March 05, 2015, 10:11:06 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 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10
91
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).

92
Lenses / Re: Poll: 35mm Vs 50mm Primes
« on: September 14, 2012, 08:29:58 PM »
I tend to like 35mm more now. I spent years in the film days shooting almost exclusively 50mm but now I prefer slightly wider, even on full frame. 35mm on crop ends up being around 50mm so its also a dual purpose normal focal length on crop or full frame (bonus).

93
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Nikon vs Canon - Honest Poll before photokina.
« on: September 14, 2012, 08:03:23 PM »
I think they're pretty evenly matched. Nikon has some lenses which don't exist with canon, and vice versa. Some of each are world class lenses. They're bodies (each company) I think appeal to slightly different people, one looking a little more sleek and one more industrial to my eye (canon is the more sleek to me). And their bodies work slightly differently, as in the menu's and buttons etc.

I don't personally care for nikon vs canon. Both have plusses and minus's depending what your comparing.

94
EOS Bodies / Re: The Mirrorless Future
« on: September 07, 2012, 05:40:40 AM »
Just wanting to mention Fuji is no stranger to rangefinder cameras if you look even at the 645 rangefinders they've had in the past. Rangefinders which are obviously mirrorless are not new, I don't think this is what this mirrorless argument is about. Leica M cameras have been around a long long time, again this isn't new. Even bronica had one actually which I do believe is now tamron! Contax... Same, not new. The only new thing I can see is that Fuji Is getting back into that market with digital.

Leica still make a slr camera, enter the s series, the r series was before that.

For me personally, the most interesting alternative for mirrorless vs dslr is the new Olympus om-d. That said the tiny four thirds sensor doesn't thrill me. Maybe time will tell this tale. I don't think sony's nex really competes with that sector, as it's more a point and shoot.

I find the Fuji x-pro 1 and the olympus I mentioned (for very different reasons) quite facinating. But my dslr is going nowhere!

95
EOS Bodies / Re: Nikon D7000 vs Canon 7D In the AF Area + Others
« on: September 04, 2012, 07:33:08 PM »
Contrary to popular belief, you can't simply rely on your fancy camera to nail it for you regardless.

No I haven't tried the d7000 for real but I'm a content owner of a 7d. Personally I think the 7d has a great af system particularly for it's price. If you learn properly how to use it is definitely a good system. Do I ever swear at it? Oh yes! Is it faultless? Oh no... Of course not. Would I expect a 1dx af system to be faultless at all times? No.

I have had experience recently with a nikon d90, it's af system isn't on the same plane as the 7d. My partner was having trouble tracking really fast (I mean fast) penguins in the water at our city's aquarium. They couldn't do it, I showed them even with an af system nowhere near the capabilities of my 7d... It can be done. I got some clear of some extremely energetic penguins in the water. Actually clearer than the shots I got with my 7d because there was a cpl filter on the nikon, I don't have one myself.

What am I suggesting? I'm suggesting who cares, yes buy a camera which suits your needs, but before, after and during, skills matter more. Btw, the d300s has a better af than the d7000.

96
Lenses / Re: How to complete my lens lineup? Help!
« on: September 04, 2012, 03:29:56 AM »
I've seen 1Ds mark iii's around $2500. If one of those appeal you could potentially get one of those and the 35L.

Sounds good to me. Im pretty sure I saw them on keh.

97
Lenses / Re: A New EF 400 f/5.6L Before Photokina? [CR1]
« on: September 04, 2012, 03:06:51 AM »
I was thinking of getting that lens eventually.

Well, so long as the update doesn't take the price out of 'quite affordable' territory. Otherwise forget it for me.

Adding to other's comments: f5.6 for lens like this means that its not $6000!!!!! Yes we want faster, but can one pay it? I can't. I'd love a 400mm f2.8 is ii but nuh uh for the $$$. Unless of course I'm not paying out my own pocket.

98
Lenses / Re: Canon 14-24 2.8 - With our powers combined....
« on: August 31, 2012, 11:29:36 PM »
I've never used the nikon one, but Im willing to bet if canon made and miraculously made it even better than the nikon one it will on the pretty damn expensive list.

I see journo's with them on their nikon's quite a lot.

99
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Your Ultimate Gear (wish)list
« on: August 31, 2012, 10:54:19 PM »
My realistic-ish (sort of - $$$) dream list at the moment: A very small portion I already own.

7D
1d mark iv
1dx or at least a 1ds mark iii

Canon ef-s 10-22
Canon 16-35mm f2.8 ii
Canon 70-200mm f2.8 is ii
Canon 35mm f1.4L
Canon 50mm f1.2L
Canon 300mm f2.8 is ii
Canon 400mm f2.8 is ii

100
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: rumor: D600 gets 16 Bit processing
« on: August 31, 2012, 10:46:34 PM »
in the 80's Nikon (who was the supreme leader of SLR cameras) did not take Canon AF lenses seriously and it paid very dearly by losing its top position to Canon and has not caught up ever since.


Oh, don't know about hasn't caught up since. I used nikons in the early 2000's, didn't care then but oh yeah, they were loosing badly. Now? Well they've already lost a chunk of the market which hasn't as of yet returned (if ever) but yes they HAVE caught up.

Damn, I just defended nikon! Sorry about that, but I thought it needed to be said. Doesn't matter what you shoot on nowdays, either make fantastic images, particularly in capable hands.

101
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Where am I ?
« on: August 31, 2012, 09:55:25 AM »
Your on planet earth and not in Australia. LOL

NFI. Yellowstone national park perhaps? But seriously I have no clue. Is there even a lake there?

102
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: rumor: D600 gets 16 Bit processing
« on: August 31, 2012, 04:38:38 AM »
The D90 does not have in camera HDR. And why do you want built in flash? Other than occasional emergency fill, they're useless.

Looks like my partner (who has a D90) will have a nice upgrade path if they decide to in the next while. Myself, well I don't have any money to spend on anything much so I'll just wait it out and see what happens and make do with my 7D which is doing me really well anyway. Im not going back to nikon.

103
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: World's most expensive lens
« on: August 28, 2012, 06:02:51 AM »
Did I seriously miss that? Ha, wow.

Publicity stunt perhaps.

104
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: World's most expensive lens
« on: August 28, 2012, 05:15:41 AM »
Personally I don't understand how a Leica APO-Telyt-R 1:5.6/1600mm would be worth 2.79 million dollars. Thats really in WTF territory for me. Unless all the glass is sapphire crystal or something ridiculous.

105
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D question
« on: August 06, 2012, 11:41:03 PM »
Yep, hit play first. Then zoom in on the LCD.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10