September 24, 2014, 12:38:40 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 - mrsfotografie

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 94
76
haven't seen a camera yet that didn't have, or eventually develop, some hot pixels.
That's what dark frame subtraction's for, even the in-camera process is usable for most shots.

At least SOME mfrs, NOT Canon, NOT Nikon, allow you to map out bad pixels right from the camera menu.

Not true, doing a 'sensor clean' with the cap on for a minute or so allows the camera to remap the sensor, and gone are all the hot pixels  8)

77
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2014, 03:51:57 PM »
I would love to have 20mm pancake on FF

I think we'd like a 20mm prime of any sort in FF.  Canon hasn't made a new once since 1992.

- A

True, I went for the Sigma, which for all the bad press still is a great and fun lens to have in my kit.

78
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2014, 03:48:56 PM »
Do people like these pancakes just because they are cute (no argument there)? What am I missing?

Many people bought the 40 mm just because it was 'cool' and then lost it somewhere between the padding of their camera bags and never realized it went missing  ::)

79
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2014, 03:45:22 PM »
I wonder what the limits of a "pancake"'lens are. Could they make a 14mm or 85mm pancake?

Since Pentax can make a 70mm f2.4 Pancake and a really small 15mm f4.0 for APS-C, I think it is not completely impossible but the Limiteds are a bit pricy unlike the EF40.

Wait till they include diffractive optics into the mix :)

80
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2014, 03:44:33 PM »
The beauty of the 400 prime over the zoom is size/weight and image quality, as well as it would be cheaper.

A new 100-400L would very likely improve over the old one in size, weight, and image quality, and improve for Canon in cost.   ;D

As in 'improve' you mean 'more' I think? I also think a new 100-400 will be bigger and heavier especially if it's twist zoom.

All the newer teles have gotten lighter.  I expect the same.

The 70-200 f/2.8 IS (II) increased both in size and weight...

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Specifications.aspx?Lens=103&LensComp=687&Units=M

81
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2014, 10:31:20 AM »
The beauty of the 400 prime over the zoom is size/weight and image quality, as well as it would be cheaper.

A new 100-400L would very likely improve over the old one in size, weight, and image quality, and improve for Canon in cost.   ;D

As in 'improve' you mean 'more' I think? I also think a new 100-400 will be bigger and heavier especially if it's twist zoom.

82
5D mark III Central autofocus point performance with Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3

Today I discovered a very strange behavior of autofocus of this lens on 5D mark III.
If you use a single autofocus point it appears that the central point works much worse than others.

The main problem is in refocusing from near objects (~3m) to far away ones (30m).
 If only a single center autofocus point is selected for use , the lens is refocusing from near objects to remote very badly. In many cases it gets stuck.

In fact, somehow, I obviously thought that the center point should give the best results. But it turned out that any other point except the central one provides much better refocusing (on 5D mark III). It works a bit slow but OK.

At first, I suspected that maybe it's my camera glitches. So, I put on the Canon EF300 / 4 L IS with 1.4x converter, and of cause the central point here worked exceptionally well with a Canon lens, so that means the camera is OK.
Just don’t understand how it is possible?

P.S.: The lens has actually been updated with the new firmware at a local Tamron service.
The AF menu, "Lens drive when AF impossible" is turned "ON".

I get odd results with the center point and my 100-400L too, so it's not likely to be 'just' Tamron's fault ;)

83
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2014, 08:57:31 AM »
The thorn in my side is a new version of the 400 5.6L. The oldest lens in the line up now yet to be re-worked
IS plus a closer min focus.
Thank you please Canon

I might be interested in that lens, also. But it would have to compete with a new 100-400L.

84
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2014, 08:51:19 AM »
I hope they don't improve the optics on the new 15-85. I want to keep mine  ::)

Be careful what you wish for ;)

85
PowerShot / Re: New Large Sensor PowerShot Rumor [CR2]
« on: August 23, 2014, 08:47:43 AM »
I think such a camera makes sense. Cameras now have to compete with smart phones on image quality, not portability.

86
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2014, 08:03:38 AM »
The 44mm flange distance makes a non retrofocus (ie pancake) 24mm EF or EF-S lens unlikely.

Really? 'Pancake' does not have to preclude 'retrofocus'.





http://www.voigtlaender.de/cms/voigtlaender/voigtlaender_cms.nsf/id/pa_fdih8vxb7z.html

87
Sports / Re: The first Olympic game/ Field , in this world 776 BC.
« on: August 21, 2014, 05:14:11 PM »
Aphrodisias, Turkey...  ;)





88
Photography Technique / Re: Photographer's Block
« on: August 21, 2014, 04:07:35 PM »

I don't know that's entirely fair... You can grow as a photographer and you can fit more on your plate as time goes...

Asking a person WHY they bought a camera is fair.

I'll answer this question with a timeline.   Back in 2004 my first child was born and like most parents we wanted to capture every moment of our daughter's life.  Fast forward a few years, my wife and I were looking at the pictures we had taken with our Nikon 885 p/s camera and noticed that our pictures looked just as crappy as our parents picture books did.   Though we did 'capture' family memories, we wanted them to look better and figured it was the camera and not technique (noob mistake).   In 2009 I bought a rebel T1i and started with the kit lens and a 70-300 IS USM.   I stuck with that for a few more years.   2011 - both kids start to participate in sports, so now I can't get where I need to be for a good picture being on the sidelines.  Start really using the 70-300 but find that after 200mm the lens was too soft.   I found this website/forum and started to learn as quickly as my brain could absorb.   I lurked here for a year before really starting to participate in the forum.   My techniques improved dramatically and I made smarter lens choices.  I got lenses that complimented my camera: 10-22, 17-55, 60 macro, 70-200 Mk II L IS USM, 85 1.8, 50 1.8, a couple of flashes, a much improved tripod, and last a 1.4 mk III teleconverter.  I focused on technique and glass rather than updating a body.   During the last couple of years I explored macro photography, portraits mainly for family pictures, and nature/wildlife photography.   As my kids got quicker in sports, I grew my skills there by asking our local high school coach if I could take pictures during games from the sidelines.  He liked what he saw and gave me a season sideline pass so I could practice in return for the pictures.  I also take pictures for my daughter's diving team and son's baseball team.  Now, my kids have joined the 4-H club and I'm providing "event" photography for them - again, to build my skills.   I have a few realtor friends who've asked me to photograph their new listings for them.   They've called me back for more work, so I must be doing okay there.   And now, I'm not sure what else to do/try.   So far all of my pictures have been functional rather than creative.   That is the reason behind this question.   I want to break out of the functional mode of photography.  I want to jump start my brain to see the world in a different way and capture that world I live in.     That is why I have asked the question.   I am not a professional and have no plans to be, but don't judge me because I don't focus on one aspect of photography or you believe that I'm upset at how much money I've spent.


So why did I buy the camera? - to make sure my family memories don't look like crap.

 ;)

edit - I still don't see why the equipment I have makes a difference to my question, nor if am I a photography professional or not.  But, if you feel it's pertinent to your analysis and recommendations, then you have your answer above.

I get how your 'functional' photography has dominated your photography and now you can't see how to be 'creative' outside that scope. I know of a photographer who was really into creative photography and has gradually moved back into 'functional' but great family photography. He's reduced his gear along those lines as well. Is it a loss? I don't know but as long as he and his family are happy, why not?

So please rejoice in your family photography if that is your main driver. Please don't push yourself to be the artistic photographer that you're not, if the only thing you find is frustration. And if you are that creative photographer... find the release, go out with a standard prime, away from your family and see what you can capture. You may like it and see that you have 'it' or not... it's all the advice I can give. But then again I don't have any kids - I can see how your kids can be a real motivator because after all your world revolves around them. Is it not?

89
Photography Technique / Re: Photographer's Block
« on: August 21, 2014, 02:52:33 PM »

I don't know that's entirely fair... You can grow as a photographer and you can fit more on your plate as time goes...

Asking a person WHY they bought a camera is fair. There are lots of reasons people buy cameras. And some of the reasons have absolutely nothing to do with photography.

Why do think there is a real need to fit more on your plate to grow as a photographer ??? Is there a check-list that needs to be filled ;)

The best photographers are specialists ;)

90
Photography Technique / Re: Photographer's Block
« on: August 21, 2014, 01:52:53 AM »
... I've worked on macro, sports, portraiture, real estate, architecture, and wildlife but right now none of those seem appealing. 

My suggestion is to stop 'working' on it. Your expectations may be too high, which at the moment is blocking your creativity. I would suggest to slap on a prime (simplify!!), relax and go out and play. When you lower your expectations, there's less pressure to 'perform' and that will allow you to free your creativity. :)

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 94