December 18, 2014, 09:54:53 AM

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 6 ... 237
46
Windows 7 x64. It's just works and It will end up living a very long life, possibly like XP.

Windows 8 wasn't ready yet and windows 9/10 will polish everything up to make it a proper release.

47
I watched whole video and some points made sense. Then I figured this person must make some great photos and visited his website. Dear lord! I visited his fashion portfolio section, I'm lost for words in the tone mapped, HDR haloed photos. After that, I took this video as an ad for Sony or possibly an ad for his workshop.

48
EOS Bodies / Re: AA Filter: Still Relevant, Marketing Ploy, or Obsolete?
« on: October 12, 2014, 06:03:56 PM »
I've seen moire in my 5d3 files before,  I'd imagine it'd be worse without one.

49
I'd say for every 2 out of three drones, the photos they actually produce are garbage. Now I'm speaking about the drones that come here to complain so fiercely that when we actually scrutinize the photos the produce, they fall flat on their face.

Careful. I get flamed every time I make a similar observation. According to some of the most vocal DR "advocates," most people seeking more DR do indeed produce stunning images.......it's just that they keep those images top secret, and no one is allowed to see them.
I think you mistake that I want to be correct on that statement. I really hope that I'm wrong and a Droner can prove me wrong. IE: dilbert.

I'm probably just like everyone else where probably less than 3% of my images are what I'd call "postcard" quality.
That sounds like you have a lot of work on and DR would be the least of those things.

Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop.
And I'm sure DR is only a miniscule part of making those photos.

No but it helps.
Not as much as a proper ball head. ;)

You know that if one person says it does not matter at all and the next says it is all important they become opposites.
In this case both are wrong.

One says that you make poor pictures because you do not have a body with more DR.
The other says you focus to much on DR and your pics are crap.

I read the arguments and think both of those individual's pics are probably lacking because neither concedes any ground and say that it is the combination of all things that make great pics.

There are work arounds for not having a good ball head, there are work arounds for DR.
The difference is does the person work around them. In dilbert case, not so much and why I said DR is the least of the problems others and I have observed with his photos. Which in kinda like ignoring the gaping hole in the wall to work on a miniscule paint chip.

But I'm sure he'll get a high DR body and his photos will still continue to be what they are. That's the real tragedy here.

50
I'd say for every 2 out of three drones, the photos they actually produce are garbage. Now I'm speaking about the drones that come here to complain so fiercely that when we actually scrutinize the photos the produce, they fall flat on their face.

Careful. I get flamed every time I make a similar observation. According to some of the most vocal DR "advocates," most people seeking more DR do indeed produce stunning images.......it's just that they keep those images top secret, and no one is allowed to see them.
I think you mistake that I want to be correct on that statement. I really hope that I'm wrong and a Droner can prove me wrong. IE: dilbert.

I'm probably just like everyone else where probably less than 3% of my images are what I'd call "postcard" quality.
That sounds like you have a lot of work on and DR would be the least of those things.

Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop.
And I'm sure DR is only a miniscule part of making those photos.

No but it helps.
Not as much as a proper ball head. ;)

51
I'd say for every 2 out of three drones, the photos they actually produce are garbage. Now I'm speaking about the drones that come here to complain so fiercely that when we actually scrutinize the photos the produce, they fall flat on their face.

Careful. I get flamed every time I make a similar observation. According to some of the most vocal DR "advocates," most people seeking more DR do indeed produce stunning images.......it's just that they keep those images top secret, and no one is allowed to see them.
I think you mistake that I want to be correct on that statement. I really hope that I'm wrong and a Droner can prove me wrong. IE: dilbert.

I'm probably just like everyone else where probably less than 3% of my images are what I'd call "postcard" quality.
That sounds like you have a lot of work on and DR would be the least of those things.

Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop.
And I'm sure DR is only a miniscule part of making those photos.

52
I'd say for every 2 out of three drones, the photos they actually produce are garbage. Now I'm speaking about the drones that come here to complain so fiercely that when we actually scrutinize the photos the produce, they fall flat on their face.

Careful. I get flamed every time I make a similar observation. According to some of the most vocal DR "advocates," most people seeking more DR do indeed produce stunning images.......it's just that they keep those images top secret, and no one is allowed to see them.
I think you mistake that I want to be correct on that statement. I really hope that I'm wrong and a Droner can prove me wrong. IE: dilbert.

I'm probably just like everyone else where probably less than 3% of my images are what I'd call "postcard" quality.
That sounds like you have a lot of work on and DR would be the least of those things.

53
I could not get the flashes to fire consistently from a Sony RX1R with the YN-E3-Rt

It's a Sony multi-interface hot shoe, but it will fire the 600ex-rt in the hot shoe.

The test button the YN-E3-RT fired them ok, and after doing that a few times sometimes it would work for a single flash triggered from the camera.

I will have to check the mode and try again, but I'm not optimistic.

You can try these things to help get consistent results.

1. fresh set of batterys.
2. make sure the yn3 is in M mode, not in GR.
3. Adjust the channels until it's reliable using the channel scanner on your 600rts.

I found ch.5 has worked best for where ever I've been shooting. I left my set there.

54
I'd say for every 2 out of three drones, the photos they actually produce are garbage. Now I'm speaking about the drones that come here to complain so fiercely that when we actually scrutinize the photos the produce, they fall flat on their face.

Why do those who don't care about the issue always have to get personal and bring it down to such things?

You don't see those who care about the issue running around trying to subtly or not so subtly hint that the pics of those who don't care all stink do you?

Fact is that some of the DRoners shoot a lot more and have better portfolios than some who don't care. And that some who don't care have much better portfolios than those who do. And, most importantly, whatever the case, none of that has anything to do with anything.

If someone says 1+1=2 they are not wrong because their photos stink and if someone has amazing photos and says 1+1=3 that doesn't mean 1+1=3. You are conflating things that have nothing to do with each other.
If you don't care then why did my personal observation offend you? I believe your conflating things beyond what they are. In the end, I bring things down to the end product, and unfortunately for most droners DR is the least of their problems with their pictures.

Edit: I'd like to add that jrista is considered a droner by most here but the stark difference is that Jon DID make the move to an A7R and Jon DOES shoot photos that are good.(IMHO) However I can't say the same for the likes of many many other droners.

55
I'd say for every 2 out of three drones, the photos they actually produce are garbage. Now I'm speaking about the drones that come here to complain so fiercely that when we actually scrutinize the photos the produce, they fall flat on their face.

Careful. I get flamed every time I make a similar observation. According to some of the most vocal DR "advocates," most people seeking more DR do indeed produce stunning images.......it's just that they keep those images top secret, and no one is allowed to see them.
I think you mistake that I want to be correct on that statement. I really hope that I'm wrong and a Droner can prove me wrong. IE: dilbert.

56
I'd say for every 2 out of three drones, the photos they actually produce are garbage. Now I'm speaking about the drones that come here to complain so fiercely that when we actually scrutinize the photos the produce, they fall flat on their face.

57
Over 1/500th do you start to see power loss when the speed lite is set to 1/8th power or lower on your x100?

58
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: October 07, 2014, 09:09:54 AM »
Ican't speak to D800 because I have never used one, but my take on the great 5dM3 is this . . . when you make something that takes that IQ and feels so good in your hand . . . why would you want to change it.

+1. I won't.
I agree. I had a 5DMk3 which was feeling lonely so I got a second 5DMk3 to keep it company  ;D

If it's a breeding pair, can I have one of the offspring? ;D
Word on the street says it's offspring are quite rebellious. XD

59
Reviews / Re: Canon 16-35 F4 Review vs. 17-40 Shootout
« on: October 07, 2014, 03:29:23 AM »
From the reviews i have seen i noticed that some people have really bad EF 17-40mm copies.

I think it was a guy named RLphoto from here who had a 17-40mm copy that showed corners so bad i first thought he uses a vignete blur. :)
No honest i have never seen such bad corners with any of my Canon glass.

I own a 16-35mm f2.8 and my brother has a 17-40mm f4.
The 17-40mm from my bother is much sharper in the corner than what i have seen from RLphoto.

So i thank you for this review. It seems your 17-40mm is closer to my brothers in terms of image quality.

The 16-35mm f4 seem to be a nice upgarde but not such a big step in terms of image quality.
Sure nice for pixel peeper but i guess you will hardly see a difference in prints.

Yes, I've heard this as well. My copy is pretty old, from 2007, and it's resolved tack sharp ever since, even with moisture entering into the lens enclosure.

I wish there was a way to determine which eras or batches are good and bad...

Graham
Well in fairness, I did a formal review of the 17-40L in actual use and that lens regardless of the IQ, still made some of my favorite images. However, that being said,  I don't miss it.

http://youtu.be/OWK68nuC_hE

60
Lighting / Re: POLL: What flash modes do you use?
« on: October 06, 2014, 03:55:37 PM »
The Thyristor Mode works great Off camera where ETTL would nuke the exposure or burn the exposure depending on the background.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 237