July 28, 2014, 04:24:44 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 - extremeinstability

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10
46
Lenses / Re: Best lens for capturing the Milky Way?
« on: April 28, 2013, 11:57:07 PM »
It's not Canon.  Probably Samyang or their other brands.  Canon is king coma both the 14L II and especially the 24L II.  I used both for that....

http://www.extremeinstability.com/2012-9-22.htm  24L II

http://www.extremeinstability.com/2012-3-30.htm  14L  II

They both have make you barf wings off points of light.  It extends so far in on full frame too.  It really has a way of killing the use for star photography. 

1.4 vs 2.8 is so huge though obviously.  So with that in mind, I'd think the Samyang 24 F1.4 would be damn tempting to give a whirl.  Wider than 24 would be nice though as it actually is limiting on Milky Way even vertical shooting.  But of course bye bye F1.4-F2.8

I now have the Zeiss 21 and Samyang 14, neither of which I've done this with yet.  Samyang 14 has some hefty vignetting wide open that may not help much.  Least it doesn't wing/coma like Canon.  I'm actually planning to take it to the Badlands for that soon on a 6D.  But really, as you can see from the F1.4 24L stuff there is potential for craziness with high ISOs.  If only 1/3 of the frame wasn't winged the hell out.  So in the end I'd say taking a 14 Samyang and 24 would be a great idea.  The 14 Rokinon version was down to what, $300 or so? 

http://www.lenstip.com/330.7-Lens_review-Samyang_24_mm_f_1.4_ED_AS_UMC_Coma__astigmatism_and_bokeh.html
http://www.lenstip.com/245.7-Lens_review-Canon_EF_24_mm_f_1.4L_II_USM_Coma_and_astigmatism.html

Least the Samyang 24 will have noticeably less wingage than the Canon.  Too bad it's not the same prices as their 14 lol. 

47
Lenses / Re: Canon 24-105 F/4L
« on: March 30, 2013, 10:23:48 AM »
Just added the 6D and 24-105 2 days ago and first shot with it yesterday.  I keep trying to talk myself into selling the lens but I can't come up with a better alternative.  I'll have the 21 Zeiss on the 6D and this lens will be on the 5D II at the same time(figure it'd be best to run two bodies for the rare times a tornado is passing close by and no time to switch lenses lol).  The wide shot will be happy with the Zeiss, like a lot happy as it is amazing.  I'm having a fit in my head if I need the zoom or not for the second body and not just a 50 or 85 prime.  The thing is, at 50mm the 24-105 at F4 is dam similar to a Sigma 50 at F4.  But yeah not at F2  ::) .  The good thing is 24mm is clearly its weak end but by quite a lot.  Need to see just where that gets better between there and 50mm.  35-90mm might be really damn "happy" with that lens and that would be great.

I'm a little shocked just how bad the color fringing is though.  Sure it can easily be removed but it sure isn't helping things.  Vignetting wouldn't be as annoying if it wasn't such a sharp change and was spread out a bit more.  For sure that would be a very damn fine lens on a crop body.  And even full it seems pretty darn happy inside 24mm and to a lesser degree also inside 105mm.  Edges are a billion times better than the 17-40 ever was anyway so there's that lol. 

I've gotten rather picky over the last few years(even when I already know it doesn't matter for the image and old original rebel kit lens images will still be selling over everything else, making the point all the more lol).  Anyway, as anal as I've gotten, even on full frame the 24-105 is trying its ass off to get me to keep it and use it.  24-70 F4 sounds like its weakness is in the middle.  Screw that then.  24-70 F2.8 I may as well just go 50mm since there will be a 21mm on another body anyway. 

I hope you got a good deal on it.  It was $2330 or something like that from Amazon, which if one then wants to sell the 24-105 anyway, for like $800, then the body was only $1500.  I think Canon's rebate deal ends today on things. 

48
Canon General / Re: Think I need a 12 step program
« on: March 29, 2013, 09:41:28 PM »
My name is Mike, I'm a camoholic. 

Last fall added the 5D II, 14 Samyang, 50 Sigma and 21 Zeiss.  Lately had a buying bug real bad and convinced myself I need to run two bodies at once.  So yesterday a 6D with 24-105 arrived.  Now I'm trying to refrain from selling the 24-105 and snatching up the 85L.  I'd finally feel rather complete after all that and having the 100-400 already as well.  Yeah right I'd feel complete. 

Sad thing is I've hardly shot a thing since all that.  If severe weather season would hurry the heck up I could probably save myself from giving into the buying bug.  Like some sort of "fix" when waiting on being able to shoot what you shoot.

49
Reviews / Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« on: March 22, 2013, 06:02:36 PM »
I'm looking to rent a lens for a backpacking trip this summer in the Sierras and was looking at the Zeiss ZE 21mm f/2.8 would you go with the Zeiss 21 or Canon 24. Manual focus isn't an issue.

I had the 24 first on a 5D II but quickly wound up swapping it out for the 21 Zeiss.  I'd hoped to use the fastness of the 24 for night sky stuff but the coma is so extreme it rendered it useless for that and needed stopped to at least F2.8 anyway.  The Zeiss is dope. 

50
Lenses / Re: Help Me Build My Lens Stable!
« on: February 17, 2013, 11:04:50 PM »
I just made a similar jump and wound up with these and a couple in there I didn't keep...  http://www.extremeinstability.com/topic-14-21-50-lenses.htm

24L for astro I'd probably rethink that one.  Stars will have huge ol wings on full frame well in from corners and even stopped down some. 

51
Lenses / Re: Which 50mm (with AF) is best from f/1.4 - f/2.0?
« on: January 27, 2013, 12:49:30 PM »
Sounds like you largely already know the ups and downs.  This may or may not be worth looking at for others.  I did a quick few comparisons with the Canon 1.4 1.8 and Sigma 1.4 here:  http://www.extremeinstability.com/topic-14-21-50-lenses.htm

52
Mine is just my site name obviously, http://www.extremeinstability.com/ ...which I named it back in 1999 or 2000.  Needed a storm chasing related term for the site and saw that mention on a national weather service page talking about the setup for a first chase of mine.  CAPE is convective available potential energy and pretty much 1000 j/kg and under is low and I guess I always took extreme instability as being 5000 j/kg and above.  It's stuck since then, though I often regret the choice as I don't feel I've chased "extreme" enough to warrant extreme being in the name.  That and well extreme instability has never proved to end up that impressive storm-wise usually.  Usually means more of a cap in place and weaker shear periods.  Kinda stuck with the name now though.  And lordy are there few url naming options now.   

53
This should be highly dependent on subject detail or lack of.  I shoot a lot of clouds or fog or just something with a lot of sky and well even the base ISO can wind up annoying.  Where as if I shot something with a bunch of detail the ISO could go far far higher before there's an annoying aspect to it.  Doesn't take long with a digital camera to see what sucks and what doesn't for each type of scene though. 

54
Thanks for the heads up Cayenne.  I'll have to look into that this year.  I've always filed myself online but planned to go to a tax account this year and will bring that up.

55
Wild guess between now and April I sell either my Zeiss 21 or Canon 100-400L to help pay my taxes.  One of these years I'll learn to pay the quarterly estimates(like it matters).  God I love 15% self employment tax, sigh.  But yeah yay for all the deductions being self employed.  If I was getting money a Samyang TS 24 might be in order when it is out.  Gas money instead would probably serve more use however.

56
Canon General / Re: Total File Size - All Your Images and Keep or Delete
« on: January 02, 2013, 04:03:46 PM »
That's a good point on corrupted images.  I've always sorta wondered what the best route is to keep backups with that possibility in mind.  I've feared something gets corrupted and then when I back up, I write over in all the back up locations using a corrupted file.  Suppose the key would be when backing up, doing it once in each location and not writing over the first ones.  Not so simple to have several places when we are talking 5TB obviously!  But even for my whittled down 36 gigs I'm wondering the best safest route to prevent that corrupted issue.  I guess if you browse through them all in like Bridge as you are deleting down you could see if anything had gotten corrupted on the main harddrive.  Course that might have to include purging bridge cache and letting it make new previews.  Just this being brought up again now makes me want to only add to the back up drives each year and not re-write over the older years.  Because it would be pretty damn annoying to get a corrupted file on the main pc, then screw up all the backup locations by simply re-writing with a bad file. 

57
Canon General / Re: Total File Size - All Your Images and Keep or Delete
« on: January 02, 2013, 02:18:04 PM »
Glad to see some others that are pretty big on purging and deleting.  I realized a bit ago probably the biggest reason I'm so bad at it.  I'm so anal on putting the best of the images forward whenever I do anything. I think, I have to whittle down so it's easier to find/sort/know the best(in my mind) for this or that use.  The other thing that I think drives what amounts to being the opposite of a hoarder is, I really really really hate doing headlines, captions, and keywords for stock sites.  Having far far less to screw with makes that a lot easier.  Yeah many are similar, but at least as far as keywords are concerned, it's often not as easy as simply highlighting all in a basic group and "appending metadata" for the keywords.  If I delete the piss out of things before I get to that point, it's all the easier to accomplish that and move on.  Those are the biggest reasons I delete away.  The third would probably be, it sorta feels healthy to just let go of some of it lol.  I always think about later on down the road in life, I don't need an ocean of images, a lake or pond will do.  Maybe that would have been a better way to look at this/do this post.  When you are at the end of your photography year's rope, how many photos will be enough.  I'm shooting for a best of collection I guess.  If I "only" have 5,000 of those after another 30 years that should be more than enough. 

58
Canon General / Re: Total File Size - All Your Images and Keep or Delete
« on: January 02, 2013, 01:37:49 PM »
Memory is cheap. You said it yourself. To me, it's not worth deleting a single frame. If I take a shot that's not worth keeping, it gets deleted in camera before I transfer the files to computer.
Just curious....I'd been told that for longer life of your memory cards, that it was best to NOT do maniuplations, deletions from the camera to individiual files on the cards while in camera.

That is was best to unload all your images from a session(s) with your card reader to your comuter, and once done, you reformat the cards in the CAMERA to totally erase them to be ready for next shoots.

Thoughts on this? Myth or Fact?

TIA,

cayenne

It's probably a bit of both.  Generally if you work something more it won't last as long as otherwise, but with that it's probably a big none issue.  Something else will screw up a card first.  I've only had one card fail the last 10 years. 

Of course now I notice the card reader comment.  I have always done mine via usb cable/camera to the computer.  I think taking the card out, putting it in a card reader then back out and back to the camera will do more harm than deleting images on the card ever will.  I've always been paranoid about that weakening a card that I just always have a big enough card each time and never take it out of the camera and use the usb route(till the usb port failed on my T2i anyway lol).

59
Canon General / Re: Total File Size - All Your Images and Keep or Delete
« on: January 02, 2013, 10:19:41 AM »
I didn't even think about video.  I'm almost the same with those.  With those I tend to delete just entire days at a time rather than go through the clips from a day and delete unwanted clips. I chase storms so well later I think, that day/storm wasn't that interesting compared to other things caught.  Trash bin it goes. 

And it has completely nothing to do with cost of drives.  Someone could give me huge TB drives and I'd still have 36 gigs kept right now is all. 

I kinda look at it like a box of family photos later in life.  I'd think say 10,000 should cover it, rather than having to deal with 100,000 instead.  I'll never have 10,000 as I barely have 2,000 after 10 years. Seems like keeping 10 photos from a day out would be ideal or even 20 I guess.  Not sure how much that would change if I say shot sports instead.  Probably a lot but then again not really sure it'd matter much. 

The one thing I have learned is to not spend much time deleting off the camera at the time.  Whole lot easier to do it later on the pc and usually a lot wiser. 

Seems to me spending time deleting and whittling down a lot is anything but "wasting time".  I guess if I was fully wise I'd always stick files on a big ol hard drive and not delete those down and instead just have a separate area where I whittle like mad like I already do.  I have too much of a screw it attitude though.  Not saying to hell with all the photos at all, but it just seems excessive to save everything. 

I'll agree if it's worth putting on a website it should be worth keeping.  I just end up thinking that one backwards after the fact when I'm whittling down and thinking it wasn't worth putting on the site in the end...but it's already there.  If it is in my stock section I will for sure have the original file still.  But man no one wants to just use that section and instead find it elsewhere. 

I've gone over this topic with others a few times in the past and some have come back later totally changing their minds and wishing they had kept their pile at a more sane level.  I want to end up in with a very much best of pile.  Then if I want to say put out a calendar or simply change stock sites, or whatever might come up, it'd be so so much easier to start from a very much best of pile than seeing a trillion highly similar shots.  And it is.  And yet it's still a bit of a mental chore to pick, even now. 

If I shoot say some atmospheric optic that trumps all the versions of the same phenomena shot earlier, then in my mind life is simpler to delete all the lesser versions from the past. 

I will say though that what I do actually keep, I'm a backup madman like most everyone.  I'll have it on this computer at home and another, 2 external hard drives, then I'll also keep a couple copies at my parent's place.  That all barely feels like enough lol. 

I guess I'm just surprised there aren't more that take this approach and would rather do the opposite and keep it all.  The exception is if it's for someone else you are shooting, wedding, portrait, sports, etc. 

60
Canon General / Total File Size - All Your Images and Keep or Delete
« on: January 01, 2013, 11:29:41 PM »
36.5 gigs 2002 through 2012... at the moment...though I feel like whittling down even more.  Actually quite a lot of TIFF files(star trails/etc) in that making it larger than it really is imagewise. 

I always wonder how many others are like me out there and delete like a madman, just to keep things in check as far as total images kept over the years.  If I don't whittle often and delete away, I end up feeling like I don't even know what all I have and can't keep a grasp on that.  Figured it might be interesting to see some of the total image file size out there.  As in whatever you got that you keep and well back-up. 

I'm sure for the wedding photographers and portrait business folks out there, it's a different deal and huge just for the customer's sake.  Still probably interesting to hear.

Since 2002 I've had a Sony F707, 5 rebels and 2 5D II's and really actually shoot quite a bit.  Often stuff that's just not repeatable later.  I think many take the "logical" route of "it's safer to save and not delete and storage is cheap anyway".  It is logical.  Deleting takes courage lol.  If I took that route and had been keeping everything, man I'd feel so so lost whenever I'd go to do anything with things.  I get into a severe delete mode, just find something, anything to delete, to whittle the pile way way down.  I do that with the collection, then later on I do it again to the same total collection.  The earliest stuff gets so so whittled down.   I'll stop and think to myself, what are you doing, then say screw it, just a photo, and delete...over and over lol.  And of course half the time someone e-mails wanting to license an image, they pick one off the site that I never kept and I kick myself a little. 

It's fun to sorta trip yourself out later realizing you can stick all the images you've kept the last 10 years on a single cheap flash card. 

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10