October 25, 2014, 01:17:35 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 ... 129 130 [131] 132 133 ... 234
1951
Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS Exists as a Working Prototype [CR2]
« on: December 21, 2012, 02:25:55 PM »
Tamrons are junk. They're good starter lenses but that's about it.

Have you looked at the new Tamron 24-70? From the limited time I rented it and the images I'm seeing, it's quite good. Also from the reviews I've read, it's very good. IQ, not quite up to the 24-70 v2, sure, but still around as good or a bit more than the 24-70 v1. Build quality seems quite good, although again, not quite up to L standards. But it's $1300, not $2100-2300 or whatever the 24-70 v2 is going for right now.

Now, most of the rest of the Tamron glass, far as I know you're mostly correct, but if their 24-70 is the new direction they are going it, they're likely to become a serious off-brand competitor for people who can't quite afford L and don't want to pay the vastly more expensive new non-L primes with IS.

+1 The Tamron 24-70 VC and 70-200 VC are a huge shift in IQ and quality from them. Add the Sigma 35mm 1.4 and you've got a superb third party kit.

1952
Canon General / Re: DxOMark vs. Reality
« on: December 21, 2012, 11:41:43 AM »
How come the 5D2 IQ was impeccable before the D800? I find it still impeccable today. :|

1953
Lenses / Re: Lens choice advice please??
« on: December 21, 2012, 11:39:43 AM »
Get a cheapo tripod and stop down your kit lens for landscapes and still get that 50mm 1.8.

1954
Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS Exists as a Working Prototype [CR2]
« on: December 21, 2012, 11:35:56 AM »
Too little, too late. Even if this were released tomarrow, I'd still buy the tamron 24-70 over the canon. The canon would be stupendously expensive and the tamrons IQ is already excellent. Why buy the canon? Oh yeah, that pretty red ring. ::)

1955
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Cannot Keep Screwing It's Customers Over
« on: December 21, 2012, 11:23:59 AM »
Meh, This seems to only be an issue for early adopters. I got both my Mk3s for under 3000$ and one for 2499$. I couldn't feel better about being patient.   8)

Just don't be an early adopter unless absolutely necessary.

1956
It comes to personal choice but wow lots of people on this forum use filters as protection.

Lets put this into perspective.

For the ones that have it permanently on do you guys buy the paint protection for your brand new car as well?
How about eye protection when you go out of your house. After all your eyes are more important than any L lens.

This reminds me of some old timers that would bubble wrap their TV remote control so it wouldn't get damaged.
The most infuriating thing for me is filters on the 18-55mm efs kit lens. Who here would seriously recommend for someone to use a filter on this lens?

Some other interesting reads.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/canondslr/discuss/72157630037025174/
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/06/good-times-with-bad-filters

If the protection provided has the same level of protection as the filters I use, I wouldn't mind a clear, in discernible force field around my car.  ;D

1957
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: UPGRADING 7D to FF Please help!!!
« on: December 20, 2012, 09:56:56 AM »
If you love the 7D, you'll hate the 5D2 or the 6D. Save the cash and get the mk3. It won't limit you later on.

1958
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Hand on SONY RX 1.............AMAZING
« on: December 20, 2012, 09:52:14 AM »
First gen product. Avoid.

1959
Lenses / Re: "Big White" lens choice
« on: December 20, 2012, 09:10:55 AM »
400 f2.8

1960
Canon General / Re: some money left. what should I buy?
« on: December 19, 2012, 08:01:23 AM »
200mm f/2.

1961
Camera Body Gallery / Canon EOS 5D classic photos
« on: December 18, 2012, 11:11:20 PM »
This was one of my favorite canon bodies and is still a good choice for budget FF users.

Please post some recent or even legacy photos with the 5D classic.

1962
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: December 18, 2012, 11:06:47 PM »
Shot and edited on 5D3 + IPad.

1963
I have to do this all the time and the Epson v700 is the best I've used. It even had an wet plate option for the best quality you can get this side of a drum scan.

1964
Software & Accessories / Re: Stop Using Instagram
« on: December 18, 2012, 12:45:32 PM »
Crap, and I was just starting to like instagram.

As a Istock contributor, IMO, Most crap cell phone photos won't print,look, or sell as well as good stock photos.
Depends on the market. If Facebook is trying to undercut microstock for bloggers/online news, then cell phone photos will be perfectly fine. There's still a decent amount of money is selling subscriptions that way; especially when it only costs you storage space to produce those images. Their labor cost is lower than a microstock place that pays photographers.

That said, I think a lot of people will abandon them after their last few changes. Taking away Twitter usability and then this is a good way to piss people off and make them go elsewhere

Istock has editorial licensed photos that are free for use on blogger non-commercial sites already in place. The Small file size sales are pretty decent and already are cheap for bloggers.

Then again, We won't really know until next year.

1965
Lenses / Re: Lens checking methods 24-70II
« on: December 18, 2012, 11:30:51 AM »
Enjoy that zeiss 15mm, Its the greatest UW ever-made.

Pages: 1 ... 129 130 [131] 132 133 ... 234