March 06, 2015, 04:02:16 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 - Danielle

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Best Flash
« on: February 13, 2014, 07:11:04 PM »

I personally would rate Metz at the top, they could be worth a look too. Very good flashes. I almost brought the top one but got a 52 af-1 instead. Touch screen, works like a charm as optical slave from the 7D and better than the canon 430. Big bit cheaper than a 600rt or the metz 58 af-1. Touch screen too. I'd look at those before other third party flashes. 

How's the touchscreen of the 52? I own the 50 and would like to add the 52 because it can be used as a master (50 is slave only)

+1 for Metz.

If you need more synch possibilities, a Phottix Mitros might be an alternative.
Again, it all boils down to how you want to use the flash:
on/off camera, radio/light-of-sight/cable synch, ttl?

Zero complaints of the touchscreen on the 52, the flash is a gem.

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Best Flash
« on: February 12, 2014, 10:47:54 PM »
I personally would rate Metz at the top, they could be worth a look too. Very good flashes. I almost brought the top one but got a 52 af-1 instead. Touch screen, works like a charm as optical slave from the 7D and better than the canon 430. Big bit cheaper than a 600rt or the metz 58 af-1. Touch screen too. I'd look at those before other third party flashes. 

Food for thought I hope.

Lenses / Re: 24-70/2.8 Canon or Tamron: Which did you choose and why?
« on: February 01, 2014, 02:09:35 PM »
I chose the Tamron after testing one in the shop and going away for a few weeks for a think. That $1000 extra for the canon wasn't happening. My tamron did however show a VC issue, otherwise the lens is damn sharp. Tamron fixed it up and I've had a good sharp reliable copy since. So I can vouch for Tamron service too. I'm happy with it, I can't compare to the canon mkii as I never tested it (points to the cost I personally think is nuts for such a lens). I use Zeiss otherwise, this lens filled the gap with an autofocus lens and I'm NOT disappointed with my choice one bit.

I do like the rendering, I find it beautiful especially for portrait oriented work. Soft almost muted colour, yes maybe lower contrast than the L's I've used but I like it anyway. Each to their own.

Lenses / Re: Canon 24mm f2.8 IS Prime or Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC Zoom
« on: December 09, 2013, 12:09:23 AM »
I own the tamron 24-70 vc, all in all I can say it's extremely good value. Nice quite beautiful muted skin tones and for a zoom, very good sharpness. I own a zeiss 35mm which overlaps one focal length (obviously) but I think for anything portrait like, the tamron is damn good. I would have brought another zeiss prime, still will but not in those focal lengths. Another bonus is that the tamron is weather sealed. It's a very good value zoom. Go try one first in a store. Then have a think. I'm quite happy with it. Good build quality too. It's kinda big however.

EOS Bodies / Re: "Two New FF Bodies in 2014" - if 5DM4, would you jump in?
« on: November 30, 2013, 07:46:14 AM »
1. 5D MK III will NOT be out in 2014

+1000, it will not be out next year! Not a chance in hell. - just being serious here.

Oh and I side with neuro above. In my opinion, and probably many others, the 5d3 is a light year ahead of the 5d2 and I don't mean the AF system. It's severely better at everything.

Lenses / Re: 16-35 2.8L II - Is it really THAT bad ?
« on: November 17, 2013, 08:59:44 PM »
Having used both, the 17-35L has some of the most horrendous flare I've seen for a while, the 16-35 mark ii is a long shot better. The 16-35 mark ii is a good lens, maybe no wow factor but a very decent choice. Very usable set of focal lengths, hence why it's popular.

I can also vouch for its durability. Having dropped it and my camera accidentally on concrete. Both are fine. Which is a good thing.

Lenses / Re: Same ole, same ole' Filters vs no filters...
« on: November 10, 2013, 08:06:43 AM »
I have always left high quality filters on my glass. Filters & energy absorbing hoods have done more than their designed purpose for me over the years. Together they have saved me plenty of money absorbing the bumps and biffs that are all part of a day's work. A filter makes me feel OK about cleaning down a lens with my shirt when under pressure. They eventually pick up a myriad of barely visible scratches and are routinely changed every few years. Better the filter than the front element!

I don't want to feel like I'm walking on eggshells every time I pull a camera out of the bag. The path to unhindered creativity is not always easy on the gear, so in my view, a pragmatic approach to the use of filter and hood is an everyday must.


+1 on that, possibly +1000.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Appeal of Nikon Df
« on: November 07, 2013, 02:17:25 AM »
#1 here too.

However, canon can't really make one. That look out dates eos cameras, it's not happening. They won't make an ae-1 digital or any fd digitals. Very unlikely.

Well, I confess to being one of the idiots, paying obscene amounts of money for a manual focus lens. I just ordered one and I am really looking forward to get my hands on it  ;D

For those of you who don't want it and don't understand how anyone else would want it, go and do something else than irritate yourselves on this thread. And for the record, I do use AF on most of my other lenses ...

Holy cow, grats! Can't wait to see some images produced from it..
I just sold my 50L and bought a Zeiss 50 f2 Makro and LOVE LOVE LOVE it to bits. I've never used manual focus prior, but after seeing the images from my Zeiss, I couldn't care less about no auto focus, plus it allows me to slow down a tad and channel my creativity rather than run and gun photos. And if I were shooting photos of fast moving subjects, such as kids, I'd just use my 24-70 ii or 70-200 is ii as I'd need more DOF anyway.

I'm another who adores zeiss glass. No I wouldn't want autofocus on it either. Manual focus isn't that hard to me at all, I shoot journalism and all manner of things on my 2/35 distagon. Manual focus has never gotten in my way and the results speak for themselves which it would on this new Otis lens, definitely. I can completely understand those who wouldn't like the manual focus idea, but trust me, there's a market for them.

Lenses / Re: Best 35mm wide open????
« on: September 26, 2013, 01:42:53 AM »
I shoot my zeiss distagon 2/35 wide open all the time, one great lens and certainly not lacking. Cheaper than the f1.4 version by about $1000. And I find f2 enough considering how much more I'd pay. The 2 zeiss distagon 35mm options are different though. One is not simply faster than the other, they are different.

Lenses / Re: What lenses would you bring for this travel-trip?
« on: August 13, 2013, 10:57:26 PM »
I'd suggest taking your pick of only 2 lenses and make the most of having the trip with the choices you have.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon is going to add mid format
« on: August 12, 2013, 03:46:15 PM »
Keep in mind that this may be a purely financial move on Canon's part.  It's possible (probable, even) that if they buy an established medium format brand, they won't rebrand the line as Canon, but rather keep the current brand intact, but streamline marketing and distribution channels to save costs and increase profit.

Agreed. That thought crossed my mind after I posted too.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon is going to add mid format
« on: August 12, 2013, 09:55:33 AM »
I find this news interesting. Could be great news depending where it leads.

However if its hasselblad, that may not be so easy. Hasselblad is in partnership with Carl Zeiss. I'm willing to suggest without them, it will be a partnership with death. Schneider Kreuznach will no doubt not touch them, this leaves what logical option? I can think of one, but it's unlikely.

Medium format being possibly affordable? No, I wouldn't be betting that regardless.

I could be wrong, but this sounds like a big hypothetical rumour. That's it.

Admiration for a number of photographers, doesn't mean to me influence though.

Steve mcurry is an admiration, but so is miss aniela to a degree too, I like some of her work.

Influence by the likes of josef koudelka, partially people like Michael David Adams and other less known.

Software & Accessories / Re: UV filter advice
« on: July 14, 2013, 08:23:21 PM »
B&W make really good ones. The higher up range in Hoya are also good.

What you get with more cost is the coatings. B&W for instance are easier to clean by miles than say marumi filters. Also the coatings will decrease the chance of lens flares.

That's my suggestion anyway, from experience. I wouldn't cheap out on them too much either.

On the Zeiss T* ones, only buy them if your using zeiss glass. The filters are made specifically because the metal hoods are so tight, a b&w for instance will have to be put on after placing the hood! - I know that, I own a zeiss lens.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10