July 29, 2014, 01:55:27 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 - Northstar

Pages: 1 ... 86 87 [88] 89 90 ... 93
EOS Bodies / Re: Mark III price dropping
« on: July 19, 2012, 06:07:24 AM »
Jrista... Huh?  ???

This isn't about anybody else beside my personal decision and opinion on buying a camera off of evil bay. I put 500$ extra in my pocket that I will use for other stuff I'll need. If you'd like to forfeit your extra dough over to a retail price camera, that's your decision.

If the seller on evil bay wasn't going to make money on evil bay, They wouldn't put it on evil bay. If the seller is willing to take a loss on evil bay, that's the seller choice.

Its quite simple economics, and I like that. ::)

Well, my comments were more about what seemed like more complaining and demonizing of Canon for charging a beastly extra $500. I was just pointing out (perhaps in an overly wordy manner) that if you want to demonize someone, demonize ebay...they more than deserve it. They probably made $320 in final sale fees off the poor sap who sold a 5D III for $3099, not including PayPal fees and whatever the initial listing fee was. Add all that up, and they walked away with...oh, maybe $2600? Knock off the wholesale cost, and thats a rinky dinky small profit margin... :(

Good for you for saving $400 (certainly not dissing that!!), but whenever I hear about eBay these days it makes me want to punch something...repeatedly...preferably an ebay C-level douche...

Jrista  - not trying to get you in a "punching" mood but....as I'm reading the morning business news I see eBay reported earnings last night....

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) — EBay Inc. shares rose more than 5% in after-hours trading Wednesday after the company reported second-quarter earnings that more-than-doubled from a year ago and recorded strong gains from its marketplaces and PayPal payments divisions.

Warning to the eBay c-level...run and hide.

Just kidding around jrista...take care.

Portrait / Re: Artsy images (Semi NSFW)
« on: July 19, 2012, 05:50:33 AM »
I like these...especially the third pic with the water.  Nice work

EOS Bodies / Re: Mark III price dropping
« on: July 18, 2012, 08:25:55 PM »
I just ordered a MK3 body for 3,099 on evil bay. USA retail, non-grey market. 8)

Its really too bad your supporting evil bay by buying something they will get at least a 10% fee out of on the seller side, if not more when you factor in the PayPal fees as well. :\ (I really despise ebay these days...moneygrubbing greedmonsters...meh.)

Oh well, Too bad canon didn't turn out a product that I feel is worth the extra 500$ Retail. ::)

Well, at least Canon would put that extra $500 to GOOD use! More money to fund better R&D, so that the next sensor they release IS as good as an Exmor, maybe? ;P All eBay will do with it is hire more moneygrubbing greedmonsters to figure out how to stick it to their sellers to and even greater degree! Yay...funding ebay greed...fun....

You bet, Canon would put those 500 Bucks in their pocket! LoL! ;D

Look Canon should have just priced the 5d3 at 2999$ and everything would have been peachy. It would be an equal priced but faster camera to compete with the d800. When an extra 500$ get slammed on top of the other thing's I'll need to run the camera into my workflow, Its just bleh.

I probably would have just purchased the 5D3 at release if it was 2999$. No problemo.

Agree with you again RL....jrista-canon doesn't get the extra $500, the retailer is the entity that is taking the "hit" to their profit.  Canon sells cameras at a specific price to retailers, if the retailer doesn't price it at MSRP then the retailer earns less profit.  Canon still profits by the same amount whether you buy it at $3500 or $3000.

Also...I totally agree that Canon is overcharging on the 5d3 by $500....I believe the price will decline to $2999 by year end because the demand won't be there at $3500.

Lenses / Re: Canon 85 1.8 vs. Sigma 85 1.4
« on: July 17, 2012, 09:17:26 AM »
Regarding AF mode...you wrote that you primarily use Al focus.  There are many people that believe this is the worst AF mode to use, and that using it results in far too many oof shots.

I leave my 5d3 on al servo because I shoot a lot of moving subjects, and then I switch to one shot with stationary subjects. 

Site Information / Re: In Sympathy for CR Guy
« on: July 17, 2012, 08:38:32 AM »
I'm sorry for your loss.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: July 15, 2012, 03:39:31 PM »
American goldfinch sitting in a red twigged dogwood
70-200 ii w/ 2xiii at 400mm
iso 500

Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: July 15, 2012, 12:48:50 PM »
Dusty, about to go play in the snow.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: July 15, 2012, 11:43:55 AM »
Not my Doggy but my girlfriends brothers.  He has two, Bella and Sonny, newfoundlands, when they go on holiday or bella is in heat we get one or both of them for a couple of weeks.  Great fun, we both work full time so no life for doggies of our own, sadly.

Bella is about 4 months old here, and the size of a large spanial.  She's now 2 years and the size of a small family car, just about.

i literally LOL'd on this one....great image.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: July 15, 2012, 11:35:06 AM »
Lilac-Breasted Roller
Serengeti, Tanzania

this is the most beautiful bird here...imo.  such unique colors.  nice shot.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: July 13, 2012, 04:39:53 PM »
trumpeter swan....5d3 w/ 70-200 2.8ii w/ 2x extender iii

I do not think though that Nikon would surpass my:
17TS-E L, 24TS-E L II, 35 1.4 L(this is just ordered actually!), 135 f/2L, 300 f/4L (non-IS) 70-200 f/4L IS and 70-200 f/2.8L II

having used both, I'll comment on it:
17TS nikon version is coming per the leaks and patents, but for now canon has the edge, although I prefer the 14-24 anyday over the 17TS personaly but that's because I really don't find 17mm anywhere near wide enough for anything I shoot.

24TS-E nikon has one, only it is older and doesn't do independant Tilt/shift axis configurations, but optically it is just as good. After my switch, I don't miss the canon. what can I say.

351.4L nikon wins hands down. the canon is way old and way worse. I actually wouldn't use the canon because it was so bad compared to the 24L.

135 f/2. Both suck. no really. Nikon has one with defocus control which produces superb bokeh. Much nicer than the L canon, but the canon has faster AF and less CA, but both lack VR. In terms of which one I'd get, it would be the sony Zeiss 135 f/1.8 which wipes the floor with both both optically and spec wise. I wish I had that instead.

300 f/4 non IS (the nikon version is superb) Unless you neede IS, it's a tie.

70-200 f/4. Nikon lacks it for now so definitively a win for canon. Although I'd never use that lens on any system as I prefer shallow DOF.

70-200 f/2.8II. The nikon version nearly identical performance wise with the canon have a slight edge and better MFD. But unlike something like the 17TS, or the fisheye zoom, there just isn't all that much practical difference.

The only canon glass I would consider worth sticking for it is the 65mm macro, the DO line, and the 800mm prime...but Nikon just announced theirs so it is down to very very little. Compare that to a decade ago when it wasn't even close. And all the better for having two systems to choose from means cheaper and better gear for everybody. I'm glad canon has been in a slide for the last decade losing share to nikon/sony because otherwise we'd be shooting 5DmkI's with ancient canon gear.

Lenses I prefer on nikon:

14-24 f/2.8 (since canon lacks it, I compare it to the 14mm prime which gets spanked)
24 f/1.4
35 f/1.4
85 f/1.4 (better optically at 1.4 and beyond, cheaper lighter).
16-35 f/4 (it's no that but the canon 17-35 is way worse and lacks IS)

Lenses I found to not matter which one you have:
24-70 f/2.8
70-200 f/2.8
50 f/1.4 vs f/1.2
24 PCE vs TS
45 PCE vs TS

Lenses I used to prefer on canon, or would consider as being unique enough to the system to have no equivalent in nikon land.

fisheye zoom. It is a useless feature to have zoom on it but the nikon fisheye is very old.
65 macro (although with tubes that may be a different story but the canon is more convenient with its 5X magnification)
I'm not listing the 17TS because I honestly wouldn't care unless it was a 14mm TS.

The nikon 85mm 1.8G DOES NOT surpass the 100mm F/2 canon.

I don't know but thats a silly comparison. who cares really. Neither lens is really interesting. I could believe some would pick systems because of the 14-24, or 17TS. But for the 100 f/2. that's a joke.

Well, you'll always have better luck sticking old Nikkor glass on a Canon Body than on the newest Digital Nikon bodies.
When I switched I tried that. But I found modern nikon glass destroys the old nikkor glass without exception. So I don't know how what you say makes any sense. I guess if you didn't care about image quality that would be the case....I'll keep my newly aquired nano coated nikkors thanks.

You say it's for simpletons. Partially true. But it's more for people without s*** tons of money to waste switching brands every generations. 
switching brands is relatively painless these days if your gear is in good shape. 10 years ago it wasn't. this isn't wife swapping. Take it from somebody who did it.

for what i do.. Nikon D800 doesnt have ISO 25600 for video, or sRAW, mRAW... So, NO WAY
that's right. the nikon isn't for low resolution shooters or people that want to shoot in very dark conditions. there are better cameras suited for that such as the D4 or 1DX.

Digital quality wise maybe Canon is lagging a little behind if we are to believe the tests. I do not own Nikon to compare but I believe the tests. However I wonder. A few years ago professionals used Canon and Nikon gear to produce excellent results. The fact that newer and better models are made does not negate the work that has been done up to now. It is still good and professional.
I switched because the nikon glass is just as good for all my needs, and Nikon's high resolution offerings suite my goals better. I couldn't care less if it was nikon or canon or sony that I had to purchase. If I'm going to spend so much money, it will be the system that fits me the best. I'd encourage everybody to do the same instead of suffering from stockholm syndrome...canon or nikon version. These are just tools.

I lost all respect for this post when you mentioned "135mm F/2L Sucks".

RL...totally agree with you on this one.

psolberg...regarding the 135 - nearly EVERYONE thinks highly of this lens.  To say that it "sucks" is simply crazy.

i think i'll pour a little gas on this particular fire....quote from a famous review guy: (wink)

"The Canon 135mm f/2 L is extraordinarily good optically".  "Don't take my word for it, ask anyone else who owns this lens and he'll tell you it's one of Canon's best lenses of all time. Great lenses like this are why so many people shoot Canon cameras; Nikon simply has nothing that competes with this"

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: July 12, 2012, 09:24:55 PM »
First let me say that there are some fantastic images on this post...wow.

This photo has minimal processing and no editing other than crop.

I really liked the clarity and sharpness of the reflection.  The pond was so still that morning.

5d3 w/ 70-200 2.8ii
iso 125

Portrait / Re: Candid portraits
« on: July 11, 2012, 09:56:09 PM »
That's the first thing that came to my mind after I took the picture.

May I kindly ask what prompted you curiosity? It could help my Photo eye ball.


Hi...I guess I noticed the background images first...they're unique and "crazy".

Portrait / Re: Candid portraits
« on: July 10, 2012, 07:17:57 AM »


 I'm curious about this photo....could you expand on "sad"?

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk III vs D800/E, is the 5D3 better at anything?
« on: July 09, 2012, 11:38:26 PM »
Correct me if I'm wrong here. Look at DPreviews stop wedge here.


Without any additional ADL or any extra processing in camera and nothing on. The d800 gets the same DR as the 5D3? Its showing this, so does that mean all the nikon is doing is pulling more from the blacks and pulling more recovery by a software curve at the cost of noise? Its seems like fake DR to me.

If yes, This means that the nikon sensor is not doing anything better than the canon. Just adding a curve which I could do to the canon in post and get the same result right? This also confirms my suspicion that Bayer sensor have hit there peak already and new sensor design like the Fuji S5pro are needed to gain True DR.

If not, Is this test valid?

Just seems like a false 14-stop DR from nikon by this test.

This test is JPG.

Then either Nikon has a really crappy in camera JPG engine to lose a 2.7 stop advantage, or more likely DxOMark scores are not accurate for Canon cameras.

DxOMark uses their own RAW decoder. It is my belief that DxOMark's RAW decoder cannot fully decode Canon CR2 files, so DxOMark scores are not accurate for Canon cameras.

The other possibility is that DxOMark is just marketing shill for Nikon.

Speculation...I've speculated for some time now that dxo could (as a very small company) be influenced (if you know what i mean) to purposely set up their testing procedure to favor one company over another in exchange for.....

Both nikon and canon are large global corporations with significant resources...this "influencing" could easily be done...imo.   Again, I'm speculating here, but we've observed time and time again in the global corporate world and in politics all over the world - money influences decisions.   Example, in the news today in the US...mitt romney raises $100 million dollars for his presidential campaign...um, that was just for the month of july AND why do citizens and corps give him that kind of money, we know why right??  Also, a couple months ago walmart was accused of a large scale bribary campaign in Mexico....humm.

Just some stuff to think about....and again, im just speculating and providing raw opinion.   Thanks.

Pages: 1 ... 86 87 [88] 89 90 ... 93