August 01, 2014, 06:45:22 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 5 ... 220
31
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: New lamp, what to buy?
« on: July 23, 2014, 07:55:10 AM »
I dont know but A PCB Einstein @ 640 W/s would take atleast 6+ Speelites to get kinda close to the full power output. It would be the same with these if they are measures the same.

32
I still included a 12×8 album with packages minimum. A great album is the best way to get referral weddings as that album usually travels places to many eyes.

33
Anything yet?

34
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Anyone own both Canon and Nikon
« on: July 22, 2014, 12:44:40 PM »
@RLP

OTOH, my D800s I find very comfortable to hold and carry for long periods, never use any kind of strap, they balance nicely with mid-weight zooms and AF (landscape) with great precision at every point even in very low light and low contrast subjects.
I never used a D700 but do hear plenty of raves about it.  FWIW, out of over 80 DSLR camera bodies (some duplicates of course) I've used in my database, I find the d800 to be the most enjoyable with the d5100/5300 being my preferred consumer crop bodies.  7D, 40-50-60D, 5D2 and 5D3 I also like the fit and feel of but I sometimes need to really stretch the limits of a raw file and the Nik's help me out there better than the Canon goods can.

I also regularly use various Pentax bodies and enjoy the fit and feel of them but they have a few minor ergonomic issues and poor placement of some controls that get in the way at times.

The only bad feel, hurt my hands cameras I've ever grabbed are the D7x00 and D6x0 series Nikons; I find them just plain aweful.  Bought a second d800 because the d600 was such an uncomfortable thing to use as a 2nd body.

No doubt the D810 did address the bad ergos on the d800. The D800 has the superior IQ to any 35mm camera for landscapes and arguably older MF systems. It's just it wasn't really a D700 replacement as the 5D3 was and the 600RT was just too good to pass up.

35
"WIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDE. I need it WIDER!" said sigma and well, Its pretty WIDE.  ;D

36
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Adopting a MF system.
« on: July 22, 2014, 11:01:48 AM »
Absolutely serious question:
What value do you see in buying and using this equipment? Those Kodak backs are very old, and have a high crop factor.

Is it the resolution? If that's the case, I promise you you'd be better off buying a Nikon D810, which would be better at pretty much everything. Focus? Check. Resolution? In the real world, check. Dynamic range? Oh my God, yes. Lens selection? By a country mile. Shallow DOF control? Oh yes.

I can think of no logical reason to buy into this system.

Sync speed. Pretty much the main reason but the MP and lenses are also a plus.

Well PBD, I have the funds to buy a system and not worry too much about operating. Also I discussed about the tax benefits vs write off as a company asset over time and it would be better to own the system as the work comes and goes but is usually a big payout. I'd be better to own the system that lease over a long period of time while it depreciates is not for me. Not saying it isn't wise for a short term stretch of work but can't work for me.

So far, it's an H3D-II - 39mp 1.1x crop factor back + 80mm HC.

37
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Adopting a MF system.
« on: July 22, 2014, 08:13:22 AM »
Thank you PBD. This purchase is out of pocket and I've already made the money to afford a older body system. You are right about the h2 systems and I had already decided to go with a minimum of an H3D system and am currently negotiating a H3D-II 39 system.

With a piece of my 35mm kit sold and the funds already put away for it, it's time to jump to MF. I had a depreciation write off on my 5d3s as they did drop from 3500-2800ish these past 2 years but this camera has already depreciated most of its value and will be slower to depreciate any more.

38
Lighting / Re: large softboxes for speedlights - what are you using
« on: July 21, 2014, 11:17:22 PM »
Photek Softlighter and El Cheapo Shoot-through/Bounce Umbrellas. I have a 20x20" softbox but doesn't get used as much as the Softlighter.

39
Scout the locations ahead of time, Use the 24-70mm most of the day, 135L for details, and Do GET A FLASH. I cannot stress how important basic on-camera flash fill and bounce is needed in dark interiors. A 430EXII or higher at minimum.

Stay level headed and cool, because you'll end up being the guide for the most of the day.

40
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Adopting a MF system.
« on: July 21, 2014, 07:36:29 PM »
I will soon be selling a 5D3 Body, the 24mm F/1.4L II, and the 50mm F/1.2L. I decided to go with Hasselblad because their lens selection is alittle better, True Focus and the Equipment is slightly more affordable. I'll lose out on 1/1600 Syncs but 1/800ths is plenty for the added benefit of True Focus.

Will post again when I've sold this equipment and Ordered the Blad. :)

41
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 21, 2014, 05:47:54 PM »
.... but the man behind the camera can tell.

What does any of that, and your disdain for my illustrative images have to do with the point? You can be as insulting as you like, I will not get drawn into it.

However as for the part of your comment that you keep saying, why then do you keep failing to actually do it?

Your answer to the question I ask you, show me you can discern the "unique look" of the 50L is not met by guesses, it is met with insults.

I hope I never attain your level of professionalism.
They are not your images and I could careless about your pointless meanderings about them. I've shot many 50mms, actually made money with them and can say without a doubt that the 50L has a unique rendering that when I look at my images and my favorites consistently are taken with it. My IMAGES. Not yours or someone elses. My images and If it's true in my experiences, perhaps it will be true for others who want the creamy look of the 50L. Your not a photographer but more of a snob to put down others who also see the difference. I hope to never reach your level of staunched ignorance.

Then again, My original post had nothing to do with you. However, you decided you wanted to debate something that in itself is completely subjective. I surprised more people haven't called you out on your lack of portfolio with such strong opinions as yours.

42
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 21, 2014, 04:17:45 PM »
PBD,
So what is the point of your comments, and those in the other thread?  Should we all be saving money and not renting/buying/shooting the L lens?  The only way you will convince me of this is by showing me the same scene shot with the different lenses in question, wide open and with no post processing.  If it is a complex scene with some depth and some small points of light in it.  I guarantee I could tell the difference. 

Anyone have multiple 50mms to do a test?

Tom
Don't expect too much from PBD experience wise. He after all doesn't use the gear to the extent to know and see the differences. From. From experience, if you take the 1.4 and 1.2 out to shoot, you'll like the 50L every time if that's the look your going for. Something that PBD won't ever be able to understand.

You are so sweet, I probably sold my last (owned) 50 1.2L before you knew what a camera was, but that is fine, stick to the personal insults rather than try and guess which images have, in your words, a "unique look", because lets be honest, you are far better at insulting people than proving your point.

As far as we know, you haven't shot the inside of a paper bag but if others like to take your opinions with weight based on zero actual photography made, that's none of my business. However, my opinions are based on my work and how the lens works for me. If you disagree, that's cool but don't attempt to justify yourself with zero actual photography.

I don't, I have posted hundreds of images here, I just choose not to link to my websites or try for YouTube and blog hits. But I am not the one proclaiming a "unique look" and then failing, 100%, to actually be able to pick it out.

As 3kramd5 says "But the common assertion is that there is a specific unique look to the 50L. If that assertion is true, and if the viewer knows what that specific unique look is, he need not have a side by side comparison, he only need look at a single photograph to determine whether or not that specific unique look is present. Right?"

Why can't you, or any other self proclaimed aficionado, answer that question?
Why can't you show us your real work?  Oh that's right, you shoot images of pools and the occasional snapshot. Wow, you have the utmost authority on something completely subjective as this topic.

Do you even have a style in your photos? I couldn't tell. They were all pretty bland and grey. Perhaps that's your unique look.

You don't understand that each little nuance in every step of an image makes someone's style. The way a lens renders is a piece, so is post processing, and so is lighting. Nonetheless, no two lenses actually render perfectly alike, thus even scientifically they are all unique in a way but that's just a conjecture to think about.

The uniqueness of the 50L may be minute to some and others more but it's the photographer who uses the lenses who will notice the difference. Clients can't tell, the general public can't tell, but the man behind the camera can tell. That's what counts because he's the one who has to make the photos.

43
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 21, 2014, 03:10:49 PM »
PBD,
So what is the point of your comments, and those in the other thread?  Should we all be saving money and not renting/buying/shooting the L lens?  The only way you will convince me of this is by showing me the same scene shot with the different lenses in question, wide open and with no post processing.  If it is a complex scene with some depth and some small points of light in it.  I guarantee I could tell the difference. 

Anyone have multiple 50mms to do a test?

Tom
Don't expect too much from PBD experience wise. He after all doesn't use the gear to the extent to know and see the differences. From. From experience, if you take the 1.4 and 1.2 out to shoot, you'll like the 50L every time if that's the look your going for. Something that PBD won't ever be able to understand.

You are so sweet, I probably sold my last (owned) 50 1.2L before you knew what a camera was, but that is fine, stick to the personal insults rather than try and guess which images have, in your words, a "unique look", because lets be honest, you are far better at insulting people than proving your point.

As far as we know, you haven't shot the inside of a paper bag but if others like to take your opinions with weight based on zero actual photography made, that's none of my business. However, my opinions are based on my work and how the lens works for me. If you disagree, that's cool but don't attempt to justify yourself with zero actual photography.

44
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 21, 2014, 02:45:54 PM »
PBD,
So what is the point of your comments, and those in the other thread?  Should we all be saving money and not renting/buying/shooting the L lens?  The only way you will convince me of this is by showing me the same scene shot with the different lenses in question, wide open and with no post processing.  If it is a complex scene with some depth and some small points of light in it.  I guarantee I could tell the difference. 

Anyone have multiple 50mms to do a test?

Tom
Don't expect too much from PBD experience wise. He after all doesn't use the gear to the extent to know and see the differences. From experience, if you take the 1.4 and 1.2 out to shoot, you'll like the 50L every time if that's the look your going for. Something that PBD won't ever be able to understand.

45
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 20, 2014, 11:41:39 PM »


Awww that's cute PBD because I remember almost everyone shutting you down on the 135L vs 100L. Both Factually and Artistically on how the 135L is the superior portrait lens.

Its not trolling if its true.  :o

And it is true that you couldn't tell which was which from the same shoot.
And it's True you've never actually shot both lenses XD XD XD!!!

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 220