Messages

226

Lenses / Re: 400mm f/4. Anything good and "affordable"?

« on: May 31, 2012, 07:46:33 AM »

Just remember than converters make the AF slower.

Better off getting the 100-400 than the 300mm F4 and buying a 1.4x to stick to it most of the time.

The 100-400mm is cheaper than a 300mm +1.4x, more versatile and will be quicker to focus at 400mm the extra 20mm will not make any difference.

227

Lenses / Re: A myth of growing from APS-C to Fullframe or Dealing with anachronisms

« on: May 24, 2012, 11:43:06 AM »

Honestly, only a fool would look at "The Americans" and complain because some of Frank's images were grainy or less than razor sharp.

The beauty is that a lot were, The Americans is one of my favourite works. There are lots of images that are less than sharp, blurry, grainy and it makes the series. This is where fine art photography differs its about the subject and in this case its documentation.

Fantastic series, if you haven't seen it get hold of a copy. His books set a trend in the design of photographic publications. Although they actually lost money on the print run. Beautiful shots and of corse the Americans hated it.

228

Lenses / Re: A myth of growing from APS-C to Fullframe or Dealing with anachronisms

« on: May 24, 2012, 10:04:24 AM »

What dedicated lenses do you need?

The 17-55 and 10-22 outperform the FF counterparts on crop and apart from weather sealing are the same even the same focal lengths. 17-55mm is pretty much 24-70 and the 10-22mm is pretty much a 16-35.

A lot of FF lenses are great on crop cameras take the 100mm L macro its a 160mm marco, 70-200 is a 110-320mm 2.8, 100-400 is 160-640mm! if you want primes just go wider 35mm is around 50mm, 50mm is around 85mm. Just need to change the way you shoot slightly. In fact I think most L lenses work great on crop apart from the wide and standard zooms and canon has filled this. The 17-55mm, 15-85mm and 10-22mm are the only lenses worth having on a crop body and fill that whole niche the only thing missing is a tilt shift and a fish eye.

Like said previously The only lenses you would have to get rid of is the 17-55mm and the 10-22mm but tbh they are so good I would keep them when going FF, also keep the 40D because that is a great camera too.

Im in exactly the same position and thats what im doing.

229

EOS Bodies / Re: DPReview 5D3 review out

« on: May 23, 2012, 09:12:20 AM »

I still dont understand the need to swap... but each to their own.

DR is useful but I will continue to raise the point that if you are a good photographer, your exposures should be correct out of camera.

230

EOS Bodies / Re: DPReview 5D3 review out

« on: May 23, 2012, 07:21:51 AM »

Its interesting that when doing a direct comparison to the 7D the metering and focusing accuracy and the ergonomics and handling are rated much higher than the 5D3. When the 5D3 is very similar in handling if not I would say better, and with the better metering I would say the 5D is better there too.

More reason to think that things are is slipping.

231

Landscape / Re: Back in the Lake District

« on: May 22, 2012, 04:50:38 AM »

Lovely pic

232

Landscape / Re: Back in the Lake District

« on: May 21, 2012, 05:48:34 PM »

Im pretty lucky to live in the Lake district. Heres one of Coniston in Feb.


Conison Water Feb 2012 by tom_scott88, on Flickr

Live right on Ullswater, was a beautiful night tonight. Weather completely different to last week was about 8 deg last week compared to todays 20.


Ullswater May 2012 by tom_scott88, on Flickr


Ullswater May 2012 by tom_scott88, on Flickr

All shot with a 10-22mm not a macro, but interesting choice!

233

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: RAW vs JPEG debate in the light of 5DIII improvements

« on: May 21, 2012, 10:25:34 AM »

Unless you are shooting for a newspaper or general journalism where the documentations and speed are the most important. I dont see any other reason to use jpeg. Exceptions being space but theres no point in having a good camera without having a good storage solution.

All good photographic workflow programs accept raw and jpeg, but with raw you always have that option and if the camera does get it wrong, lets be fair even when it looks good on the camera LCD it doesnt always mean it does. It can be quite tricky in different light to see. In this case raw is useful. Also I always shoot raw simply because I may not use the shot straight away but I may in the future. Raw conversion software gets better and better, brought up a shot from my 40D at 3200ISO, back in the day it was just not useable but the other day and made it useable with the latest codec. Noise correction and lens correction in software is becoming fantastic.

Whats most important to me is the ability to change the white balance, when you are in a situation where different temperature lights are used and change constantly like in an arena where they cycle it can be a god send, its just so much more difficult with jpegs.

So in my opinion its worth having the original negative if you will to use in the future. The possibilities with jpegs are quite slim in comparison.

If in doubt shoot both.

234

EOS Bodies / Re: Chinese Did it Again! alternative grip for 5D III on pre order

« on: May 18, 2012, 07:38:42 AM »

Depends on the quality of the button...

My 40D grip the BG-E2N the button seized, think the newer ones are better but do these third party ones offer the same weather sealing as the Canon products? Pretty sure thats what you pay for. Although it is a huge premium, it will look good too .

It says it offers the same weather proofing but I would be pretty jubious.

235

Lenses / Re: 24-105mm f/4 L IS on a crop camera

« on: May 18, 2012, 07:31:57 AM »

I see no reason to own the 24-70 or 24-105 on a crop body with the 17-55mm around. It is as sharp slightly lacking range but is fast and has IS. Only thing it misses is weather sealing, had mine in all sorts of conditions, soaked dry etc only thing is it does suffer a little with dust but chuck a UV filter on the front should reduce this.

Reason for my opinion is I did the same thing wanted to go FF in the future so got a 24-105mm and it was great on the long end but constantly switching lenses for the wide what do you combine it with? The equivalent focal length is 38.4-168mm, combining it with a 10-22 there is a huge gap. Buy a 17-40mm in between equivalent of 27.2-64mm  Dont get me wrong the 24-70 and 24-105 are incredible lenses but the dedicated EF-s lenses are more suitable. so 3 lenses for a standard focal range... then you need a tele because 168 is ok but not that far so a 70-200mm equivalent of 110-320.

I decided to sell the 24-105mm got a 17-55mm had the 10-22 so that filled the standard zoom range. Also had the 70-200mm so there was a gap on the other end between the 55-110 but depends what you shoot I dont shoot portraits really apart from the odd wedding so filled that with a 50mm which is 80mm equivalent and I tend to shoot on the wider side.

Also the 17-55mm are high in demand, buying one and selling it you shouldn't loose too much money. Most are selling second hand in the UK for between £500-£650 depending on condition.

If your moving to FF then sell it and change up to the 24-105 or 24-70mm. I think that the only FF lenses worth having for a crop body are the teles 70-200 and everything above, the 100mm L or non L macro, TS because there is no crop equivalent For wide and standard the crop sector has it covered, the 17-55mm and the 10-22mm are a fantastic combination. The standard and even the wide full frame lenses are not wide and offer a strange focal length meaning you have to learn to shoot in an unfamiliar way.

My kit fills most of my need for crop, the obvious drawback is to sell the lenses which is an inconvenience not a deal breaker.

10-22mm
17-55mm
50mm = 80mm
100mm L macro
70-200mm

Suits my style but would be nice to have a medium tele in the range at events but they dont make a fixed aperture just the 15-85mm try to stay clear of vari aperture lenses.

If they made a 15-85mm 2.8 I would be all over it but they wont, im guessing because it would sacrifice all the other lens offerings although im sure the price would make your eyes water. Plus not many pros shoot crop for everything more for the tele end and reduced cost of lenses so less need I suppose.

Best case have a 7D for length 5D MKIII for everything else. 

236

EOS Bodies / Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)

« on: May 17, 2012, 11:27:30 AM »

But you are talking 12800 ISO...

The fact is at 1600, 3200 it is very useable you could even get away with 6400. The ISO performance has been significantly improved over the 5D MKII if you ask me.

I dont think the raws are that bad for 12800 but just because it is there doesn't mean you should used it readily... the subject matter doesn't really help either. Yes the D800 has more detail but we already know that... so whats new here?

237

Lenses / Re: EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 HELP

« on: May 15, 2012, 06:04:33 AM »

Serious piece of kit. Most describe it as an L lens for the crops.

The quality is fantastic so sharp. I moved from a 17-85mm and it just blows it out the water, I was slightly disappointed with the range tho because I was used to a longer one but quickly forgot about it. The 2.8 more than worth it so useful.

One problem is dust, mine has got quite dusty but it doesn't effect the image quality in the slightest. Just make sure you chuck a UV filter on it straight away. That was my mistake.

But seriously buy it, best general lens available for APC by far.

238

EOS Bodies / Re: Why canon sucks ass:

« on: May 11, 2012, 10:35:08 AM »

I found this quite humorous.

Pictures speak louder than words.

He refused to post them more than once int he same article.

239

EOS Bodies / Re: It's OK to Rant and Gripe Here but .....

« on: May 10, 2012, 12:03:04 PM »

this may sound retarded but here goes
I have been a long time windows user and changed to mac
Is there anyway to batch rename files in a mac without additional software
in windows its as simple as highlight all the files right click rename and it automatically add a sequential number to the name you give it. I cant seem to see anything on the mac that can do that 

Maybe its worth looking at a photographic workflow which suits your needs. Just importing photos into folders I find very inconvenient and more time consuming.

With Lightroom or Aperture you can batch rename very easily and then flag, colour code, rate etc etc then edit and export in multiple ways all in one program. DPP is poor IMHO. You can also export and edit in more powerful programs like PS then save and it saves a new version. Making workflow very easy and keeps everything in one place.

You can also sync libraries so if you use a Laptop you can work on the project while on location then sync back in the studio. You can also save specific shoots as new libraries and work on them specifically, or if you work with people give them the library to edit too and it syncs again. Also helps when shooting weddings etc the more projects you have the slower the program works by being able to work on specific projects it means you can concentrate on that one specifically and also easier to back up each individual shoot. Everyone is exported and backed up on Blueray, and then also backed up using the programs back up tool and also on another server for 3 back ups. Perfect photographic workflow.

And to answer the OPS question. Nice one nice to see someone being positive.

240

EOS Bodies / Re: Why did Canon Release the 5D MkIII (pure conjecture)

« on: May 09, 2012, 11:30:38 AM »

I think a lot of people are missing the point that not everyone has the 5D MKII. A lot of people are still using the 5DC, 1Ds MKII, 40D etc the previous generation cameras.

The target audience for this camera is not just the 5D MKII there are the rest of us. People that didnt invest in the 60 or 7D and want to go full frame. Or didnt feel like the 5D MKII was worth the upgrade from the 5D classic. 5DC still makes superb images.

The 5D MKIII is a dream come true for these owners. I cant wait to snap one up. The D800 is overkill for most things in terms of resolution and is far too slow for the price point. 22mp is more than enough 3 years ago we were all using 10mp cameras! 22mp is more than enough.

I also agree with Neuro on this one DR... If you need 14 stops of DR you need to learn how to use a camera correctly! Its nice to have it as a back up but I did a test on my 40D shot a picture of a black car with nothing but a street light and purposefully under exposed it. I had enough DR to bring back a useable picture, now if the 5D MKIII can provide 10x + performance than a 40D then its basically miracle working IMO. When does anyone use more than 1-2 stops of DR anyway and if you do you should learn how to use light!!!!