August 20, 2014, 01:49:47 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 - Hector1970

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
1
Reviews / Re: Tony Northrup - D810 vs. 5D Mk3
« on: August 19, 2014, 07:00:52 AM »
Get the feeling it's not easy to make money with photography these days. Those who shoot as their main job seem to drive Yugos from what I see personally and those who shoot AND sell products and build up a giant web presence and following seem to live in nice homes in La Jolla, CA or the fancy part of CT  ;D.
It's definitely tough out there for all but the very top photographers, at least in terms of making six figures, plus.  I am in awe of people who do nothing but product reviews and seem to live quite well in terms of farms, horses, and trips to tropical islands, not to mention any names...but I guess a percent or two of big white purchases adds up :)

The reality is that stock is all but dead and that was a huge source of income in the past.  It's been supplanted by workshops, books, videos, and affiliate links. 

They say that if you want to make money from photography, you need to teach photography, not do photography.  Scott Kelby has done rather well with this model.
+1
I agree…some of these people do very well financially.  I am always amazed at some of the places that people, such as Trey Ratcliff, have been to,…sometimes multiple times…places I will never get to…
I find Trey Radcliffe amazing. I was fascinated when I first saw his HDR work. Amazed him giving away his secrets for free. He's probably improved it in the meantime but the original tutorial didn't tell all his secrets. When I look at his work now it doesn't seen so good . Often OTT, he often doesn't make the best of the amazing locations. But that's what's still amazing about him. He's been to amazing places on the back of his website. He's also like a sage / guru on all types of subjects like the best camera , mirror less cameras, lecturing at google and other places.
All because he was first and has stayed top of the HDR pile.  He tells people how he became successful and to follow their photographic dreams. It's a bit like a pyramid scheme. There is very little room at the top. You can't repeat Treys success as the field is full. You have to find a photography type so far unexplored. I guess 3D photography and physically going to another planet are left. But you never know. I never saw HDR coming. Trey did though and I tip my hat to him. I hope he is enjoying his fame and wealth.
On the subject of D810 and 5D III . I've never used the Nikon but the 5DIII has been a great camera for me. It's a great all rounder. Never let's me down. Very high quality images. Nikon make a great camera too so we are all blessed to live in this era. The gear is no longer the excuse not to take great photos. Maybe it's easier to blame the gear than the technique or imagination.

2
Lenses / Re: New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)
« on: August 16, 2014, 04:38:04 AM »
I always find these debates interesting but also people spend too much time saying certain lens are crappy. I think people often blame equipment before themselves. A good photograph is 90% creativity and 10% equipment. I'd say in a blind test 99% of Canon shooters couldn't tell a photo taken from an Otus from a 50mm 1.4.
People should push to the limit what they have before moving to more expensive equipment.
I have the 85 1.2 . This lens is amazing at times. It's not amazing all the time because the photographer isn't precise enough with their technique. Similarily the 50 1.2 is a great lens in the right hands. It's a specialist portrait lens. I doubt they had walking around in mind. In a studio with lights and stopped down a bit those two lens are too sharp. You can see every pore, every blemish and piece of food stuck in their teeth.
It's scary at times. I have to jump past photoshop to portrait professional to not shock the person in the photo.
More practice with your existing prime is my advice. Work on your creativity and technique and worry less about the lens performance. It's good enough.
Ps my canon 1.4 isn't the sharpest lens in the world but it takes a lovely photo (as long as you don't pixel peep).
Perfectly fine for flickr or Facebook and printing to A4

3
I find it a little soft at the edges like the 16-35l.
The minimum focusing distance is to far too.
DXO gave it a poor review. It turns heads though.

4
Photography Technique / Iceland Hints and Tips
« on: August 05, 2014, 04:43:57 AM »
Hi All
I was thinking in 2015 of going to Iceland. I was looking for others advice and experience on Iceland.
I had a number of questions where I hope you might help.
A) recommended photographic tour companies
B) recommended time of year to travel
C) recommended places must have to visit
D) recommended gear to bring (any point in bringing a heavy 70-200mm
E) recommended clothing (just how cold can it be)
F) I don't eat fish - will I starve? :-)
G) any good suggestions / tips

5
Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: July 31, 2014, 03:51:22 PM »
A Wimberly Plamp.
Lens baby Muse
An array of flash accessories too embarrassing to use.
Oh it hurts the money I've wasted!

6
I'm on my second version the Hero 3+ Black.
Video quality is excellent (wide angle - you won't be zooming in)
You can do great slow motion work.
It's hard to avoid not to buy accessories. A tripod mount is a necessity.
It does great time lapse . Photos are so so, like a camera phone. It can do 10fps.
Menu system is a pain. I still get it wrong.
You can now pair you phone to the 3+ which makes it easier but drains the battery.
Battery life is the downside. Goes suddenly. The battery indicators not great. Switching batteries means opening the case. The battery cover isn't hinged.
I think it's brilliant for what it's for ie: Action video
Handling and Ergnomics could be much better.
Getting rid of the dive housing and making a waterproof camera in itself would help a lot.
Still the videos you get make great memories.

7
So many places  :D
1 Iceland
2 serenghetti (I've been there pre digital -amazing )
3 Southern Argentina
4 Everest base camp
5 Yosemite

8
EOS Bodies / Re: A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: June 12, 2014, 06:24:20 AM »
Given the potential customer base of those moving from other APS-C models I reckon
It will have a mode dial,
It will have a flash,
APS-C
It will be size of a 5D or slightly less,
You will have to buy your own battery grip,
I'd say ~10 frames a second.
24 Megapixel.
Reasonably modern focusing (from the 5D M III)
An improved ISO performance - closer to the 5D
Good video but nothing spectacular
Reasonably good screen
Wifi and Gps
Dual cards .
In essence a good camera that makes you feel like a pro but mainly sold to experienced amateurs.
It will be better than most of their friends cameras but still a step below a 1-DX and not full frame so it doesn't impact too much 5D sales
I'd say they have their market down to a T.
It will cost just less than a 5d Mark III .

We'll see I guess

9
Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8L IS II underwhelming
« on: June 06, 2014, 07:36:02 AM »
You  must have received a very bad copy.
It's a tremendous lens. Super sharp and accurate.
At 18 comparing things to Hasselblads is interesting.
You seem to know something about photography and unless you are over complicating how you are taking photos I couldn't see how the problem is you.
A complete beginner would take great shots with a normal version of this lens.
Maybe you should buy a 5D Mark III to pair with it.
At 18 you'd probably be better off buying cheap equipment and making the most out of them.
You'd potentially learn more that way.
Jumping straight to a 70-200mm F2.8 II means maybe you won't every appreciate how good it is (if you had a good copy).
There is too much emphasis on buying gear (I include myself here ) and not enough on improving the actual photos we take. Lack of equipment makes you're innovative and better out technique.
I hope you get your version replaced with a proper version. Hopefully you'll then see what a great lens it is.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Can Canon deliver a FF sensor that is class leading?
« on: June 05, 2014, 09:51:14 AM »
I know some people here get sick of this dynamic range discussion but I find it interesting.
I always amazed at some of Transnistriathe knowledge displayed here.
My question is more simple.
With brightish scenes I often use graduated filters or maybe do a bit of blending or HDR to avoid blown himghlights.
How far off are we in getting a sensor from Canon that might render it obsolete to use graduated filters to control over brightness in the sky?
I know the eye is complex and because it's sort of combining images and may have an equivalent dynamic range of 24 stops. Ideally I want a camera that is capturing the view closer to what my braining is receiving.
A sensor that is a capable of holding detail in a sunny day is what I would love.

I'd love a sensor too that you zoom in further that say the 5D Mark III without the picture pixelating.
I love those giga pixel pictures where you can zoom and zoom.


11
It might be easier to list what I wouldn't buy:
But did.
Sigma 150-500
Canon 28mm 2.8
Sigma 10-20mm
Canon 70-300mm III
Lens baby
Zeiss? Pentacon six 50mm with tilt adapter
Canon 50mm 1.8
Samyang 8mm Fisheye(although it is good on an APS-C
Canon 85mm 1.2 L
Canon G12
I won't even mention the gadgets and triggers and flash modifiers I've wasted money on.
No wonder Garry Fong is so rich

I would rebuy
Canon 70-200mm f2.8 II
Canon 24mm TSe II
Canon 50mm 1.4
Samyang 14mm
Canon 24-105 F4l
Canon 100mm marcro
Canon 1.4 and 2x extensions
5D Mark III
580ex II flash

I'd replace 17-40 with a 16-35mm

I'd also rebuy the Fuji X100s.
It's a lovely camera to use (even though I don't think it's image quality is good as a Canon APS-C sensor
I'd rebuy a Gopro too for time lapsing
Lee filters I'd certainly rebuy.


No wonder people simplify later in life.
Too much gear not enough time taking photos

12
Lenses / Re: Sigma 300-800 - Anyone use this lens?
« on: April 20, 2014, 08:01:45 PM »
It has great reviews on Amazon
But not as good reviews as the Sigma 200-500 F2.8
  ;D

13
Lenses / Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« on: March 18, 2014, 03:14:32 PM »
Best of luck in your search for the right lens. The only thing I would say is I think the 70-200 II F2.8 is the best of all Canons zoom lens. It creates beautiful photograph. It locks on focus very fast. It's very adaptable to sport , portraits and even landscapes. Other than the cost you'd never regret buying it. I use the canon 1.4 and the Kenko 2x converters. Still good but maybe some of the magic disappears. Probably for what you are planning the existing 100-400 is good enough.

14
Landscape / Re: Slot Canyons- Canyon X and Upper Antelope, Grand Canyon
« on: December 02, 2013, 04:59:52 AM »
Thanks for sharing you experience . You were kind to do so and you made good use of the feedback here. Some lovely shots. A9586 being my favourite. Looks like tough conditions to photograph in. Others have complained about the crowding too. I suppose everyone has to make a buck. Glad you felt it was worth it. The crowds will be bigger next year because of your great photos.

15
Lenses / Re: 70-200mm F 2.8 IS 2 VS 70-200mm F4 IS
« on: November 21, 2013, 06:07:09 PM »
I own the 2.8 II but have used the F4.
Both are great. Of all my lens I think the 2.8 is the best .
It's absolutely brilliant for sports and for portraits.
The F4 is way lighter and cheaper and very very good. You will love it but maybe crave the 2.8
The 2.8 will either give you big muscles or a repetitive strain injury.
But it's wonderful and even after 2 years it hasn't lost its appeal .
I have the 85mm II and I wouldn't rate it anywhere near as good.
It's too tricky at times whereas the 70-200mm always comes up trumps.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6