March 06, 2015, 01:01:25 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 - KitsVancouver

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
1
Canon General / Re: 5Ds R Moire and Bird Feathers
« on: March 04, 2015, 01:16:32 AM »
I will bite.  It's a great photo, but from a pure sharpness perspective, it's just OK. 

2
Lenses / Re: Gear for upcoming trip to Italy and Greece
« on: February 25, 2015, 02:26:29 PM »
Checking camera bag on/off the ship is no big deal, they just X-ray it. Getting on shore depends on the port. some does nothing, some x-ray the whole bag. So far I have never been asked to open the bag under any condition. One poster mentioned taking pictures before and after sun set on the Greek Islands. You have a slim to none chance. Usually ships docks after the sun rise and sails before 6 pm.

It's mostly no big deal, but it can be.  Especially if you're with kids and people behind you are impatient.  At the very least, it adds a bit of stress because you are going through security checks.  Then again, I'm fairly bothered by that sort of stuff, but others may not be.
Ship will also check the following: lady's handbag (no matter how small they are, point and shoot cameras case, back packs, shopping bag etc. If you are being brother by that, may be you should not go on a cruise.

LOL.  Maybe you're right.  Maybe I am a shady looking character, but they seemed to go through my bag the most.  My wife didn't bring a purse once she realized she could put all her stuff into my camera bag. 

Depending on the port, having a big camera bag is definitely more hassle.  I don't know how anyone could argue it's not.  Now whether it's a lot, is purely a subjective thing. 

3
Lenses / Re: Gear for upcoming trip to Italy and Greece
« on: February 25, 2015, 12:34:06 PM »
I have one Canadian-Greek in-law and one Canadian-Greek friend.  Both are (in my opinion) passionate about their countries, so much that I would say they are not objective.  I'm only commenting on my opinion of the two people I know.  My relative only takes his family to Greece and no where else in the world. 

There is a crime report that is issued by (what I believe to be fairly accurate) a Committee on different travel destinations.  Opinions aside, Greece continues to be listed as an area of concern for safety.  Like it or not, I think it's hard to argue that crime and safety are an issue.  Just because something has never happened to an individual, it doesn't mean it's not an issue.  It is the exact same argument as, "I won't buy house insurance because my house has never caught on fire." 

https://www.osac.gov/pages/ContentReportDetails.aspx?cid=13731
"Rates of street crimes, such as pick pocketing, purse snatchings, and other crimes of opportunity, continue to be high."
"They tend to target newly-arrived tourists who are not familiar with their surroundings and presumably are traveling with larger amounts of cash."
And to my comment about areas of concern:
"Areas to be Avoided and Best Security Practices
 Generally Athens is a safe city, but travelers should avoid the Omonia and Syntagma areas during protests. Avoid Exarchia Square and its immediate vicinity at all times. "

Since this is a photography-related forum, I think it is terrible advice to tell others that one doesn't have to be more careful in some countries than others.  It's reality that some countries are safer than others just as some areas of the same country can be safer than other areas.  The data suggests that you should at the very least, be cautious and mindful with your expensive camera gear. 

Poverty is relative to one's perspective.  I'm not American, but I can see how one might see Greece as "poor" when you compare GDP.  Greece has half the GDP of the USA and is actually lower than countries like Lithuania and Slovakia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html
GDP per capita is actually DECLINING:
$23,600 (2013 est.)
$24,600 (2012 est.)
$26,200 (2011 est.)

Just because you don't see or believe something, it doesn't make it untrue. 

4
Lenses / Re: Gear for upcoming trip to Italy and Greece
« on: February 23, 2015, 04:09:59 PM »
Checking camera bag on/off the ship is no big deal, they just X-ray it. Getting on shore depends on the port. some does nothing, some x-ray the whole bag. So far I have never been asked to open the bag under any condition. One poster mentioned taking pictures before and after sun set on the Greek Islands. You have a slim to none chance. Usually ships docks after the sun rise and sails before 6 pm.

It's mostly no big deal, but it can be.  Especially if you're with kids and people behind you are impatient.  At the very least, it adds a bit of stress because you are going through security checks.  Then again, I'm fairly bothered by that sort of stuff, but others may not be.   

5
Lenses / Re: Gear for upcoming trip to Italy and Greece
« on: February 23, 2015, 03:51:27 PM »
Our family goes to Italy once a year and I seem to bring more and more gear on each trip.  We have a vacation home there so I have place to leave the gear that I won't use much when we go out. 

On my first trip, I only used a 24-105 and found it adequate for most shots.  I would have loved an UW lens though. 

Nowadays, I will bring all the below gear in a backpack on the plane and then bring a small Billingham bag for smaller excursions. 

Full load-out
24-105
16-35 2.8 II
70-200 2.8 II
17 TS
85 1.2 II

At our home, I find the 24-105 is the most useful.  You've said you don't like the images, but I've been happy with mine.  Then again, I'm taking a lot of photos of my kids so I'm more trying to capture memories. 

When I go out, I find I can still make do with the 24-105 85% of the time and often use the 17 TS when I know I will go out without my family to take architectural photos. 

If this is your first visit to Italy and Greece, you will likely take a lot of photos.  In this case, I'd still suggest the 24-105.  If you are dead against it, then I really think you need something for the 50mm to 100mm range.  I don't have the other lenses you mentioned, but I know that 85 1.2 and the 17 TS are really heavy lenses so I have to really think about every lens I add to my bag. 

If you have been there many times and you are like me, you will find yourself taking fewer and fewer photos because
1) You've already taken the photo before
2) You will realize that you can't take the photo as well as a postcard because there are too many people around and you don't have a tripod, etc. 
3) You will want to enjoy the trip more and get out from behind the lens

I just did a cruise in the Caribbean 4 months ago and the one thing I found really annoying was having my camera bag checked off the ship, at the port, and then again at the port and coming back on the ship.  I started to carry as little as possible.  I don't know what size room you have on your cruise, but if you don't have a suite, then your space is going to very limited. 

6
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS-1D X Replacement in 2016 [CR1]
« on: February 14, 2015, 01:52:36 AM »

Glad Canon waits until something big can be introduce and then makes sure it is solid.  I think that they learned a lesson from the problems (real or imaginary) with AF on the 1D M3.

The 1D MkIII was a massive upgrade over the 1D MkIIn in many areas, so I don't see how your reference to it would impact the thinking on a 1DX MkII release.

I believe, if my aged memory serves me correctly, that the 1D M3 had AF problems.  canon had egg on their face after that body and since then I have noticed that they have been more cautious about introducing new products.

Yes, but you are conflating quality control issues (1D MkIII) with lack of technological advancement issues (1DX MkII) the two are not related and so I didn't understand why you linked them..

QC and technological advancement are totally related.  Technological advancement can't occur without QC.  No successful product can make it to market without QC.  If you skimp on QC, you can get technological advancements to market faster.  I don't understand why you don't think they are linked. 

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Bingo! New Canon 5Ds has 50.6 MP new rumored specs
« on: February 06, 2015, 01:54:33 PM »
Canon just saved me alot of money :P.

Canon keeps being Canon, evolving their legacy dslr line step by step, avoiding big decisions or risks if the can help it (that's why they do a 5ds and 5ds-r, even though Nikon decided to only do one d810 w/o low pass filter).

Canon are very good at the numbers game and keep shuffling around their lineup, try to limit r&d costs and re-assemble new gear from old designs. If you're not ok with switch to Sonikon or - as you indicate - simply skip a couple of generations.

I don't think this will ever change unless they get in serious trouble with their current policy, and as the 5ds will find a lot of customers the end isn't nigh.

If I understand your post correctly, I fully agree.  I had the 5D1 and hoped for better AF and more resolution.  When the 5D2, came out, I got more resolution but the same crappy AF system.  They could have easily put in better AF as they were doing it in lower end models, but they INTENTIONALLY held back the features.  Then the 5D3 comes out and AF improves, but not resolution.  Now with the 5DS, they improve resolution, but keep everything else (the stuff that matters to me) the same.  It's probably good product marketing for Canon, but they sure don't lead the market with innovation.  That said, I would probably do the same if I was in their shoes, but it still pisses me off. 

For my preferences, it seems like they are releasing improvements a tiny bit a time and holding back improvements or even regressing if they can get away with it.  They make cameras JUST good enough.  I really hope this is not just a larger 7D2 sensor. 

8
Lenses / Re: 11-24 is here, with images of it compared to Nikon 14-24
« on: February 06, 2015, 03:39:49 AM »
Booo...they just took the video down.  Right in the middle of my viewing! 

9
Lenses / Re: Is 2015 the real Year of the Lens?
« on: February 05, 2015, 03:47:20 PM »
Canon has already delivered a great 16-35 f/4, a spunky new 24STM and a great 100-400 update. 2014 was great.

2015 is off to a good start with the 11-24/4. I'm itching to see how it performs.

In terms of what I'd like to see updated next... well, the prime suspects have to be the 50/1.4 along with the 35/1.4.

The 16-35 f/4 and new 100-400 were exciting updates for some, but they are in ways, compromises (either price, size, etc.) and can even be considered "entry-level" L lenses.  16-35 was already available (albeit not with IS) and the there are many technically better options for the 100-400 (all the big whites). 

The new 11-24 is exciting because it offers a new focal range (rectilinear) that hasn't been offered before.  I'm personally hoping for new lenses that are the "best-in-class" at a respective focal range.  For me, that is regardless of price, weight, size.  The one lens I've been wanting is a new fast 50mm L prime. 

10
I am pretty sure I will get either the 5DS or the 5DSR, but I don't know enough about which one to get and can't find that much information online about the low-pass filter.  I've read a few places that with enough resolution, the low-pass filter is less useful.   I'm still leaning towards the 5DS though because I read one post that showed the color issues without a low-pass filter.  So, if you are going to buy one of the new camera bodies for sure, which one are you leaning towards? 

11
Lenses / Re: Can the 11-24 replace the 17 mm T/S as far as......
« on: February 04, 2015, 08:38:42 PM »
I can't answer the tilt function, but I haven't used my 17mm TS much because:
  • The font element scares me a bit so I don't use it around people too much.
  • I tried to learn the TS features, but every time I learn a bit, I forget by the time I use the lens again. 
  • The lack of AF


.... the shift function is concerned?

I am guessing "yes" as the image circle has to be much bigger at 11 mm and may be bigger than the 17 mm T/S even at 12 mm.

I use my T/S only to shoot tall structures ( to be honest I have never been able to use the tilt function to my advantage, mainly because of lack of knowledge/expertise). I am thinking that using an 11-24 might be a better idea as metering/ AF capability will be advantageous.

Can someone throw more light on it ?

Thanks

Dholai

12
Lenses / Re: Who is going to buy the 11-24 f/4L?
« on: February 04, 2015, 04:05:50 PM »
Since we have one for the 5Ds bodies, why not one have one for the lens.

I'm planning to stay up tomorrow night just so I can be one of the first to preorder this badboy.  I can see myself making good money with one of my clients who always loved my Sigma 12-24 II work.

Anyone else plan to buy one?

If the lens is at least as sharp as my 17mm TS and AF at least as well as my 16-35mm 2.8 II, then I will get it, but I won't be in a rush as it will likely get as much use as my 17mm TS lens does.  I will wait for the first discount opportunity as well since I don't need it right away (I'm not a pro). 

I'm a total gearhead so please don't take this as a "the photographer is more important than the camera" argument, but why do you feel the need for this lens if you already have the Sigma?  Do you feel it will help you get more business? 

13
Lenses / Re: EF 11-24 f/4L USM Specifications
« on: February 03, 2015, 10:55:10 PM »
Thanks.  I only have a super-tele with a drop-in filter and have never seen a lens with the filter mechanism that you described. 

The updated specs say there is a rear drop in filter, but I don't see anything in the image.  Does that make sense to anyone?
If it's like the 14mm it's just behind the rear lens, a metal frame accepting gelatin filters. When mounted, it's inside the camera - and you need to remove the lens to remove/change the filter. Not the most practical solution. It's not like some drop-in filter holders on tele lenses.

IIRC some old FD UWA or fish-eye lenses had embedded filters which could be selected via a lens ring - IIRC Sky, some classic B/W filters, and maybe an ND (but not PL). I didn't see it used anymore - too expensive, not really useful, or it didn't work properly? Never had then any of those lenses...

14
Lenses / Re: EF 11-24 f/4L USM Specifications
« on: February 03, 2015, 01:18:28 PM »
The updated specs say there is a rear drop in filter, but I don't see anything in the image.  Does that make sense to anyone? 

15
I remember seeing a post for the 24-105 for $599 a few days ago, but thought that might have been a new one.  Does anyone remember if the previous post was for a new or used lens? 

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8