Messages

376

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II

« on: February 06, 2012, 10:56:36 PM »

If I wanted to trade my good and sharp copy of the 24-105 for a good and sharp copy of the current 24-70 would I be better of to do this now or will the market be swamped once the upgrade (might) be released bringing used prices down? Assuming of course the "upgrade" doesn't turn out to be a complete dud which is always possible.

377

Lenses / Re: Why Dont more lenses have IS?

« on: February 06, 2012, 10:48:29 PM »

I'm newish to high end photography, but one thing has struck me. there dont appear to be a lot of EF lenses with IS.. is there a reason for this? is it not as required on short focal lengths?

I personally hope it stays like that. I see very little value in IS except maybe for a few specialty applications or very long focal lengths. It adds cost, weight and is another thing that will break or get the lens out of whack at some point. It does work to some degree. I have it on my 24-105 but again there isn't much that I would use it for and it's actually one of the reasons I'm still thinking about trading it for the original 24-70 while it's still around.

378

Canon General / Re: Battery for 5dmk2

« on: February 06, 2012, 04:21:02 PM »

I agree with what others have said. And not only would I only buy the original batteries but I make sure I buy them from a reputable and authorized Canon dealer. I recently saw an article somewhere with pictures of counterfeit Canon accessories. It was pretty much impossible to tell them apart up to the hologram on the packaging. There is still no grantee that this kind of stuff would somehow enter the supply chain or that even a genuine battery goes bad. But at least then you should be covered to some degree. Not really sure if saving 50 bucks is worth the risk.

379

Canon General / Re: Is it worth *really* studying photography?

« on: February 06, 2012, 12:28:36 PM »

Hard to say. I don't think there are any right or wrong answers with this -  and from my personal experience with education I could easily argue both ways.

It all depends on personal learning styles and what the ultimate expectations are. First: I'm a firm believer that it is possible to learn pretty much anything on your own that is largely a conceptional thing - and doesn't cost lives when trying things out. So, yes, there is a certain benefit in learning brain surgery with a sound foundation out of medical school and working side by side with an expert (which is what makes very high level education so expensive). Given the wasted time that I experienced during my primary education and the problems in various kinds of school systems that my wife - a former teacher - came to realize we are actually home schooling our children. I was skeptical at first but the results speak for themselves and that's what counts. People can learn pretty quickly when they are interested in something and concepts tie in to a larger context.

So, I think learning the basics of photography is no rocket science. Add creativity and a natural sense of business to it and some people are good to go.

BUT: there are also benefits to certain types of formal education. My children take classes, for instance music classes, sports activities and there will be more to come. Often this is a practical approach of what materials are available or specialized knowledge - or as simple a fact as needing a team for team sports. Same with my own higher education. My business school degree cost me a pretty penny. And I learned a lot in a structured way that fit my schedule at the time. It's much more convenient to sit in an accounting class three nights a week then to force yourself through this rather horrific subject matter. I have no issue reading geekish economics books in my free time but certain things I just wouldn't have done without the pressure of expensive classes, tests, etc.

The other issue is that certain degrees can open doors and put you in a different position for salary negotiations. And not to forget the networking piece of such education.

For photography schools I could see that the latter plays a role and that you get to use equipment that otherwise most of us don't get to try out easily. Is it worth a lot of money? Depends. Probably not since photography isn't really a well paying profession to begin with on average. So there is probably more benefit in applying a well rounded education to finding a niche market and investing yourself in special interests. Nothing wrong with taking additional classes though - and I would recommend including business, marketing and some legal and tech stuff to your curriculum.

380

Canon General / Papers, forms and contracts - the legal stuff

« on: February 02, 2012, 10:38:34 AM »

Hope this is the right place. I'm looking for a quick and easy fix - I know, usually not a good starting point but I don't have the time right now for extensive research on this rather complex issue so I was hoping somebody has dealt with this before.

I just did a few shots for a political campaign (U.S.) and I'm donating the work and the use of the shots to the campaign. Their manager is working on the paperwork that comes with that as far as the trappings of campaign finance stuff is concerned.

While I'm at it I want them to sign the most basic form/template that allows them indefinite use for the candidate and the campaign but not necessarily beyond and I want to make sure that the rights to the pictures remain with me. I'm probably not finding the right words right now but I hope you know where I'm getting at. I want to keep this as simple and short as possible not create unnecessary work for anyone or pay for legal fees or anything like that. Any links to templates for that purpose would be fabulous.

Thanks 

381

Software & Accessories / Re: Mac Book Pro or Asus N55SF or something else for photo editing?

« on: February 01, 2012, 11:31:40 AM »

If I had to get a new laptop anytime soon I'd go again for a Lenovo Thinkpad. Not only because I like the layout and the keyboards best (especially for non-photo applications if you do a lot of writing) but because I always liked the high resolution screens available. Not sure if the latest models live up to that but worth checking. I haven't really found anything else that works for me that way since (on a laptop) I prefer smaller screens with high resolution (and I'm glad that mine is still in the 4:3 format but that's a thing of the past). Macs don't really offer that last time I checked. I f things were more compatible and if CS5 worked across platforms I might consider an Apple desktop but the Macbook pros I find just too big and don't like the screens.

382

Lenses / Re: If you could buy one ...

« on: February 01, 2012, 09:51:06 AM »

If you could buy only one, which would you choose?

24-70mm f/2.8 L
35mm f/1.4 L
50mm f/1.2 L

Presumed use -- wide variety, including portrait, landscape, interior, and even a little basketball (close-to-basket lens)

Wondering: Is it dumb to buy 24-70 now with rumors of new-gen version out soon?

Especially interested in feeback from anyone who owns or has used all three.

Want to make a buying decision before rebates expire Feb. 4.

Many thanks in advance.

If I could pick really only one then I'd go for the 50L - if alternatives are allowed I might opt for the Zeiss 50 1.4 instead.

383

Canon General / Re: Headed to Paris with Camera Gear

« on: January 31, 2012, 09:13:29 AM »

I never had any problems in Paris but haven't been in a while.

The other question is how and what to leave at the hotel. That can be a bit tricky.

How are you getting to Paris? I couldn't see your location. If you are flying in from the States there is also the issue of bringing gear as carry-on luggage or checking it. I'm still looking into this myself at the moment since I'm flying to Germany in July. I bought a Pelican carry-on case with that in mind but the weight limitations on especially European carriers are getting ever more tight. Some now only allow 8kg of carry on luggage - which is a problem if the empty case is 6kg alone.

The other thing that I like about the case is that you can lock it and/or tie it to something. That may come in handy at the hotel also.

384

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DII joystick/multicontroller

« on: January 30, 2012, 04:10:08 PM »

Hm, interesting. I only use the main dial to select focus points.

385

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Flip out displays -- why the resentment?

« on: January 30, 2012, 03:40:26 PM »

Simplicity is important.  For me personally, an articulated screen is going the wrong direction and I'm not going to buy a dSLR with one. 

So you would prefer no LCD?  It would be simpler...   

Perhaps even that. Any time I'm now using my film camera I find myself staring at the back of the body. Kind of makes you realize how much of a habit this has become - and how often this is really just a major distraction. The time "reviewing" the shot and histograms after the shot might be better spend thinking before the shot. It's very tempting to just snap away because of the instant result. Not to speak of the insane number of actuations that digital cameras allow for without penalty (other than early demise of the camera and the stacks of hard drives accumulating).

386

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Flip out displays -- why the resentment?

« on: January 30, 2012, 12:44:41 PM »

@Eye-Broccoli, @dr croubie, @Harley, @Narcolepsy, @Canon-F-1, @7enderbender:
Perhaps some traditionalists don't realize that the Vari-angle screen can remain flush against the body without ever even once being swung out.  Canon has recessed it into the camera's back, surrounded by a slightly raised, rounded frame.  There's no way I can think of, that it can be accidentally dislodged from this position, even rolling round loose in a sack: only a somewhat forceful action of fingertip/nail can pry it open.  To this extent it doesn't resemble the clam-shell design of many small camcorders.  In appearance it's very little different from Canon's fixed-screen models.  It is more vulnerable once swung out, obviously and of course.  One must take care.  The hinge seems to be very solid.

@WFT: Those vari-shooters are only blocking your view because the fixed-screeners in front of them don't dare stop and sit down, shooting blind as they are.

Admittedly, this is a good argument. But forgive me, as a traditionalist (which I am on a lot of things, not all) I don't really want to put up with a feature just because it can be done and because it may be useful to a minority. Is a fixed screen the be-all-end-all? No, of course not. But it's another thing that takes away from the experience of owning a rock-solid camera which to me is part of the fun and justification of shelling out thousands of dollars for camera gear (or similar items). Neither makes me a better photographer (cyclist, guitar player, golfer, skier, you name it...). But to me there is something to be said about solid workman ship that makes the experience of going out and shooting half-way decent photographs more enjoyable. A BMW, Audi or Lexus doesn't make me a better driver or even gets me any faster to work than a Corolla (or the Commuter Rail...) - but hell, I do like stick shifts and good acceleration when I drive.

But even in that somewhat lame comparison I could now (the traditionalist that I am) complain that the Germans and Japanese in the last few decades started to put way too much useless stuff into their vehicles. So even with money to burn I'd probably still take the train and rental cars for the necessary stuff and otherwise have a nice classic sports car in the garage.

So in as much as I "get" the fully utilitarian approach with turning everything into the equivalent of a Swiss Army knife (I do like Swiss Army knives though) I'm missing the emotional component. That's why people like me whine when they realize that their $1000+ new lens is made from plastic and is build in way that makes it unlikely that my kids will enjoy them later on like I still use some of my dad's old lenses. And it's a bit like the difference between a nice mechanical watch and a Chinese quartz movement. The latter will be more precise.

Maybe I'm interpreting too much into a silly old screen here but it's another one of those obvious changes that significantly change the experience independent of results.

387

EOS Bodies - For Stills / 5DII joystick/multicontroller

« on: January 30, 2012, 11:16:58 AM »

So now that we may have seen the first pictures of a new Canon body with a joystick integrated into the battery grip I was wondering what I may be missing. Come to think of it I realized that I never use the thing on my 5DII. How are you guys using it? What other functions would we expect from it that makes it important enough to add a second one to the vertical layout?

388

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Flip out displays -- why the resentment?

« on: January 30, 2012, 07:15:25 AM »

It would be another step into a direction that I personally don't like. More plastic, more moving parts, more "features" that have nothing to do with photography. It would be another reminder that what I really want is a digital version of the F-1. And that I can't afford Leica gear. I don't do video (at least not with my DSLR) and I don't use live-view. I'd rather have no screen at all instead of a swivel screen.

389

Lenses / Re: All primes... But what zoom?

« on: January 29, 2012, 08:50:33 PM »

Hello CR!

I am a prime sort'a guy. I currently own the 35mm f/1.4 L, 50mm f/1.2 L and the 135mm f/2 L.
I am shooting with a Canon 5D mk ll.
I have always loved my primes, but am considering a good walk-around lens.
Any opinions out there on what to invest in? My main reason is for the versatility and to NOT have to carry my three primes all day.
Thanks in advance!

Just playing devil's advocate here: do you really need one? The obvious choices are of course the 24-70 and the 24-105. Both are great and it's hard to say which is "better" since it depends on application and preference. BUT as a "prime sort'a guy" are your really going to take either of them?

I have a 50, 135, 200 and then the 24-105 - because as a "kit" you couldn't beat the value of it, otherwise I may have opted for the 24-70 and may still trade it one day. The 24-105 is way better then I expected. It's very sharp and the results at all focal lengths are really really good. But I do like my fast primes and the 24-105 is anything but not fast with its f/4 limitation. The IS works but I personally consider it a gimick and see no value in it. So the 24-70 would probably be more the zoom for me or so I thought for a while.

What I find though now is that I go for the 135 and 50 more often and leave the zoom behind unless I expect needing the wide angle.  Well, and if I already had a wide and fast prime like you...

So in short: if you really feel you need a zoom either is fine. If you shoot a lot wide open the 24-70 maybe a better choice. If you really want the wide range the 24-105 is better, especially since the long end delivers pretty decent results as far as background blur goes - more or less a wash compared to f/2.8 at 70mm.

390

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D mkII upgrade with a mkIII or 1Dx

« on: January 28, 2012, 05:59:20 PM »

If the rumors turn out to be true I can see that a lot of people may go for the 5DIII - which might be a great opportunity to pick up a second 5DII body. I'm personally happy with it as is.