January 29, 2015, 05:50:21 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 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10
Lenses / Re: 24-70 F/4L IS - Why I will Buy/Not Buy this lens.
« on: November 17, 2012, 08:08:27 AM »
I said other.

I don't understand why everyone seems to go 'ooooohhhh' about that focal range. Isn't it boring? Useful to some, undeniably but really? Seriously???

F4 is too slow to me and that focal range I personally am better off with a couple of primes. And the f2.8 version I think is ridiculous priced, the mark ii I mean. I haven't tried it but in that range I think tamron cornered the realistic end with price and aperture size.

How much experience do you have? Why I ask (you don't have to physically answer) is that if you know you are going to print big, I'd suggest the D800. By the way I mean big.

If you want maybe slightly cleaner high iso the canon and forget the 24-70 (my opinion) and buy a fast prime for your low light. For instance the 35L. Unless of course your dead set on the zoom. The canon will get you a pretty state of the art autofocus system too.

If your experienced I don't think you'll go wrong with either actually.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Carl Zeiss ZE 35 f/2
« on: November 13, 2012, 03:50:32 PM »
Found this thread again.

I did end up purchasing the distagon 2/35, I adore it. I'm so glad I didn't get swayed in the direction of the 35L. Personally speaking here, the optics are stellar. Yes I've used L glass before, this to my work and my way of shooting is superb. The subtle aesthetic difference between this and the best canons are different and I personally made the best choice for myself. Good price too considering I didn't buy a grey.

Now I'm in a pickle, the 2/100 macro is definitely expensive and I'm hooked. Lol. Nobody has to tell me the macro is superb. ;)

Pricewatch Deals / Re: $749 24-105mm f/4L IS USM on eBay (BigValueInc)
« on: November 08, 2012, 10:01:16 AM »
I'd worry about where I'm buying gear online. There's been cases of copy's of decent lenses miraculously without serial numbers. Meaning they aren't real!

If the price is too good to be true, ask questions.

I hope nobody has a horror story.

Lenses / Re: 16-35 ii on crop
« on: November 08, 2012, 09:09:04 AM »
I've used it extensively on my 7D. It's a great lens and damn useful, yes. A hard working lens you don't have to baby.

However my 2 lenses consisting of a 10-22 and a zeiss 2/35 distagon more useful. But there's nothing wrong with using the 16-35 ii on crop. That lens went back to my father to his 5D3, for good reason.

I haven't used a 24-70 on my 7D so I can't comment directly. But if that range would suit you I don't see why not. Personally I'd be testing a tamron first though.

Lighting / Re: Elinchrom Ranger Quadra
« on: November 07, 2012, 07:54:44 AM »
The reason I'd be buying a quadra set (I will) is size, weight and portability while still being a decent studio light set up.

You don't compare studio lights, even these to speedlights. 400ws is what... At minimum 4 times more light without trying. And the light shapers, no comparison.

What the others have mentioned so far is correct. I'd buy the A heads personally as I believe would be most people's recommendation. You could use the A heads in the studio (your home maybe) to freeze water droplets, splashes, anything as well. S heads may not be as versatile in that aspect, depending what your doing with them.

The quadra's aren't bad for price either, all things considered.

Software & Accessories / Re: Who uses a handheld light meter?
« on: October 02, 2012, 08:15:56 PM »
I know I can get a metered prism for my RB67, but of course it will only read reflected light. I can meter reflected light on my meter as well. So I never brought one, it wouldn't speed anything up much anyway and would likely make an already heavy bulky camera even more bulky. I'd be better off spending money on another lens.

To those who want to know, I'm talking about an older mechanical medium format film camera, yes I still use it and yes I love it. No electronics what so ever, no batteries, nothing. And probably more reliable because of it.

Software & Accessories / Re: Who uses a handheld light meter?
« on: October 02, 2012, 07:34:09 AM »
Actually, I have an RB67 too hence my reason for one. I've had it for years.

However there are times I purposely want to meter ambient light as opposed to reflected even with digital where I can just chimp. But at least I use it.

If your working with off camera flash, then well, that's obvious. Light meter comes out.

EOS Bodies / Re: POLL: How much $$$ will the high-mp eos cost?
« on: September 30, 2012, 07:19:34 AM »
I also expect around $8k and maybe more, if its really better than nikon's D800 we can be sure canon will price it really damn high. The only danger there is that its bumping towards medium format money which Im willing to bet will still get higher IQ in the entry levels.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: EOS 7D FW2.0: Problems anyone?
« on: September 21, 2012, 04:45:20 AM »
I went to use the pop up flash a few days ago, for fill during my partner's exposure of all things. It came up with an error, which I too preoccupied to catch the exact text and restarted as if I turned it off and back on (in manual mode if one wants to know).

However it hasn't done anything else odd, nor has it done it again (just played with the pop up thing just then to make sure). So I have no idea. It has 2.0.3 installed.

I guess it needed anti anxiety pills that day, thats all. *shrugs*

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Announces the Canon EOS 6D DSLR
« on: September 20, 2012, 09:28:18 AM »
I can see some uses for it however. For starters, table top stuff in studio's where multi cross type sensors won't give a lot of benefit anyway, or for just the casual weekend enthusiast who wants particularly decent IQ.

However for myself and obviously many many others, this is just... well... *insert expletives* Looks like Canon don't mind if Nikon kicks them in the guts this time around. Can't believe it only has one cross type focus point. Wow. Yes, this should have been under $2k to be more viable.

I guess those who are interested in the 5D2 should snap them fast in case they are very soon discontinued. Save a few dollars perhaps too.

Why didn't they call it an 8D? Weird.

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Mega Pixel
« on: September 20, 2012, 07:55:43 AM »
If its a 1D body, being really the replacement for the 1Ds3, then cost will be pretty damn high.

The starting point for medium format digital has fallen a little remember. Get what Im saying? Yes I know the starting point only gets you 22mp or so, but those 22mp used well, will annihilate a D800 for instance. Plus a Phase One will flash sync at 1/1600th second (leaf shutter) or a Hasselblad at 1/800th sec.

EOS Bodies / Re: 7DII feature requests...
« on: September 20, 2012, 07:40:16 AM »
I'd love the proposed 7D mark ii to be the crop sensor equivalent to a 1Dx.

Failing that however, less noise and slightly better image quality would do. If they ditch the pop up flash, its fine by me. In fact Im sure its another weak point for weather resistance with it... so kill it! I don't care if its still 18mp if it's better in IQ.

10fps would be another nice upgrade though for the times I use high fps. Im sure twin digic 5 processors could easily achieve that. I don't see why it can't have twin digic 5's and a single digic 4 for af. However Im sure we'd pay for that! The actual af points Im not too fussed about, if it gets an upgrade then cool, if not... then so what.

And Im still content with my 7D plus I have no money to burn, so if they take their time releasing it, then I don't mind.

Lenses / Re: Which to get next: 35 f/1.4L or 16-35 f/2.8L...?
« on: September 20, 2012, 07:07:04 AM »
Depends if you need the versatility of the 16-35 zoom. The widest you have is 24mm at the moment, right? 16mm is massively wider if that appeals.

Other than that, Im sure the 35mmL would kick the so and so's out of even a perfectly good 24-105mm in image quality plus if you need a fast lens for any reasons more than you need ultra wide, then well... thats the pick.

I've used a 16-35mm f2.8 ii, its great, it really is... even on crop. However after testing a 35mmL, wow. If you like out of focus areas, thats the one and no contest.

Lenses / Re: If you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they...???
« on: September 20, 2012, 06:24:01 AM »
Canon ef-s 10-22mm (because Im using a 7D) - Love that lens.
Zeiss 35mm f2
Canon 70-200mm f2.8L is ii usm

Kind of covers all bases pretty perfectly for me. Personally I don't really 'need' much more than that. In fact I could save $1000 and get the non is 70-200 f2.8 and put the extra towards some elinchrom ranger quadra's.

If I was using full frame it would change to a 16-35mm and a 50mm L (I think).

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10