July 22, 2014, 04:27:25 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 - RLPhoto

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 218
16
If it is 4K, They will make loads of money but If its not, They have much more to lose.

17
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Adopting a MF system.
« on: July 18, 2014, 05:40:09 PM »
My only experience was a H1 body w/ P25+ at a camera store and I used to have 501CM hasselblad. Otherwise, I haven't actually shot with a H bodied Hasselblad.

18
Third Party Manufacturers / Adopting a MF system.
« on: July 18, 2014, 05:20:44 PM »
I have been saving my monies for along time to adopt a MF system to replace one of my 5D3's for dedicated Staged Photo usage. I have a budget of 8K to start a system and this is what I liked so far.

What I'd Like out of the system

1. Sync Speed
2. Prolonged Shelf life. (How long can I use it before no Backs work for it or other pitfalls.)
3. Repair & Upkeep Costs
4. Len's Selection vs Pricing
5. ??? Anything else I should consider?

Hasselblad H2D + 39mp Kodak Back + HV90x Viewfinder + 80mm HC F/2.8 - More or less around 8K.

Or should I consider Phase One? They're alittle more pricey though...

Alot of options but I'd like to know what system I should choose.

19
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Anyone own both Canon and Nikon
« on: July 17, 2014, 08:59:15 AM »
Before the 5D3, I was strongly Considering selling all my canon kit at the time to jump for the d700 for the AF and nikons superb flash system. Then that all changed when with the 5D3 + 600RT combo.

I tried the d800 for a weekend and it felt like nikon lost what made the d700 so good. It felt clunkier, less comfortable in the hand, the left AF focusing issue did consistently show it's face, and to top it all off, the AF was slower with primes than my canon.

The files had some more detail and the shadows recovered nicely but who cares? It hurt my hand, and frustrated me when I had to return to using pocketwizards for flash. The d700 was a general purpose camera that could do most anything well and the d800 is a special purpose camera that does one thing exceptionally at the cost of everything else. Maybe they fixed the issues with later models but it doesn't change the bad ergos and the now inferior flash system.

Perhaps not buying a d700 was the best decision I could have made because I'd be stuck with nikon at this time.

20
Software & Accessories / Re: Sub $1000 27" monitor for photo editing
« on: July 16, 2014, 11:43:57 PM »
The dell U3011. I have a pair of them @ 850$ on a Newegg sale 6 months ago. You should see them drop again by the end of this year but a fantastically accurate monitor and calibrates like a champ.

$850 for a pair? Wow! Time to look at newegg!

:P whoops. I meant I have a pair of them and paid @ 850$ each.

21
Canon General / Re: New Speedlite Coming? [CR2]
« on: July 16, 2014, 12:40:43 PM »
Sweetness. 440RT would be a nice addition to rid us of the ancient IR triggering tech.

22
Lenses / Re: Year of the lens....a joke....?
« on: July 16, 2014, 12:26:07 PM »
The 16-35L IS and the 10-18mm IS alone make this year great for Canon users. If they add the 100-400LII, it would be the year of the lens.

23
Lenses / Re: What Lenses are missing from Canon's range
« on: July 16, 2014, 12:23:38 PM »
Canon EF 135mm f/1.8L IS

24
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 135mm f/2L
« on: July 16, 2014, 07:33:16 AM »
I've been raving for the 135L for awhile now but it seems to get washed out by the "eermegerd 85mm 1.2!" Consistently... :/

It's a near perfect lens and it deserves a makeover with a bump in aperture and IS. That will make it a lens that I'd have absolutely no reason to own a 70-200II. Dedicated portrait photographers would flock to that prime instead of spending the weight and monies on the 70-200II.
I just love the 135L. It's the reason I like primes over zooms. Light, small, fast and affordable.

Since I don't do photography for living, I can live without 135L. The 70-200 f2.8 IS II is a MUST have lens for my shooting.
It won't replace the 70-200LII but it'd give a nice alternative to shooters who don't need the size and weight and need some extra speed.

25
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 135mm f/2L
« on: July 15, 2014, 07:51:02 PM »
I've been raving for the 135L for awhile now but it seems to get washed out by the "eermegerd 85mm 1.2!" Consistently... :/

It's a near perfect lens and it deserves a makeover with a bump in aperture and IS. That will make it a lens that I'd have absolutely no reason to own a 70-200II. Dedicated portrait photographers would flock to that prime instead of spending the weight and monies on the 70-200II.

I just love the 135L. It's the reason I like primes over zooms. Light, small, fast and affordable.

26
Lenses / Re: RLPhotos first impressions of the 16-35mm f/4L - Video
« on: July 15, 2014, 12:29:54 PM »
RL, do you have a favorite set of ND filters you typically like to carry?  Everything takes up space and weight so I figure you have 2 or 3 that you use that work best and offer the most versatility.  I've put off buying these because I figured I would eventually just purchase a variable ND filter from probably Singh-Ray with some filter adapters.  But of course that's expensive so I keep putting it off.  Thoughts?

http://www.singh-ray.com/shop/vari-nd-variable-neutral-density-filter/

For my NDs, it's all LEE filters. My polarizers are all B+W screw on and combining both together get me what I need.

I have
1. 2 stop pro glass LEE ND.
2. 10 Stop glass Big Stopper LEE ND.
3. 2 stop resin hard and soft edged LEE NDs.
4. All the wide angle adapter rings.

If I use a polarizer, I use B+W Kaesmann x-s slim mount filters then the Lee system on top. It works pretty well @ 17mm with some slight vignette but disappears by 19mm. I have no vignette if I just use the LEE system alone.

Good filters are worth the cash and actually hold some value over time. I like to buy once and use them for years instead of cheaping out and getting something subpar and having to buy again. I don't have experience with Singh ray filters and Don't own a variable ND. :P

27
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Customer Advisor
« on: July 15, 2014, 01:30:57 AM »

28
Lenses / Re: RLPhotos first impressions of the 16-35mm f/4L - Video
« on: July 14, 2014, 11:47:29 PM »
My last post to wrap up this thread. A final goodbye to the 17-40L for me and looking back at some of my favorite photos it captured before it's sold on evilbay.

Very cool little discussion that really makes me want to take some ND filters with me more often.  Thanks for the nice walk through some of your fun images and their back story.  This helps inspire me to try more stuff, even when I'm tired or not always in the mood while travelling!
Thank you rusty. I know what it's like to travel around and arrive late at the hotel. You end up wanting to just sleep the night away but we could miss so many opportunities. I can't say how important it is, no matter what lens you got, to stay out a bit later and strive to make some cool photos.

I didn't know at the the time that this photo would make it on the cover of the London Planner, but hey! I'm glad I stayed out longer. :) I'd highly recommend a set of NDs for your travel photos.

29
Software & Accessories / Re: To filter or not to filter
« on: July 14, 2014, 09:10:12 PM »
I use B+w filters on all my lenses except my 100mm macro and 40mm pancake. They never come off unless I can see they're a problem when I'm shooting back lit subjects or I use my LEE filter system. Otherwise, My lenses always have pristine front elements at the end of their life for resale.

UV Filter vs No UV Filter Debate.:
Small | Large

30
Lenses / Re: UV filter on the new 16-35 f/4?
« on: July 14, 2014, 09:52:34 AM »
As someone who uses filters - all of the time unless I'm shooting into the sun or using a CPL/ND filters - I am amazed at how some of my 4-6 year old filters look.  Most of them have at least a few serious scratches on them and all of them are covered with numerous minor scratches.  These are high quality filters - B+W & Hoya HD - so that's the not the issue, but obviously they are doing their job.  If my front element looked like this, I'd be very sad, even though I know that it really doesn't affect image quality.  It would kill the resale value.  I've sold lenses with a fair bit of external wear, but perfect glass, and they've always sold well.

Also, I bought the B+W 77mm XS-Pro Clear UV Haze with Multi-Resistant Nano Coating (010M) for 16-35 f/4 IS and it fits great.  The inner barrel of the lens moves back & forth a lot more than any other Canon lens I've owned so I think a filter is a good idea on this lens.
Same here. My work is more important than cuddling my lenses front element. Fast lens swapping in and out of bags, fingerprints, residue, dust and then needing to hurry to clean them off with my sweat soaked shirt on a summer Texas wedding, the occasional spray of champagne at the reception or some booze that happens to find my lens from party happy patrons. Then take the same lens to the beach the next day for a session with the groom and bride alone with sand blowing against my lens. Go home, rinse off all the sand from my camera and wipe off my lenses.

Broke a filter once from a stray rock directly into my lens, no hood would have helped, grabbed my tshirt and unscrewed the broken filter and continued shooting.

I'm always surprised when I unscrew the filter to sell a lens to see the damage it takes and a pristine perfect front element.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 218