March 03, 2015, 07:20:50 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 - Velo Steve

Pages: 1 [2] 3
16
Software & Accessories / Re: "Best" budget filters?
« on: October 19, 2012, 08:28:48 PM »
Thanks for the heads up on the coating.

Do you think it's worth spending $60 for a $400 lens? I won't be looking to protect any super fancy glass for awhile, so these filters are for an EF 85 1.8 and EF 28 1.8.

I had this thought once, and bought cheap filters for my first DSLR.  They were probably okay with that kit lens, but it was still a big mistake.

Recently I had some questionable images from my nearly new 300mm 4.0L Canon lens on a 5D Mark III.  I read the lensrentals.com article and decided to test my filters.  Somehow I had swapped an old cheap filter onto the new lens and it was a problem.  I had two different mid-priced Hoya filters, and they were MUCH better.  There are several test images on Flickr:http://www.flickr.com/photos/juniorvelo/8009756400/#in/set-72157624036270340/.

The Hoyas cause a color shift (arguably a desirable one), but practically no loss of sharpness compared to a bare lens.  The cheap filters made every shot look out of focus.

I'll never let a bad filter in my house again.

17
A far as they go, the rumored specs look good.  On the other hand, most of what I care about isn't addressed there.

My biggest need is better ISO performance for shooting wildlife in shaded or dawn/dusk situations.  I'm not looking for "pretty good" noise at 12,800.  Really great quality at 1600 would be more valuable.  That will determine whether I buy this camera, and I probably will.

I also do 30 second exposures of the night sky with some frequency.  If this camera gets rid of the many unnaturally reddish pixels or blotches I get in those shots, it would be really nice.

Sometimes I shoot sports, especially cycling.  Really good autofocus on subjects moving toward the camera would be valuable.  Extra points if it's available before the Amgen Tour of California in mid May.

The third big item for me (also not described in the rumored specs) is dynamic range.  That white bird in the sun on a background of dark foliage could look a lot better with another stop or two of range.  Or the cyclist in the sun with his face shaded by a helmet.  Or the bride in white and groom in black, for you wedding photographers.

I really expect to want this camera, but I'll take a good look at tests and reviews before I place my order.

18
EOS Bodies / Re: No 5D Mark III on Novemeber 3 [CR2]
« on: September 26, 2011, 10:25:59 AM »
No, Canon, no!

Video is, with a few exceptions, a slow and boring form of communication.  Once people realize that no one wants to watch their boring clips, this will fade.  Sure, it's possible now to shoot HD video at reasonable prices, but who needs it?

Apologies of course to those who actually are able to make good video.

19
EOS Bodies / Re: Where are the BIG information leaks??
« on: August 30, 2011, 07:55:57 PM »
...  And Nikon and Canon fight each other for millions and millions of our money each year....

This brings up an interesting point.  Testers carefully protect the information they are trusted with from the public for all the good reasons given in this thread.  After all, honesty and self-interest are aligned.

That doesn't mean that the other company can't get the information from an unscrupulous tester.  An offer of cash and anonymity could go a long way, and the public would never know.  The camera might even make a brief visit to the other company's engineering group.

I hope they aren't actually this cutthroat.  I've probably been watching too many crime dramas.

20
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Lens Mug - Giveaway
« on: August 30, 2011, 07:40:24 PM »
Imagine that you are shooting a landscape and a rare bird lands on a nearby limb.

The camera should be able to accurately shoot out a glob of adhesive, fastening the bird to the branch.  Then you have plenty of time to switch to a telephoto lens and adjust settings without missing the shot.

Of course the glue should biodegrade in a minute or two, releasing the bird.

21
PowerShot Cameras / Re: Tuesdays PowerShots
« on: August 21, 2011, 12:22:34 AM »
Does anyone know if there's some rhyme or reason to the compact camera names, such as SXxxx (with and without an HS suffix) or Axxxx or Sxx?  Different target markets?  Different key features?  Or is it just a bunch of random letters?

Not that I care about the tiny-sensor cameras, but I'm still curious.

Steve

22
PowerShot Cameras / Re: August 23 is Announcement Day [CR3]
« on: August 20, 2011, 12:50:57 PM »
I just hope one of the compacts has a sensor at least as large as the S95's.  I'm waiting for the 5D Mark III like a lot of you, but on my next trip I have to travel light.

23
For what it's worth, here's my experience.  I have an Intel 64-bit processor, and Windows 7 64 bit.  My files are .CR2 files from a 40D, and they display fine in Photoshop.

Installed the _x86 file.  The preview pane doesn't show a raw image.  No error messages.
Uninstalled.
Installed the _amd64 file.  The preview pane doesn't show raw image.  No error messages.

The Microsoft site mentions Windows Live, but I don't use that (at least not in any way I'm aware of).  Either this software doesn't work or it has some obscure use that doesn't apply to anything I do.  I'm uninstalling it.

24
charlie,Velo Steve ,goretexguy,noisejammer , DavidD  and who shared of the Yousemite national park "s images at this place, realy appreciated and if you have more photo ,please just upload it here and we will enjoy,..
You may note that three of us,
DavidD http://www.inspiringlandscapes.com/moonbowyfalls.htm
noisejammer http://www.flickr.com/people/noisejammer/
Velo Steve http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=29145750@N00&q=yosemite
have provided links to more photos.

In my case I prefer that you use the link rather than asking for photos to be reposted here.  There are two main reasons:
1) Why waste the server space and effort by double-posting when following a link is easy?
2) Flickr automatically associates each photo with my preferred licensing terms.

Steve

25
From last Friday, at the top of Nevada Fall, looking straight down.

For 511 more shots  :D  http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=29145750@N00&q=yosemite

26
United States / Re: Help getting started
« on: July 14, 2011, 12:42:12 PM »
...
I have been told by many people that my photos are good, and I would like some advice on how to start selling my photos. I have a smugmug already, www.alexmojica.com , but after almost a year of posting pictures, my only sales have been to family  :( . Could anyone give me some advice on advertising?

(Also, if you want to give me some pointers for the photos themselves, I would really appreciate it!  ;D )

It seems that most of the comments have been about the content of your photos.   They are good comments, for the most part, but don't completely address your question.  I won't claim a complete answer, but I have a couple of different thoughts.

First, take the comments of friends with a grain of salt.  Lots of people tell me what a good photographer I am, and I have even been invited to be the next artist in a rotating display at the local library.  Does that make me competitive with the best?  No way!  Everyone is a photographer these days, and I'm sure many thousands are better than I am.  Many of those are probably as good as you or better.

Of course there's a good side to this.  Potential customers are not necessarily more discerning than your friends and family.  You don't have to create the best photo of "X" in the world.  You have to offer a very good photo of "X" in a place where paying customers will find it.  Once you reach a certain level it's more about marketing than the actual photography.

Apologies if this has been covered, but two very different market niches come to mind.  One is art photography - the sort of thing people buy to hang on their walls because it is beautiful.  The other is the sort of photography used in advertising, books, commercial web sites and so on.  I'm not really an expert on either, but it is obvious that what you shoot and how you market to each niche will be very different.

One last thought.  Making a little money from your hobby is one thing, and making a career of it is another.  In my opinion, it is only getting harder to be a professional photographer.  Some photography jobs will always exist, but the proliferation of high quality cameras and people who enjoy using them means that there will be increasing competition, and many of the new photographers are giving their work away under Creative Commons licenses.  Organizations which might have paid a few hundred dollars for a minor photo for their publications are now finding them online for nothing.  If you want to be a pro, be prepared to work hard, to work smart, and to adapt your preferences to what actually sells.

27
PowerShot Cameras / Re: PowerShot Info
« on: June 06, 2011, 05:39:13 PM »
Like gene_can_sing I'm normally here to look for DSLR news.  This time is different - I'm in the market for a smaller camera for a bicycle trip in September.  I wonder if there is any hope for a G12 or S95 successor to actually be available by then?

Steve

28
EOS Bodies / Re: What do you want from the 5D mk III
« on: May 09, 2011, 11:33:15 AM »
  • USB3 support.
  • Ability to program series of (time lapse) exposure for stills, and time lapse for video
I edited the quote down to two items which should have been in my list too.

Time lapse should be really simple to add, would save having to connect a laptop with EOS utility to do a simple series of photos.

29
EOS Bodies / Re: What do you want from the 5D mk III
« on: May 08, 2011, 08:07:19 PM »
    Here's my wish list, most important first:

    • At least two stops higher ISO without an increase in noise.  The improvement needs to be at the sensor level - not just postprocessing.
    • Improved focus tracking of moving objects (athletes, birds in flight).
    • Frame rate as fast as the 40D (6.5 fps), or better.
    • Built-in wireless control.  Paying hundreds extra for an add-on device may have made sense ten years ago...
    • Weight no higher than needed.  "Feels solid" can be just an illusion.
    • The Mark II's 21 megapixels is already pretty good.  At some point you just waste storage space and transfer time.
    • If video features are added, they should NEVER get in the way of use as a still camera.
    • Wider dynamic range.  HDR from multiple exposures rarely gives what I want.
    • A price increase is to be expected, but I won't pay 1D-level prices.

    I'm asking a lot, but after all I have a perfectly good camera already.  A new one has to be compelling.

    Steve

30
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III & More
« on: May 02, 2011, 03:35:25 PM »
Exactly what I wanted to hear!  I'm rarely limited by pixel resolution, but situations with moving subjects in weak light keep coming up.  A couple of stops higher ISO without an increase in noise will have me ordering on the first day possible.

Of course if I could get that in combination with the "frames per second" rate of my 40D, that would be even better.

Steve

Added: the noise reduction needs to start at the sensor.  Just processing it out in the Digic won't cut it.

Pages: 1 [2] 3