« on: October 12, 2013, 04:16:24 PM »
I see longer... My walkaround lens does tend to be a 300 2.8... Although, I do also carry a 24-105 on a 5d mkII, because my wife likes landscape images...
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.
If pentax had in lens IS
Also, as I just read this in-lens system suppresses moire so no aa filter is necessary?
Pentax IS is at the sensor, not in the lens as Canon and Nikon. It is the sensor vibration mechanism that sets up a carefully controlled amount of blur to avoid moire, whereas other cameras use the micro-lens AA filter on the sensor to create a small amount of blur to the same effect.
IS at the lens is usually reckoned to be more effective, but the pentax IS (like Olympus) can work on all lenses - saving the need to buy IS equipped lenses.
If I wasnt invested in Canon gear, I'd be tempted to try my father's lovely manual lenses on a Pentax, to see how effective the IS at the sensor might be. On the other hand, if Pentax launch a full frame DSLR, I might sell up and switch.
Im hiking down to Havasupai Falls in the Grand Canyon next week. I'm trying to limit how much I carry down with me. I'm trying to figure out what lenses to bring. I have Canon 5D MkIII. My lense choices are 17-40, 24-105. I also have 70-200 and 85 and 135 Prime. Any advice would be appreciated. I think I only want to take two of them.
Any other advice about the hike would be appreciated.
G.A.S. can be bad if you are poor. I don't mind wealthy amateurs buying lots of gear they don't need.
Well, being definitely on the rather poor side I do enjoy reading threads about "should I get 2x 5d3 or 1x 1dx?" because it puts my personal GAS back into perspective :-) Also neither the article or I said that GAS *makes* you bad, just that it often goes along with it to compensate for the lack of skill and/or experience.
I'm absolutely in favor of people buying €6000 1dx or €10000 1dxs so Canon can lower my 6D to €1500 (which is still very expensive for me)... that's why I voted against Magic Lantern hacking the 1dx into a 1dc, rich people should cross-fund r&d and profits when they buy the premium gear, I'll stay 1-2 levels below that.
When on second day of our US national park trip ranger informed us, that parks are closed and we can't even get refund for our annual pass (bought two days before that day)
Yeah, I am first time in US and all I got was one afternoon in Grand Teton and one day in Yellowstone, i felt pretty miserable indeed and we had to rescheduled the rest of our trip ...
What could you add to the 70D to make it more video oriented?
Hybrid EVF/OVF viewfinder?
Faster frame rates below 1080p?
Higher resolution (4k)?
Smooth digital video zoom from full-frame to 1:1?
Quad pixel for 4-way AF sensors on every pixel?
Some sort of power zoom lens system?
A ton! No line skipping for FAR less aliasing and moire and better SNR. Focus peaking, live 10x focus box, RAW video recording, non-mangled up compressed video/HDMI out video, zebras, zoomed modes including 1:1, 4k, etc. etc.
I know it's popular if you are a still shooter to laugh off video, but seriously why not expand your creativity to new world. 5D3 ML RAW video is pretty stunning! Some things work better as video, just as some work better as stills and many work equally as well.
I, for one, am a bit tired of my bodies being "video oriented". My 5DII, 7D and 60D have not shot a second of video. I guess I'll just have to hang on to them until the pendulum swings a bit in the other direction.
4QuoteJust because people use electronic post processing rather than mechanical post processing really makes no difference to me.
Film images were doctored just as electronic images are, objects and people were inserted or removed from images, areas of the image lightened or darkened, exposures changed, colors changed, contrast changed, its just that some people do not know how it used to be done and think that post processing is something new.
people romanticize the film days and wet processes like they brought some unquestionable truth to the medium. it has always been about image capture --> image processing --> image presentation. nothing has changed in the fundamentals of photography...nothing.
how it is done is far less important than how well it is done.