September 20, 2014, 08:00:08 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 - pdirestajr

Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 ... 50
451
Buy a 5DII and spend the rest of your "budget" on glass!

452
Lenses / Re: What lenses do you own?
« on: August 20, 2012, 09:27:50 AM »
EF 15 f2.8 = small... Great for night and stars

EF 8-15 f4 L = fun fun fun fun lens

EF 24 L f1.4 = wonderful in low light, group of people, parties, etc

TS-E 24 L II = amazing for architecture and landsacape.

TS-E 45 = love it for time lapse and architecture.

TS-E 90 = wonderful for product photography and macro.

EF 85 L 1.2 II = amazing for portraits

EF 50 L 1.2 = a wonderful normal lens. Always with me.

EF 16-35 L 2.8 II = versatile wide zoom, great quality. Use it a lot for landscape HDR

EF 100 Macro IS f2.8 = a very good macro, very fast focusing and not only for macro.

EF 180 f3.5 Macro. = the one I always use for my waterdrops macro shots

MP-E 65 f2.8 = best macro lens for insects. Period.

EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS II = everything. From semi macro to walk around lens

EF 24-105 F 4 = not sure why I have not sold it yet.. Came with the 5D MKII. It's good... But not use it that much

Sigma 120-300 f2.8 and tons of extra letter I never remember = birds with a 1.2 and 2 x extender.

Something else but I can remember what.

Wow. That's it?

453
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Cleaning Camera - some questions
« on: August 19, 2012, 12:46:15 PM »
I do a lot of offshore saltwater fishing. I wipe everything down after those trips.

454
Lenses / Re: 5D Mark III / EF 85 1.8 - General Portraiture AFMA
« on: August 17, 2012, 09:34:08 AM »
And then there are times where you may not have to micro adjust a lens. I might just be incredibly lucky, but I have never needed to micro adjust a lens to a body. So like Neuro said, it's really case by case.

455
It means the amazing FF camera from Canon for <2k isn't a rumor! :)

456
Lenses / Re: 100mm F2.8 macro vs 100mm F.28L IS macro
« on: August 16, 2012, 05:37:27 PM »
I've had both at one time or another. Neither now- traded for 135 f/2 as I don't shoot macro.

With that said, both images were sharp and beautiful. What I do like about IS, when handholding, is the steady VIEW FINDER. Makes framing something small and really close up so much easier. I never needed IS cause I always used flash or fast shutter speeds, but that "sticky" frame is really sweet.

For what it is worth, I always got sharper images from the non-L / non-IS version. But sharpness is crazy overrated. That word is thrown around too much IMO.

If I was running around nature chasing bugs I'd get the L for IS and the weather thing. If I was in studio/ more controlled environments, I'd save the money, buy the non-L and spend the rest on a flash.

457
Portrait / Re: Quality of Portraits
« on: August 16, 2012, 01:04:55 PM »
I'm a professional artist. Photography is just one form of art I do. I basically charge what my time is worth. Otherwise, I'd rather spend that time with my family. After I had a my first daughter, all my rates went up as my time became more valuable.

Granted I am very fortunate to have more work than I can ever do. A good "problem" to have :)

458
Portrait / Re: 50mm f1.4 group photo
« on: August 16, 2012, 07:37:41 AM »
I think the problem is that you are using a 5DIII, which if you read enough threads on CR, you'll learn is a terrible camera. And that you aren't using an L lens. All non L lenses are total rubbish an should only be used as doorstops. You need a 50mm f/1.2L and NEVER use it at any other setting besides f/1.2! Just focus on one person's most interesting eyelash- Who cares about the rest. I need to see some bokeh!

Um, just kidding. I think lots of people covered possible fixes. Shallow DOF + slow shutter speeds + moving subjects = tough.

459
In terms of post processing critique: I'd say some of the techniques you used don't work well with the subjects. IE: harsh mid-tone contrast (extreme clarity/ sharpening) on the upclose female portraits. It is just emphasizing every pore, wrinkle, stray hair and imperfection in their complexion. Most women don't like that kind of effect ;)

460
You are 6 months in. Just keep shooting and growing as a photographer and artist. I wouldnt even begin to think about getting paid for work until people start saying, "hey, your work is special, I want to give you my hard earned money in exchange for your talent."

Just focus on your craft and not the cash.

Bottom line: I wouldn't expect people to pay me for anything after just 6 months of practice.

461
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM
« on: August 14, 2012, 05:12:54 PM »
Just picked up this lens off of Craigslist for 750. It is pretty cool.


Cafe Girls by Philip DiResta, on Flickr


The Gymnast by Philip DiResta, on Flickr

462
Lenses / Re: If you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they...???
« on: August 14, 2012, 10:13:17 AM »
Wow a lot of people are shooting with lenses that don't even exist!

463
Lenses / Re: Which 3 Primes to go for. Your advice will be appreciated
« on: August 12, 2012, 09:12:42 AM »
IMO starting with 3 lenses is a bit crazy. Why not get one zoom (or prime) and see what focal lengths you prefer? Reading reviews is very different than actually shooting.

464
Lenses / Re: lens recommendations for a vacation
« on: August 09, 2012, 12:05:59 PM »
I'd take as little gear as possible >> so you can enjoy the trip as much as possible!

24-105 as all day walk around. 50 for indoors/ low light.

24 is wide on FF. 5DIII's ISO capability also makes your 24-105 pretty powerful even though it's "only" f/4.

465
Lenses / Re: Sigma 30mm f/1.4 or Canon 35mm f/2?
« on: August 08, 2012, 11:34:59 PM »
The "vintage" EF 35 f/2 and the 24 f/2.8 are really great lenses and very affordable. The Sigma prime is APS-c only, so limiting to which bodies you can use it on.

Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 ... 50