Messages

16

Portrait / Re: My photos look so dull

« on: June 29, 2012, 04:54:25 PM »

you need to spend some time here: http://strobist.blogspot.com/

maybe a lot of time.

start by reading "lighting 101"

17

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]

« on: June 25, 2012, 03:11:26 PM »

Clearly, I wasn't figuring, I just ass-umed 

I'd be interested in your thoughts accounting for (presumed) the weight increase..

Current (old) lens is f/4.5-5.6, this one will have a larger objective so bigger, heavier glass...

How do you figure that?  Same ratio at the long end - 400/5.6 = 71.4mm diameter element.  100/4.5 = 22.2mm, 100/4 = 25mm, both much smaller than dictated by the long end, i.e that's where the limitation is, not the wide end.

18

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]

« on: June 25, 2012, 02:57:48 PM »

Current (old) lens is f/4.5-5.6, this one will have a larger objective so bigger, heavier glass...

This probably sounds laughable to anyone used to using the super zooms but I'm disappointed that the weight is going up instead of down.  Down has been the trend on all the newly announced lenses that come to mind.  Perhaps my attitude will change once the new version has been released but right now "heavier" is a deal killer for me.

19

EOS Bodies / Re: 1D X Unboxing

« on: June 24, 2012, 02:47:19 PM »

That's just how the 1-series has always shipped...possibly so that you think to check the diopter adjustment before covering it?

Why is there no eye-piece installed?

20

Street & City / Re: what is it with the brits and DSLR cameras?

« on: April 24, 2012, 09:59:35 AM »

Who decides whether it is a simple abuse of power, or a true security concern.

Perhaps citizens would best be kept confined somewhere, so the machinery of the state can proceed on its business unimpinged.

Personally, I think if we think about it, if it keeps us safe, can we really complain?
No doubt it will be annoying... but if that one terrorist is stopped.... its done its job

21

Software & Accessories / Re: Lightroom 4 Problems

« on: March 22, 2012, 11:37:04 AM »

It would be unwise to migrate your current Lightroom catalog to a new version without first doing a optimize and backup. That's just basic smarts.

Lightroom4 works great for me, no issues with speed, 60,000 image catalog.

I think the big advantages of new Process Version 2012 warrant the upgrade, many beta users griped they wanted to migrate the catalog to the beta NOW.

Photoshop CS6 beta is released today, so editing in Photoshop from Lightroom is seamless once again.....

22

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D MkIII instructions - Rant !!

« on: March 16, 2012, 10:37:45 AM »

Same information in all Canon manuals, including all the 1-series...at least, my 1D2, 1D3, 1Ds3 and 1D4 manuals all had the exact same boilerplate.

23

Lenses / Re: Canon L vs Zeiss ZE

« on: March 10, 2012, 10:25:42 AM »

I had a ZE 35 f/2 for a couple years, and loved it. I sold it because I need a wide angle that autofocuses when I shoot handheld. Plus, for my purpose, the 16-35 II zoom will have other advantages.

I think most people are using LiveView on the camera back, often at 10X, when composing shots on a tripod. That is to say, the question has to be asked whether the user intends to hand hold or use a fixed support.

24

Lenses / Re: Canon 400mm f5.6 L lens - upgrade needed.

« on: March 07, 2012, 05:03:37 PM »

The 400DO is an excellent lens, I wish I still had mine.

The 300 f/4 IS lens was introduced in 1997. The new (announced) 24/28mm f/2.8 IS lenses are around $800-$850.

There ain't gonna be no more sub-$2500 supertelephotos from Canon.

I think I'm in  the ballpark, but today's news makes it seem the new 100-400 will be positioned to overlay the old 400 f/5.6

25

Lenses / Re: Canon 400mm f5.6 L lens - upgrade needed.

« on: March 06, 2012, 11:57:33 AM »

This has gotta be the single most requested and (endlessly) discussed lens upgrade since digital forever.

Ya, we all want a $1200 400mm f/5.6 L IS lens. Ain't gonna happen.

How about a $4500 400mm f/5.6 L IS lens? That's more realistic.

Don't look for it until Canon announce the discontinuation of the 400 f/4.0 DO IS lens...

26

Software & Accessories / Re: Before you upgrade to Lightroom 4...

« on: March 06, 2012, 10:32:28 AM »

LightRoom5 will not be out in 2013, it's a two year product cycle.

27

Lenses / Re: Where do you sell used lenses

« on: March 03, 2012, 09:20:23 PM »

WOW. I am gobsmacked that there is any answer given other than Fred Miranda.

28

EOS Bodies / Re: The Next 5D on February 27/28, 2012 [CR3]

« on: February 23, 2012, 08:54:41 PM »

SandyP, you are in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I feel your pain. But not in a place where you might think.

I'm sure it feels good to pontificate about how real photographers don't hang out on gear forums, they are out Getting The Shot.

But this is a place dedicated to RUMORS about NEW GEAR. Not about technique or composition. Or discussions about how all the good photos were already taken years ago by the Legends of Photography.

And there is an imminent announcement of a eagerly anticipated camera barreling down the pike.

What did you expect to read about coming to this site at this time?

Really, you flatter yourself that only you can see folly in the discussions going on. All the members here are having fun discussing some possibilities.

That is all.

29

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III/X Information [CR1]

« on: February 14, 2012, 01:25:36 PM »

I don't read "scale factor of 100x" as "cost factor of 100x", but I'm not going to get into any arguments here.

In terms of number of cameras produced and sold, I think I'm well in the ballpark.

Production costs aren't the same. There's a scale factor of 100x between the Pro and consumer body production lines. A weather sealed FF pro body and a 1.6 crop consumer body have little in common beyond the nameplate.

Nice hyperbole, but that can't be true.  The most expensive 1-series body sells for ~10x an xxxD body, there's not a 100x difference in production costs.

30

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III/X Information [CR1]

« on: February 14, 2012, 12:39:01 PM »

No.

Production costs aren't the same. There's a scale factor of 100x between the Pro and consumer body production lines. A weather sealed FF pro body and a 1.6 crop consumer body have little in common beyond the nameplate.

Well, for starters, only Canon has the 5D2.
Partly though we are talking about an oligopoly, not a true free market.  The barrier to entry in this industry is so high that there are only a few players, and all of them go by about the same playbook; charge what the market will bare with a combination of low cost entry level equipment and premium priced professional equipment, even though the manufacturing costs are pretty close across the board.  They charge based off how much the bodies are worth, not on how much they cost to make.