joke.

126

Lenses / Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 135 f/1.8L IS

« on: August 01, 2012, 06:45:22 PM »

"- Hey, Joe, I've been thinking... What if we made a 135 f/1.8L IS? Think it would sell?
- Hm, dunno... What if we checked it out by spreading some fake pics around so we can have an idea if it's worth making?
- Interesting, but... Do you really think it would work?
- Well, it worked last time, didn't it?"

127

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]

« on: July 16, 2012, 06:19:40 PM »

So... if its gonna be the same sensor, same processor, same image quality as MKIII and a decent AF (comparing to MKII) I seriously do not understand what people complain about here. This is an entry level FF body, priced (lets assume the specs and price are correct) $1.5K less than MKIII, so something is gotta go in terms of body features. Plastic body - so what - this is not a toy like plastic (I had a Rebel and it did not feel like a toy to me). For $1.5K less you get the same sensor as in MKIII, plus a (the way it sounds) decent AF. What else do you expect from an entry level model? You want MKII for the metal body - go for it, buy it now while they have it new or wait a bit and get a cheap used once this new FF is announced. Do you seriously expect a lot more from an entry level FF considering that even with these specs it will hurt MKIII sales. Read the forums and see how many people are sitting on the fence for a less expensive FF, who do not want MKII with its crippled AF and who do not think they can justify $3500- $3700 for MKIII.  Some of these folks are still potential MKIII buyers - maybe not now, but in a year or so.

Lots of comparison with MKII. Why do you judge these new FF specs based on an assumption that this is supposed to be an upgrade from MKII?  MKII was never positioned as an entry level FF. If you think the new sensor and AF are not worth the upgrade and you prefer to have MKII with metal body - go for it.  But coming from 7D I do not want to compromise on AF. Not to that extent.

If Canon can give us MKIII less metal body, some fps, dual card slots, weathersealing and $1.5K off the price - I'm in.

It looks like we're sitting on the same fence

128

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]

« on: July 16, 2012, 06:04:17 PM »

The rumored specs have me a bit confused...

For $2000 you get:

22mp 5D3 sensor?

19 point AF - Ok, this sounds reasonable.

4fps - Makes sense.

ISO 100-51200 - Taking into consideration that this camera will have a 5D3 sensor; wouldn't this mean that ISO performance at ISO 51200 would be the same as 5D3? Canon just eliminated ISO 102400... but 102400 is unusable anyway... Logic tells me that this new entry level FF camera will not perform the same as a 5D3... but then that would mean that Canon just de-tuned the heck out of the 5D3 sensor and it's capabilities... Lose money lol

3"LCD - Ok

Smaller than 5D Mark II - If it's smaller, than does this mean that there is no quick reference display on the top of the body? Or does this simply mean that it may be "slightly" smaller than a 5D2? Maybe the size of a 60D? In which case, it being the size of a 60D is pretty irrelevant information since it's not that much smaller than a 5D2...

More plastic than metal in the construction - So this camera will be packed with what sounds like great performance features but will be built like a toy?

Pop-up flash - Ok

$1999 USD at launch - Ok

Launched with new non-L full frame kit lens - Whatever

Compatible with full frame STM lenses - Whatever

So in a nutshell, for $1500 less than a 5D Mark 3 you get the same sensor and ISO performance (up to ISO 51200), a crappier AF system, and 2fps less continuous shooting speed, but have to live with the thing being built like a toy... On that note, for $100-$200 less than a 5D Mark 2 you get a way better sensor, ISO performance, AF system, and 1fps more continuous shooting speed, but have to live with the thing being built like a toy because even the 5D Mark II was mostly metal in construction. Does anyone else think these specs don't seem realistic?

I mostly agree with you, except on the "toy" thing. I do have a 60D (my first dSLR), and although I would have to agree that magnesium alloy bodies feel much better (took a couple shots with a friend's 5DmIII the other day), I don't think plastic is as bad as you put it. In other words, I can live with a little (too much) plastic. Sure I'll have to take care, but I would anyway, since I'll have paid $2,000 for it! (And, well, it's cheaper for a reason, after all.)
Many amateurs folks like me who are current Rebel and 60D owners and just can't justify $3,000+ on a camera will welcome the specs, I think, as it lets us into the FF world and plastic would be no step backwards anyway. I'd rather have a better focus system, better low-light capabilities and a pop-up flash than a better body, if I'm to choose (and I am, since I won't make any money -- at least soon -- from it). If I didn't care about money I would just buy a 5DmIII, another flash and a bunch of L lenses, but I'd probably have more camera than I need.
Well, that's just me, anyway... I understand that photographers who own lots of gear already won't be missing pop-up flashes and that kind of thing, but for a first FF, well, I think it'll be a great camera. It'll be just another soon-to-be-obsolete thing of the many things I own anyway, but one that was not so expensive and that fits my needs. Couldn't ask for more.
Plastic? Give me some! I can take it!

129

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]

« on: July 16, 2012, 05:09:40 PM »

The more I think about this rumor, this could  could work out very nicely for me assuming the specs are within my needs.  This might just be the perfect camera for those in my shoes or on a limited budget.  (Obviously if funds were unlimited I would already have a 5D3.)

Since I have a 7D and plan to keep it and get a FF in addition, I will have the reach and FPS with the 7D when I need it.

A FF (I'll call it a 6D) will be my landscape, portrait, and low light body.  Assuming the specs are at least these:
-  same (or better) sensor than the 5DII
-  7D or better AF
-  AFMA
-  form factor no smaller than the 7D
-  100% view finder
-  prefer metal body (may compromise)
-  weather sealing (at least that of 7D)
-  swivel screen--don't want
-  pop up flash--don't want unless its a radio trigger
 
All my lens are EF Ls so everything is line.

If this doesn't work out then I'm back to looking at a 5D2 or 5D3--but a 5D3 has to come down or I'll have to go used.

Sorry, I know, this is an extension off a previous post, just optimistic that this might be my solution.

Why is a pop-up flash a bad thing?

If they manage to fit in a large enough bright prism then not. But personally, I wont use it much. I would rather use my 430 EX II.

Control over wireless flashes would be a welcome feature but I doubt there will be such feature in it.

Oh, now I see it. Things can get crowded up there...
Nikon seems to have no problem with it on their D800; hopefully Canon will find a way too, as currently I only have one flash...

130

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]

« on: July 16, 2012, 04:52:45 PM »

The more I think about this rumor, this could  could work out very nicely for me assuming the specs are within my needs.  This might just be the perfect camera for those in my shoes or on a limited budget.  (Obviously if funds were unlimited I would already have a 5D3.)

Since I have a 7D and plan to keep it and get a FF in addition, I will have the reach and FPS with the 7D when I need it.

A FF (I'll call it a 6D) will be my landscape, portrait, and low light body.  Assuming the specs are at least these:
-  same (or better) sensor than the 5DII
-  7D or better AF
-  AFMA
-  form factor no smaller than the 7D
-  100% view finder
-  prefer metal body (may compromise)
-  weather sealing (at least that of 7D)
-  swivel screen--don't want
-  pop up flash--don't want unless its a radio trigger
 
All my lens are EF Ls so everything is line.

If this doesn't work out then I'm back to looking at a 5D2 or 5D3--but a 5D3 has to come down or I'll have to go used.

Sorry, I know, this is an extension off a previous post, just optimistic that this might be my solution.

Why is a pop-up flash a bad thing?

131

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]

« on: July 16, 2012, 10:19:24 AM »

Well, being a 60D owner who can't justify $3000+ on a camera for chasing sunsets, I really like the specs!
- Plastic doesn't bother me (my 60D has plenty of it and it has never kept me from doing anything), although I have to acknowledge a metal body feels great in the hand.
- Smaller size is also good, I guess, because as a FF camera, it can't be made too small for men's hands and will be lighter than a 5DmII/III.
- The sensor should be more than good enough, even if Nikon's got a better one and has won the round.
- 19 AF points, like the 7D? Well, everybody likes it on the 7D, and if I've managed to live with only 9 so far.
- 4 fps, well, not that great, but I can't see myself needing to go any faster.
- ISO 100-51,200: now that would be some improvement for me!
- Having a built-in flash that can act as a commander seals the deal for me.
- $2000? Well, I can wait a little... BUT, sure it shouldn't cost more than the Nikon "equivalent".
The 5DmII is sure a great camera, but the built-in flash and the better AF are important to me as I can buy one less flash and have more keepers of my soon-to-come kid.
Is the D600 better? Oh, I'll have all my needs taken care of with the 6D or whatever they call it. I don't care if my neighbors will have a better toy; mine will be great for me already.

132

Lenses / Re: Lensbaby

« on: July 12, 2012, 12:44:24 PM »

@ melbournite
Wow, great shots!
I'll be probably buying just that, composer (pro?) and the 35 optic, and maybe the 80 later on.

133

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Making of a Leica M9-P

« on: July 11, 2012, 08:53:13 PM »

@ hpmuc
Can't help but wonder what kind of news one would read on such a newspaper...
"Husband gets killed by mad wife after selling car to buy camera: 'he would put all those toys before our marriage'."

134

Lenses / Re: Lensbaby

« on: July 11, 2012, 06:58:55 PM »

@!ex
Great piece of advice! Didn't know the effect was easy to recreate in Photoshop... Will try in a few shots of mine tonight. Terrific shots, by the way!

135

Lenses / Re: Lensbaby

« on: July 11, 2012, 02:23:52 PM »

@ crasher8 and gn100
There's a kit with the composer pro and the sweet 35 optic. Is it better than buying the composer pro alone? Not sure I understand the benefit of having another optic attached if the composer pro is itself a lens.

@ crasher8
Great shots! Does it take too long to get the hang of it?