March 06, 2015, 07:10:47 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 - robbymack

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 28
Canon General / Re: Canon’s Q3 Profits Tumbled Down By 42%
« on: October 26, 2012, 10:16:43 AM »
You do realize canon makes more than dslr's right?  Profits tumbled, but revenues didn't take as much of a hit which means canon was essentially giving a lot of the stuff they sold away at near or below cost. Sorry to all of you who are just miffed at the 5diii pricing. It's also important to remember that this is in yen and the most important factor is generally yen vs usd, and in some cases yen vs yuan as those are the two largest customers.

Lenses / Re: Travel lens\es on crop body
« on: October 25, 2012, 04:20:45 PM »
For crop I prefer the 17-55 2.8 over the 24-105, but since you already have the latter maybe just rent a 10-22 for the trip and stick a 50 1.8 or 1.4 in the bag for those night shots.

Australia / Re: Legal question on photography
« on: October 25, 2012, 12:38:14 AM »
Purchase of the Ticket implies your compliance. While I think the likelihood of you having a problem is low you may as well respect their wishes. Obviously if you took the time to post to an Internet forum you probably already know what you should do and are just looking for reassurance.

Lenses / Re: efs 15-85 or ef 24-105L
« on: October 24, 2012, 10:10:51 AM »
Because you have aps c I'd say get the 15-85. 24 isn't very wide on aps c, which means if you want to shoot wider than that you're looking at a 10-22 as well, which is a good piece of glass, but obviously additional money out the door. Actually I'd recommend the 17-55 f2.8 over both for aps c. That gives you better low light capabilities than either and you only miss out on the tele end of the 24-105.

Of the 2 I'd get the 18-135 especially if its the new STM version. Otherwise it's a toss up, can't go wrong with either as a starter. If funds allow maybe consider body only and either the efs 17-55 f2.8 or the efs 15-85.

Canon General / Re: Out of Focus Photos!!!
« on: October 19, 2012, 06:16:36 PM »
There is also operator error to consider however I have always been one to blame the arrow and not the Indian. What settings were you using and maybe some examples.

Landscape / Re: Loch Leven
« on: October 19, 2012, 06:13:53 PM »
I'm a bit biased but IMHO Scotland is home of the most spectacular scenery on earth.

for most normal print jobs the 5diii is useable to ISO 12K or so, 25K in a pinch.  If you are printing very large then maybe scale back to 3200-6400 max.  For the web, IMHO, you can probably push it a stop beyond 25,600 depending on the use. 

this is such a mountain out of a mole hill, 4 (or 5) samples aren't enough to draw any real conclusions.  If Lens rentals was saying it and they had 40 copies then maybe.  If you're really that worried about sample variation (again read roger's comments regarding the "this lens is soft" phenomenon) just buy from a quality retailer: BH, Adorama, et al. and send it back for a new one if you aren't happy.  For the record the one I rented for the weekend was fantastic.

Reviews / Re: My Mini-Review of the 85mm 1.2L II.
« on: October 14, 2012, 12:46:36 AM »
RL great review, but since you asked for some critique here it is. Be careful of common grammatical errors as in the first sentence of your review.  You used "your on the canon system". Should be "you're". There are a few other errors in spelling and grammar throughout. I don't want to be the grammar police, but if at the outset I already see a common mistake I'm not going to take the rest of what you say very seriously.

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 8-15 f/4L Fisheye
« on: October 14, 2012, 12:38:18 AM »
This fisheye is awesome!

There is good and bad fisheye, this is an example of the former. Awesome!

Lenses / Re: Which Prime: 50L or 35L?
« on: October 12, 2012, 05:21:04 PM »
Hi guys,
I decided to upgrade all my lenses to “L”. Early this week, I sold my last non-L 50mm f1.4 on CL for $290. That wasn’t an easy decision, but I did it.

I currently have 16-35 II, 24-70 II and 70-200 f2.8 IS II (5D III body). As you can see, I’m pretty much covered from 16 to 200mm at 2.8 straight. It’s time to add a prime to my bag.

Question is which prime?  I’m leaning toward to 50L or 35L – my feeling right now is 55% on 50L and 45% on 35L.

So, which prime will deliver best sharpness at wide open for portrait general shooting & portrait? Your thoughts are greatly appreciated.


with the f2.8 zoom trinity do you really need a prime?  Ok I jest we all need new (more) gear.  Since this will obviously be a costly decision, i say rent the 35, 50, 85, and 135 L and see what floats your boat.  Or simply set your zooms to those FL and go shooting for a day to see what fits your eye best.  I suspect with the gear you already have there is a good chance you already know what FL you want the most.  My $0.02: I spent a brief weekend with the 24-70ii and that tells me you won't see a vast improvement over the zoom with the 35 or 50L unless you really need the extra stops, so maybe lean towards the 85 or 135L. 

Lenses / Re: B&H Issues!!!
« on: October 12, 2012, 05:11:36 PM »
certainly sorry you didn't get your new toy today, and will likely have to wait till the next ups delivery day which is monday.  Shipping issues do happen from time to time, I am sure you can understand that.  I, however, wouldn't get too upset, the good people at BH will make it right. 

Why wait to save a few bucks. Pull the trigger.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X DXOMark Sensor Scores
« on: October 11, 2012, 07:17:13 PM »
Gosh just think about all the pros that are going to need to sell all their gear just to get a d800 because is scored better in some arcane test  ::)

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 28