Messages

1

EOS Bodies / Re: Is This the EOS 3D?

« on: June 17, 2013, 03:32:51 PM »

Dam it...I just ordered a 5D III as my 2nd body

A 3D will be much better

Why would you post your receipt here? Are you trying to brag about having two 5D Mk III's? I don't get it.

He's been contemplating what to do in the forums for a while, now he's made a decision.  I highly doubt he's trying to rub anyone's face in it or brag; he's just excited.  Don't you get excited when you get something new?

Congratulations on your 5D3 Dylan, I hope to pick up a second one as well, but I've got a lot of glass to catch up on first.

2

Site Information / Re: banning people for nothing at canon rumors

« on: June 17, 2013, 11:49:04 AM »

He was warned and suspended numerous times, and persisted in his unacceptable behavior.

The decision to ban an established member is never made lightly, it is usually after discussion between mods.  He earned his ban 110%. In fact, he probably should have been banned earlier.

Dissent and disagreement is half the fun, you'll never get banned for that.  Name calling, and disrespecting other users, inciting flame wars, will.  It adds nothing to the discussion, and is generally counterproductive.

3

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 2nd Body - your thoughts?

« on: June 13, 2013, 12:26:58 PM »

I'd get the 5DIII (or the 1D X).  The better AF will be beneficial - especially with fast primes you'll want the f/2.8 crosses that the 6D doesn't have.  Also, if you're carrying two bodies and switching between them as you shoot, ergonomics is important - having the same controls is preferable, rather than switching from the normal xD dial+joystick controls to the 60D-like dial of the 6D.

 that is true about the  knowing the controls by heart.  I  had a 60d  and someone would ask about adjusting a t3i  and it was like I never used an slr in my life. 

 having said that,  if you do separate  the  duties, I  think  the 6d  will be more than sufficient as a portrait camera.

Lol... I've had the same experience.  Going from my 5D3 to my old 60D isn't too bad, probably because I used the 60D for a couple years exclusively, but a couple months ago someone handed me a rebel asking for help.  I just stood there for about 15 seconds staring at it before I even hit the first button.  The person probably thought I had a stroke or something 

4

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Worth getting an SD card for 5D3?

« on: June 12, 2013, 09:36:37 PM »

When you insert a SD card in a 5D MKIII also the writing speed to the CF card is reduced due to design by Canon.

It only slows down if you're writing to SD, (i.e., RAW to CF, JPEG to SD), just having it in there does not slow down writing to CF.

I remember reading someone did test on this (maybe at POTN), and the conclusion was that even having SD card in will slow down the CF card, because the data bus speed will default to slower speed. Having only CF will benefit higher data bus speed.

So I've never even inserted SD card. I guess I should try it works.

Disclaimer: I could be wrong, but I did read someone testing that and with such conclusion. I haven't tested myself.

I saw (probably) the same post, then I saw someone claim they were wrong...  So I tested myself.  There is no slowdown just having the SD in the camera, it only slows down if you are writing to it.

5

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: cheap lowlight 30-35mm for APS-C

« on: June 12, 2013, 02:57:31 PM »

If you think the 50 f/1.8 has slow AF, MF is not going to be fun either.

I was going to mention this, but Random Orbits beat me to it.

It bears repeating though, so it's not missed, the Samyang the OP mentioned is MF.

6

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Worth getting an SD card for 5D3?

« on: June 11, 2013, 04:46:51 PM »

When you insert a SD card in a 5D MKIII also the writing speed to the CF card is reduced due to design by Canon.

It only slows down if you're writing to SD, (i.e., RAW to CF, JPEG to SD), just having it in there does not slow down writing to CF.

7

Canon General / Re: Advice, canon 1ds mark II and canon 20-35 2.8L

« on: June 10, 2013, 11:47:02 PM »

Canon will no longer repair the 20-35/2.8L, it's quite old, and not that great to begin with.

That being said, $900 isn't exactly an awful price for a 1DsII in good shape, but I wouldn't give the lens much weight in that transaction.

8

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 5

« on: June 10, 2013, 11:30:39 AM »

Wow, quick turnaround from beta to final. Hope the bugs are fixed (adjustment brush being the most annoying to me)

Hmm, thats what I thought too. I'll wait. I'm not dying to upgrade right this second.

That's probably because it's really LR 4.5 not 5.  But even though they "short stroked" this one, LR is still the only reasonably priced Adobe product, and I'll probably be picking it up soon.

9

Camera Body Gallery / Re: anything shot with a vinatge manual lens on a Canon body

« on: June 09, 2013, 05:57:18 PM »

I guess beginners (like myself) normally start with a rebel.  Actually, I couldn't even afford a 600D. I borrowed it from my friend for this weekend. I am stilling shooting with a 40D which I have bought with the recommendations of some kind people here in this forum.

Honestly, your 40D is better than the 600D you borrowed, even though comparing specs that may not be apparent. As you shoot more you'll grow to appreciate the better build quality and handling/ergonomics.

10

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma USB dock

« on: June 08, 2013, 12:33:17 AM »

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/909813-REG/Sigma_USB_Dock.html

I'm hoping for reports from some of our Sigma 35 owners soon!

Sweet...  4x distance settings you can calibrate prime lenses at, and 16 (4 distance * 4 focal length) for zooms, that's awesome!

11

Software & Accessories / Re: Alternatives to SmugMug? I need a photo hosting site w/ print ordering option.

« on: June 07, 2013, 11:59:44 PM »

I used to use smugmug years ago, but switched to zenfolio recently (like a month ago).  I'm still in the process of getting it all tweaked out the way I want it (it's pretty barren right now), but it seems more flexible then smugmug so far.

I don't even have any logos, watermarks, etc.; or even the about page done yet.  I only shoot for fun, or for family and friends anyhow, so it's not really a big deal to me.  I'll get around to it eventually.

www.primaobscura.com

12

Lenses / Re: Leaf Shutter Lenses For Canon Dslr

« on: June 07, 2013, 11:44:31 AM »

some posters stated belief that gear is just a matter of convenience and any shot could be shot with any gear given time and thought!

U mad bro? Don't be hurt because other's here also called you out on the convenient applications of a leaf shutter.

As privatebydesign correctly pointed out, there are applications that would be served by having a leaf shutter, but none that wouldn't be BETTER served by having an electronic shutter.  You get all the benefits (but instead of only 1-2 stops gain, you're bound only by flash duration), without all the caveats of a leaf shutter.

13

Lenses / Re: When is the New 100-400 Coming?

« on: May 16, 2013, 01:19:15 PM »

I originally did not like the idea of a push-pull design, but have changed my mind after using my 400L for a few years.
Some of the advantages that this design made available when it was designed are:
 
     Short Storage length, shorter than the 70-200mmL
     Close focusing, for filling a frame with small birds which often let you get close.
     Is has worked for me down to 1/20 sec, far better than the IS on my 400mm f/5.6.
 
 
Newer lens technology now allows for shorter lens designs, better IS,  all with close focusing.  I'd certainly welcome a new model that  had those attributes, push pull or not.  I'd prefer the smallest one, whichever it is.
 
My 400mm f/5.6 is too long to easily store, and won't focus closely, plus a lack of IS can be a issue for stills where light in not its best.  Having to use a high shutter speed requires high ISO's unless I have bright light.

+1

+2

14

Landscape / Re: Jippieeee! It's spring! Post your first spring pictures here.

« on: May 13, 2013, 12:40:46 PM »

What the hell... I haven't posted any photos in a long time, here's some from last night at a local park:

15

Site Information / Re: Membership Approval Now Required

« on: May 10, 2013, 09:50:25 AM »

We will not approve membership if the account name looks like a advertisement, is a e-mail address, or just sounds phoney,  It is definitely better if a account name has some recognizable link to photography.

This is way too subjective and what may be an advertisement / email / phoney to you may just be perfect for someone else. Compound this by the fact that the username will be rejected after one day I doubt a genuine user who is rejected will bother to try again (I certainly wouldn't, but that's just me).

IMHO a captcha is a better idea as suggested above.

You'd be surprised how non-ambiguous some of the attempts are...

khlhkjh001
khlhkjh002
khlhkjh003
...
khlhkjh999

All signed up in a matter of minutes from the same IP address.

Usernames that are obvious spam URLs...

And also the people that set up sock-puppet accounts.