136
EOS Bodies / Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« on: November 18, 2012, 04:37:31 PM »
@el bouv, your pictures are horrible. Can clearly tell you're using bad technology.
May 18, 2013, 02:06:37 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.
137
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Please help me decide... Canon 5D3 or Nikon D800
« on: November 17, 2012, 09:11:54 PM »
5D3 w/ 24-70 + 100 f/2 for portraits.
138
EOS Bodies / Re: February & March are Announcement Months for Canon [CR2]
« on: November 16, 2012, 10:35:11 AM »
What RLPhoto said!
139
EOS Bodies / Re: February & March are Announcement Months for Canon [CR2]
« on: November 16, 2012, 10:23:17 AM »
Who cares about sensors? Where are the lens announcements!!
14-24
50 IS
135 IS
45/90 TS-E
14-24
50 IS
135 IS
45/90 TS-E
140
Lenses / Re: Help!! 17 TS-E vs 16-35 II vs 17-40 vs 14II vs. Tokina 16-28 2.8 for Landscapes
« on: November 15, 2012, 12:50:55 PM »
How often do you use a flash on a 17mm lens?
141
Lenses / Re: 100 f/2.8L or 135mm f/2L
« on: November 15, 2012, 12:48:54 PM »
Do you guys prefer the 135 over the 70-200 2.8 II for portraits (on full frame and comparing 135 at 2.0 vs. 200 at 2.
?
?
142
Lenses / Re: Help!! 17 TS-E vs 16-35 II vs 17-40 vs 14II vs. Tokina 16-28 2.8 for Landscapes
« on: November 15, 2012, 10:37:58 AM »
I'd go 14 and 17 TS-E just because they're the most creative lenses. I would've gone 14 and 24 TS-E if it were an option just because you don't need 2 ultra-wides. I recently took a trip to SF and rented the 16-35 and 17 TS-E. The 16-35 was rarely on my camera because the 17 was wide enough plus had so many creative ways of being used.
143
Lenses / Re: Help!! 17 TS-E vs 16-35 II vs 17-40 vs 14II vs. Tokina 16-28 2.8 for Landscapes
« on: November 15, 2012, 10:28:31 AM »
By bought do you mean rented?
144
Lenses / Re: 100 f/2.8L or 135mm f/2L
« on: November 15, 2012, 10:25:51 AM »
The 100L is almost $100 cheaper and you get macro and IS. IMO it's a better value portrait lens.
145
Lenses / Re: 100 f/2.8L or 135mm f/2L
« on: November 15, 2012, 10:13:51 AM »
""real" macro near 1:1 mag is when your lens cap nearly hits the object,"
You actually have a lot of workspace when shooting with the 100L. Your lens never nearly hits the object even at minimum focus....
You actually have a lot of workspace when shooting with the 100L. Your lens never nearly hits the object even at minimum focus....
146
EOS Bodies / Re: A Brief 2013 Canon Roadmap [CR1]
« on: November 13, 2012, 03:20:59 PM »
Do people actually care about APS-C cameras anymore?
147
EOS Bodies / Re: A Brief 2013 Canon Roadmap [CR1]
« on: November 13, 2012, 09:44:38 AM »
14-24, 50 1.4 IS, 45 and 90mm TS-E please
148
Lenses / Tilt-shift 'toy effect'
« on: November 12, 2012, 02:46:36 PM »
How much easier is it to create the 'toy effect' with a longer tilt shift lens? Anyone have any examples?
150
Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
« on: November 11, 2012, 04:15:03 PM »
[/quote]
Was this done in photoshop or in camera (is it even possible to do in camera)?