October 01, 2014, 04:33:35 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 - drjlo

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 43
Hmm, not sure what that means since the "speedring" comes hard-assembled, ready to open like umbrella.  See the customer video in the Reviews section, which I found in reviews section for the 36" Octabox.


What probably happened (seems like multiple people mention it) is that the Alien Bee insert/adapter's lip is too shallow, being loose on Alien Bees.  The insert I received was the same way, and I emailed the seller who sent me the correct one with deeper lip, which fits perfectly.  He did mention the supplier for that part had changed, causing the shallow lip.  This was some time ago, so I would hope the seller figured out this problem and changed the supplier to the correct one..

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: mini review: Yongnuo 568EX
« on: April 06, 2013, 09:29:47 PM »

The unit performed flawlessly in all the above-mentioned areas.  For example, the photo below shows my YN-568EX firing in optical slave mode, using ETTL metering, HSS and 8:1 ratio set via the camera menu.  Fantastic!   To obtain the photo below I mounted my 580EX ii master inside an Apollo Orb softbox at camera right.

I have the 580EX II and YN-568EX also.  How did you connect your camera to the 580EX II which is off-camera in Apollo? 

I would just buy something like this, as it already comes with Alien Bee speedring and much cheaper to boot:

It can even be used as a pseudo-beauty dish with white cover removed and center reflector.  I have the 36" octagon version with same features, and it's been great.

Abstract / Re: fragmented fractal
« on: April 06, 2013, 09:04:43 PM »

Happy Grape by drjlo1, on Flickr

Lenses / Re: 24 TS-E II or 135L
« on: March 29, 2013, 02:08:29 AM »
In general, I shoot a little bit of everything from landscapes to candids to street to my family. For those of you who own both or have tried both, what are your thoughts?

Well, I have both 24 TS-E II and 135L, and I don't think either is all that well-suited for what you shoot.  24 TS-E II is obviously a great lens, but it's only f/3.5 and lacks AF limiting use in candid shooting especially indoors.  135L is too long, best used for tight portrait standing far off. 

I think a good 35mm (on full frame) such as 35L or the Sigma 35 f/1.4 would suit most of your needs quite a bit better. 

Lenses / Re: 50mm: Wich one?
« on: March 27, 2013, 07:09:24 PM »

I second the notion that sigma update the 50mm 1.4 to join the art line

I third that, hoping it would happen if enough people kept saying it  :'(  Dare I even wish for f/1.2?

Software & Accessories / Re: Portrait Professional
« on: March 26, 2013, 03:13:43 PM »
Portrait Professional is a huge time-saver for me, especially for those casual gatherings and group shots when you have tons of shots usually with multiple faces in each.  Many of the people at these events are not young, so the ability to quickly clean skin imperfections of multiple faces in each shot is a god-send.  One just needs to be careful with the sliders and not overcook it, especially with face contour controls.

Software & Accessories / Re: DxO Optics Pro
« on: March 25, 2013, 10:42:33 PM »

I've never used DPP -- and it's free!  I'll have to check it out. 

I use many photography software including Nik and Topaz, and DPP is one of the favorites; the fact it's free is a bonus.  Some people tend to dismiss it right away due to it's "free" oem nature, but the latest DPP's really is a great program, especially the DLO (digital lens optimizer) feature.  I do wish third-party Photoshop plug-in's could be used directly in DPP, but if I need a plug-in, such as Silver Efex Pro, DPP has a button to "Transfer to Photoshop."

But the SL1 I think is great and I am glad they offer it body only.  Not for use with large lenses, but with a 20mm Voigtlander pancake for the ultimate quality point and shoot.  If I can save up, I may go this route.

Well, the $650 body-only price will need to calm down to more reasonable street price before I consider SL1, but stick the Canon 40 mm f/2.8 lens most of us have anyway, and it should be nicely portable and sharp.

Still, if Canon doesn't bring some REAL improvements for next generation of bodies, more customers for Sonikon :P

Lenses / Re: TS-E 45mm & TS-E 90mm Finally Getting Replaced? [CR1]
« on: March 16, 2013, 04:55:12 AM »

 I simply want FF sensor in P&S body(like RX1) that can switch lenses.

My needs might not apply to the PROs, but hey...........why not ;D

Wouldn't that be nice, hopefully at way below Leica's new M prices..

Landscape / Re: How Would You Edit This Landscape Photo?
« on: March 07, 2013, 06:02:32 PM »
Silver Effex pro after creating 3 files +/-2 EV apart.

_MG_0452BW by drjlo1, on Flickr

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II
« on: March 01, 2013, 04:52:31 AM »
I'll quickly chime in here regarding this lens.  I've had it for two days, and I'm not terribly impressed so far.  I was excited to get this sucker, as I'm looking to consolidate my collection of glass and this lens could replace several other lenses if it were good enough. 

This is certainly a good modern lens: all the positive reviews can't be wrong or outright lies, can they?.. The samples I've seen posted all over the place look mostly good.. However, for $2049 and after reading all the over-the-top reviews I was expecting a bit more.  That being said, I have in the past disliked certain lenses at first, only to learn their quirks and produce acceptable results after time.

I did not own the mark I version of this lens, but I have lots of others (albeit primes, different zoom ranges, IS included, larger apertures, tilt-shifts, etc.) to compare it to.  Now, I'm not using Imatest like the lensrental.com guys, but my eyesight is quite good and I know how to use my 5dMkII and MkIII just fine :)   I'm fully aware that I'm not performing scientific tests here, and that the comparisons are in many cases completely unfair.  Hopefully, I'm not flamed to Hell for this.

First off: aside from corner performance (where the 24-70 is quite good), the 24-105 f/4 IS seems nearly as good @f/4 all the way from 24-70.  That in itself is bad news for such a new and  pricey lens, and I was completely shocked.  I tried hand held with IS on, and tripod mounted (IS off) shots and the results were fairly similar.  The 24-70 did have better contrast than the 24-105.  Perhaps my 24-105 is a real gem but something tells me it's as average as everyone else's.  Next up, I compared a few quick landscape shots taken with it (at 24mm f/3.5) to the 24mm f/3.5 TS-E II.  I felt the TS-E was clearly better.  Again I was shocked, as the lensrentals.com guys said this lens bested the TS-E... perhaps only on paper.  The next comparison wasn't exactly fair or balanced (lol) but I did it anyway..  I took a few quick shots of my wife (head and shoulders) with the 85mm f/1.2 II (@f/1.2) and compared to similar (yeah, I know.. it's pineapples vs. peaches) shots @70mm f/2.8 with the zoom.  The in-focus areas produced by the 85 seemed sharper to me.  Yes, it's a prime vs a zoom,  yes it's 85mm.. yes it's f/1.2 vs f/2.8, but I was still expecting better from this new pricey beast.  Lastly, I snapped on the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, which I consider to be the best zoom lens I've ever owned.  @70mm, f/2.8 (IS on or off) the 70-200 is again better than the 24-70II (@70mm f/2.8 ).  I'm going to shoot with this sucker for a few days straight to see if I can get better results, but so far I consider this lens somewhat of a letdown.
In closing: I believe that most of the "bad copy" scuttlebutt I hear about certain lenses is nonsense (or at least the differences in resolution copy-to-copy are next to undetectable by the human eye), so if I find this lens to be a dud I'm not sure I'd exchange it for another...  We'll see..

Well, I also have the Canon 24mm TS-E II, 85L II, 70-200 II, along with 35L, etc, which is why I have not and will not buy the 24-70 II.  I had the Canon 28-70 as well as 24-70 MkI, and the lenses above were simply much better, and $2299 (before rebate) is simply not worth it for me for the 24-70 II. 

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 12-24 f/2.8L [CR1]
« on: February 28, 2013, 02:15:36 AM »
Personally, it would be much more useful for me if Canon came up with 16-35 f/2.8 MkIII with sharpness in line with 24-70 II and 70-200 f2.8 II, as well as a real good 35 mm end..

Lenses / Canon Cine vs. L lens video. Hilarious
« on: February 24, 2013, 01:16:15 PM »
Some of the funniest yet informative comparisons  ;D


Lenses / Re: Photozone has released their review of the Sigma 35 1.4...
« on: February 21, 2013, 03:28:11 PM »
Amazing lens IQ with the Sigma 35, that is for sure. Miles better than the Canon L.

However, I tried (2) copies and both had focusing issues in artificial light that my 35L's have not. It would front focus significantly when used in some indoor lighting (not all). I was constantly having to switch from 0 MA outdoors to +9 indoors (sometimes) and other times 0MA was fine. Drove me a bit insane.

IME, this sort of thing is the reason when one buys Sigma lens, it MUST be from a place with good return policy.  I learned this lesson the hard way myself.. :'(

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 43