December 22, 2014, 09:28:36 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 ... 123 124 [125] 126 127 ... 237
1861
If Nikon makes a 50mm 1.2 with AF, a 135mm f/1.8 and radio flash units, I'd jump ship at that point.

1862
Lighting / Re: Selling off my old strobes, What to get next?
« on: January 18, 2013, 12:46:29 PM »
i have 2 Einsteins and i find them to be very reliable and built much more solidly than the older AB units. i have not yet tested the high speed flash duration of the units but it was a feature that i liked having if the need ever arises.

some other nice things about the Einsteins:

1/10 stop variation in power over a 9 stop range
ability to control power of multiple strobes via camera with the Cyber Commander unit
value vs quality (its just a good product for the cost compared to other brands)

i have also not had any issues using any type of modifier with them. i got the units when they were first released and i was aware that they were going to correct how modifiers were attached to the unit. as i understood it, occasionally a large/heavy modifier could "jump" off the unit so PCB planned to extend the length of the clasps that engaged the speedring that the modifier was attached to.

i have never had an issue with this and i have used up to a 36x48 softbox on these units. i do hope to get a 54x72 softbox in the future so at that point i might send the units back in to get them updated to handle the extra load.

bottom line is that i find the Einsteins to be well made, reliable, and very very versatile. but i would try to research how they perform at faster flash durations and if they are capable of what you need. the only other units i saw (online) photographers using to do such work were ProFotos...and they are beastly expensive.   

Thats some piece of mind. One thing about my ancient novatron gear is its tough as nails. Fallen several feet, dropped kicked, battered but continues chugging.

 I saw some broncolor/profoto stuff and its amazing but wayy out of my budget! Then I read stuff on Einstein and knew it was perfect.

http://strobist.blogspot.com/2012/10/freezing-water-on-cheap-einstein.html

1863
Software & Accessories / Re: Camera or lightmeter?
« on: January 18, 2013, 12:03:04 PM »
I understand how a light meter works, I had an old minolta meter that was ok when I shot my TLR. I understand meters go for 18% grey and compensate.

It's a waste of time for me shooting digital, and so-so when I'd use polariod backs on my 501CM.

1864
Software & Accessories / Re: Camera or lightmeter?
« on: January 18, 2013, 11:02:34 AM »
Histogram + Chimping > Lightmeter

It allows you to not only view the amount of light but how light shapes around a subject. I only used lightmeters with film and even then, I used Polaroids more. In the end, the light has to enter the lens to make a photo, why bother?

That's just me, I can't speak for others.

1865
Lighting / Re: Selling off my old strobes, What to get next?
« on: January 18, 2013, 09:56:28 AM »
I took a look at the quadras and I love the modifiers elichrome has. The overall package won't deliver what I need it to do for me.

Durations are too slow even with the port a+b method.

It would be out of my budget for 4 heads, two packs and the modifiers I wanted.

400 w/s is not enough.

It would be super heavy compared to Einsteins + VML


1866
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
« on: January 18, 2013, 09:43:40 AM »
The 70-200II is not better than the 135L for IQ at any aperture.

True...but nor is it worse (Klaus at PZ gives slightly higher numbers to the 70-200 II across the frame at most apertures, although probably not real-world relevant).  That being the case, from an optical standpoint the only benefit to the prime is that it's one stop faster.  That can be very important in some situations, but the zoom certainly wins on versatility with no sacrifice of IQ.

It has slightly less vignette @ 2.8 but that's about it. Neither are terrible lenses but to claim either is vastly superior in IQ is nonsense.

The prime certainly wins on speed, weight, bulk, price, and stealth. If only it was a bit faster and had IS.  ;)

1868
Lenses / Re: 2013 - The Year for 400mm Lenses? [CR1]
« on: January 17, 2013, 06:05:18 PM »
I would appreciate a 100-400 2.8 :-)

You must be a back surgeon.

 ;D

Or a back Surgeon Married to a Chiropractor.

Or a back Surgeon Married to a Chiropractor who then buys said 100-400mm F2.8

1869
Lenses / Re: Canon 85mm f/1.8 vs Other L and non-L Canon Primes
« on: January 17, 2013, 03:02:45 PM »
85mm 1.8 < 100mm F/2

1870
Lenses / Re: Fast lens for indoor use
« on: January 17, 2013, 02:46:47 PM »
Sigma 35mm 1.4 or Canon 24L II

Either would be great.

1871
Lenses / Re: 2013 - The Year for 400mm Lenses? [CR1]
« on: January 17, 2013, 12:04:05 PM »
I hope this is canons year for overdue primes as well.

35L II

50mm 1.4 II or 50L II would be nice.

135mm F/1.8L IS USM would be extremely nice.

1872
4x PCB Einsteins.

1873
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 50 f/1.2L
« on: January 16, 2013, 09:51:52 PM »
Did you even look at the lines?  ??? Its pretty obvious.

That the 50/1,4 is better yes, and you can se that also in photo zone measurement figures at 2.0 , 2,8 etc etc

I guess you didn't get the memo.  :-X

1874
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 50 f/1.2L
« on: January 16, 2013, 09:37:05 PM »
Did you even look at the lines?  ??? Its pretty obvious.

1875
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 50 f/1.2L
« on: January 16, 2013, 09:29:59 PM »
Zlatko

You have rejected four recognized test sites results concerning 50/1.2 and resolution compared  to 50/1,4.
Then you have  have mixed up  the results from
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=403&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=115&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

As you can se, 50/1,2 are less sharp than 50/1.4  at F-1,4

The center is better on the 50L and there is less haze in shots i've taken from the 50L vs the 1.4.

over all better resolution with 50/1,4   at 1,4  and 2,0 than with 50/1,2

Nah, Look at the diagonal lines mid-frame on the 50L @ F/2, It has better contrast. Its the same story up to F/2.8.

Pages: 1 ... 123 124 [125] 126 127 ... 237