March 02, 2015, 07:54:18 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 - bdunbar79

Pages: 1 ... 101 102 [103] 104 105 ... 176
1531
Lenses / Re: 70-200mm f/2.8 took a bad fall... Any advice?
« on: August 26, 2012, 02:16:19 AM »
Oh they'll repair it.  You'll have to decide if it's worth the cost or not.  If it's not, then yeah, time from the Mark II :) :)  Could be a blessing in disguise.

1532
Who cares what the sharpest aperture is, really?  Do you change aperture because of sharpness?  Sharpness of what?  I use aperture to control my DOF or flash exposure.  If my lens is sharpest at f/4, I don't care because how does that have any real useful impact on your photography? 

Second reason I don't care is because just because my lens is sharpest at f/4, doesn't mean it's NOT sharp at other apertures.  So again, I don't care. 

1533
I bought two lenses and I prefer to take most of my shots near or on the mythical sweetspot in regards to aperture.  With the presumption of sufficient light, for my 50mm f/1.4 I try to stay between 2.8 and 4.0.  For my 24-105mm f/4 I make an effort to approach f/8, but that isn't always an option.

So that raises the aforementioned question.  What aperture range is the 100mm and the 70-200 the sharpest?  And don't hesitate to tell me that I was wrong about the 50 and 24-105... if indeed I'm way off.

Thanks a bunch.

Pretty much all of my lenses are sharpest around f/8.  That doesn't mean that lenses aren't sharp at other apertures.  That's just where they are sharpest.

you must have a bunch of very weird copies then

Cool.

1534
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX IQ
« on: August 26, 2012, 12:45:21 AM »
I'll post one more.  This is a 100% crop from across the field, at ISO 5000.  The 'grainy-ness" isn't noise likely, it's probably b/c I'm running out of resolution.  In this case, the 5D 3 has performed better.

1535
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX IQ
« on: August 26, 2012, 12:36:57 AM »
Here's one under the lights, no color adjustment.  Obviously we'll apply some NR and then resize in PS, I just wanted to get it on here as fast as possible.

1536
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX IQ
« on: August 26, 2012, 12:02:56 AM »
This is werid Bosman.  I'm noticing when the 1DX is in auto ISO, and it goes to 12,800 or even higher, it blows the highlights.  It doesn't do that up until that point though.  In fact, up to that point, it's just the opposite, as it looks like it's slightly underexposing.  Interesting.

1537
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX IQ
« on: August 25, 2012, 11:57:50 PM »
so 1dx win 5dm3 fail with colors? hard to believe anything look right with stadium lighting. Nice to know that $7g's does some things better.

Nope nope nope.  Not to when the lights came on yet  :P  I'm assuming that won't be quite as easy  :D

1538
Lenses / Re: How much for a used Canon 200mm f/2.0L IS?
« on: August 25, 2012, 11:22:00 PM »
I have seen them on Fred Miranda occasionally used for 4.5k U$D.

Does anyone know if the 5D3 AI Servo fix for this lens extends past the one year warranty period? Is it a service advisory like the light leak fix that can be done at any time regardless of warranty status?

I think anytime Jamesy.

1539
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X Structural Weakness
« on: August 25, 2012, 11:20:58 PM »
You woulda heard me scream like Cameron on Ferris Buehler's Day Off.

1540
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX IQ
« on: August 25, 2012, 11:17:14 PM »
Update:  My 5D3 shots I did the white uniforms were slightly overdone and I had to cool them down a bit in post.  The 1DX got it right.  It was also a nightmare match, with Ashland with white uniforms and Wooster with black uniforms.  So I didn't shoot to the right, I shot 0 EV.  The 1DX got the whites correct anyways.

1541
EOS Bodies - For Stills / 1DX IQ
« on: August 25, 2012, 11:11:28 PM »
Well I'm gonig through some shots from tonight's Ashland U. vs. Wooster soccer match, and this is pretty cool.  I'm finding when I import my RAW files, I investigate to see what post processing needs done and then do it, before I crop.  Gone through about 10 photos now and decided I didn't really need to do anything to them.  First camera I've ever had where I didn't NEED to do any post processing at all.  All I'm doing is cropping and saving to TIF.  Really amazing stuff.  I was shooting with a 300 f/2.8L I IS lens too.

1542
Lenses / Re: How much for a used Canon 200mm f/2.0L IS?
« on: August 25, 2012, 09:37:26 PM »
It's a beautiful lens... my favorite.  Anything in the mid to high $4K for a used one is a great deal....  You could recoup most if not all of your funds upon resale...

You'll probably have to go to another planet to find one that cheap, even used.

1543
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Your Ultimate Gear (wish)list
« on: August 25, 2012, 04:28:54 PM »
My whishlist:

EOS 1DX
EOS 5D III
EF 8-15 f/4 L
EF 14-24 f/2.8 L
EF 24-70 f/2.8 L II
EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II
EF 200 - 400L f/4 IS
EF 14L f.2.8 II
EF 24L f/1.4 II
EF 35L f/1.4
EF 50L f/1.2
EF 85L f/1.2 II
EF 100L f/2.8 Macro IS
EF 135L f/2
EF 180L f/2 Macro
EF 200L f/2 IS
EF 300L f/2.8 II IS
EF 400L f/2.8 II IS
EF 500L f/4 II IS
EF 600L f/4 II IS
EF 800L f/5.6 IS
EF 1200 f/5.6 IS
Extender 1,4x III
Extender 2,0x III
4x 600EX-RT
           
That would do...

What, no tilt-shift work???

1544
EOS Bodies / Re: 7d noise question is it normal?
« on: August 25, 2012, 04:18:53 PM »
I was just trying to figure out why you had ISO 640, if your shutter was 1/1600 and aperture f/13?  I always try to find the most reasonable combinations that gives me the lowest ISO possible, to avoid noise, even if it's just digital noise.  The 7D's sensor is noisy, unfortunately and the 18mp crammed into that sensor causes problems.  Why don't you shoot the clouds at f/8, and shutter 1/800, for instance, and keep ISO at 125?  (approximate settings).

Bird in flight demands a shutter speed as fast as possible...The basic setting for a dark BIF I use on my 7D with 300 2.8 is is: s1250 AV 2.8 ISO 160. This would work great for a bird like this.

At any rate, we agree the ISO could be a lot lower, right?

1545
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS BODY FOR ARCHITECTURE
« on: August 25, 2012, 03:49:39 PM »
If you need good IQ, you cannot beat D800. But for that, you have to get Nikon, as Canon is stuck with its 10 year old sensor tech. Since Canon sales are good, they have no incentive to use better sensors. Unless you are stuck to Canon due to financial/equipment commitments, Nikon is the better bet at this time.

Troll. Do you really feel like 36MP is necessary?  Unless your're printing in feet instead of inches, it is completely unnecessary. Also, if you're referring to Nikon's perceived high ISO image quality it is a moot point to an architecture photographer who shoots at native ISO (100) about 95% of the time.

How about Nikon's mediocre (compared to Canon) and outdated PC-E lenses?  What?  Nikon doesn't even manufacture a 17mm lens with shift?  That's a shame.

I'm not tryin to be a fanboy, but Canon is clearly the better choice for architectural purposes.

+1

Pages: 1 ... 101 102 [103] 104 105 ... 176