July 29, 2014, 08:02:46 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 ... 118 119 [120] 121 122 ... 220
1786
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Massive Nikon D600+24-85VR Deal - $1996
« on: December 14, 2012, 09:36:24 AM »
Sounds like Nikon is getting really desperate ... usually manufacturers don't sell their brand new products at such incredibly low prices ... their sales must be really low. But good times for the buyers.

I'm waiting for 6D to drop to $1200ish ;D ;D ;D

Perhaps BigValueInc? :D

1787
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35 f/2 IS Resolution Test
« on: December 14, 2012, 09:33:33 AM »
Good job sigma. You've won this round.

1788
Lenses / Re: Zoom vs Primes?
« on: December 14, 2012, 09:22:21 AM »
yeah, rlphoto, i haul more a good bit more stuff than that to wedding shoots. My brother works video at weddings all the time, and he says i use WAY more than anyone he's ever seen at a ceremony/formals, then i use way less the rest of the night. probably cause i'm tired! Although i've sworn i'm done carrying my speedotron 2403 and 3 head around. done, totally, never again, i don't care how nice it would be to have that much power, i'm not doing it.........

(yeah, i'll probably do it the next time i think i'll need it. )

This is basically my line of thinking on the wedding day. I have a ThinkTank Airport Security bag stuffed full of lenses, 3 bodies, and 4 flashes, pocket wizards, batteries, filters, etc... Then I carry another bag with 2 light stands, tripod, and umbrellas. I'd rather put up with the slight hassle and have everything I could possibly need than leave something at home because I think it would weigh me down.

I love quotes taken out of context. :|

1789
Even on my Expensive L Primes, I use the Top of the line B&W MRC Nano XS-Pro UV filters. Its simply superb.

I don't use them much myself ... but I know many do and swear by it. Is this because you feel there is no perceptible change whatsoever in high-performing lenses or you have made your peace with the potential trade off for possible protection? And, I did say "potential" trade-off.  :)

I want to protect my front element from cleaning, scratching, chemicals, abrasives, small meteorites from space or anything else from touching it. A UV filter already saved my 24L II once and will continue to use them.

I cannot distinguish IQ loss from the filter, B&ws are that good.

1790
Lenses / Re: Which lenses will match a 40+MP camera?
« on: December 13, 2012, 11:20:16 PM »
Have you even used the 135L? ???

1791
Lenses / Re: B+W XS Pro MRC UV (010P) NANO Slim filter for my 85L or 135L
« on: December 13, 2012, 05:07:10 PM »
I Use That exact slim filter on my 135L. Its great but I tend to stack filters so that's why I bought the slim.

so it doesnt affect the hood at all?
Some reviews say that it stops the hood from mounting properly ?

My hood mounts fine on my 135L.

1792
Lenses / Re: B+W XS Pro MRC UV (010P) NANO Slim filter for my 85L or 135L
« on: December 13, 2012, 04:51:04 PM »
I Use That exact slim filter on my 135L. Its great but I tend to stack filters so that's why I bought the slim.

1793
Lenses / Re: Zoom vs Primes?
« on: December 13, 2012, 04:41:49 PM »
A Good Price might sway me, BigValueInc happened to be one who did.  8)

Seriously though, A 24-70 + 70-200 + 50L + 2x5D3's + 2x580 EX II's is a crap load of weight for weddings or events. The 70-200 is 4 pounds and the 135L is a third of that weight.

I prefer just three small, fast primes with two bodies and the occasional flash.

That is actually a pretty lite load considering the rest of the gear waiting in cases nearby. And let's not forget a few Elinchrom Rangers set-up for formal shots.

I wonder about the OP though. A 5D2 and no lens... hummm! He's never responded to the offer to come out and play with some glass, most photographers I know jump at the chance test drive without a cash layout.

I don't have to carry mono-light's on my back, so a nice roller case for them is fine.  ::)

1794
Lenses / Re: Vignetting on 24-70 F/2.8L II USM
« on: December 13, 2012, 04:36:01 PM »
Wide open, f/2.8 at 24mm I expect a lens this expensive to have abolutly no vignetting.

The 600mm f/4L IS II costs $13,000 and has about 1.5 stops of vignetting wide open.   ::)

The 24L II is $1500 and it has 3 stops of vignette.  O_o

This is typical of a board with "Rumors" in its name.
We start by talking about the 24-70mm f/2.8 L II shot at 24mm, jump to the 600mm II and then it somehow turns in to the 24mm f/1.4L II  ???

The New Rumored 24-70 2.8L III will have Zero vignette at all focal lengths and perfect IQ. It will weight in at a reasonable 500 Grams and a MSRP of 1299$ including canons all new 7th generation Image Stablizer providing 8-stops of compensation.

This could be a "rumor" right?

Might be
Can I pre-order now?

Sure, If you've got a spare billion dollars for the R&D.  ;D

1795
Lenses / Re: Which lenses will match a 40+MP camera?
« on: December 13, 2012, 04:33:48 PM »
If it can out-resolve the 7D, It should Out-resolve the 46Mp camera.

The 135L is one of those lenses.
This is not a fair test.  All lenses have better resolution in the center area of the image.  APS-C (7D etc) usese this area only. In FF the full field is being used, and the resolution for off enter area will drop. Some might even drop drastically.
Only at thec enter area. Look at the review of lenses on DPreview, especially at the outer part of the FF. Out-resove everything you have does not mean that it will out-resolve the 40MP sensor. What you go may out resolve a 22MP FF but there is no guarantee tah tiyt will out resolve the 40MP FF.

It Should outresolve the hypothetical 46mp sensor.

The 135L has outresolved pretty much any camera I've used, so it would be a great candidate for this non-existent sensor.

Word: Should

(auxiliary) Will likely (become or do something); indicates that the subject of the sentence is likely to execute the sentence predicate.

Your 135L Should out-resolve that 1Ds MarkVI with its amazing 46mp sensor.

1796
Lenses / Re: Vignetting on 24-70 F/2.8L II USM
« on: December 13, 2012, 04:29:00 PM »
Wide open, f/2.8 at 24mm I expect a lens this expensive to have abolutly no vignetting.

The 600mm f/4L IS II costs $13,000 and has about 1.5 stops of vignetting wide open.   ::)

The 24L II is $1500 and it has 3 stops of vignette.  O_o

This is typical of a board with "Rumors" in its name.
We start by talking about the 24-70mm f/2.8 L II shot at 24mm, jump to the 600mm II and then it somehow turns in to the 24mm f/1.4L II  ???

The New Rumored 24-70 2.8L III will have Zero vignette at all focal lengths and perfect IQ. It will weight in at a reasonable 500 Grams and a MSRP of 1299$ including canons all new 7th generation Image Stablizer providing 8-stops of compensation.

This could be a "rumor" right?

1797
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Help me find video accessory !.
« on: December 13, 2012, 04:24:23 PM »
Joby gorilla pod.  :P

1798
Lenses / Re: Vignetting on 24-70 F/2.8L II USM
« on: December 13, 2012, 04:20:23 PM »
Wide open, f/2.8 at 24mm I expect a lens this expensive to have abolutly no vignetting.

The 600mm f/4L IS II costs $13,000 and has about 1.5 stops of vignetting wide open.   ::)

The 24L II is $1500 and it has 3 stops of vignette.  O_o

1799
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D Top Focus Point Light Bleeding Issue
« on: December 13, 2012, 04:18:55 PM »
It's the curse of the 5D2 sequel.  :o

1800
EOS Bodies / Re: Moving to 6D from 5DII
« on: December 13, 2012, 03:15:09 PM »
That won't be much of an upgrade over the 5D2, Save alittle more for a 5D3.

Pages: 1 ... 118 119 [120] 121 122 ... 220