July 24, 2014, 02:28:15 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.


Messages - trygved

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
16
Lenses / Re: I can't stop thinking about A MONSTER!
« on: February 08, 2013, 05:19:20 AM »
If reach is this critical to you, I strongly suggest you pick up a 7D or wait for the 7DII
A 300 f2.8 IS FoV on APS-C = 480mm

It'd be $$$ smart + leagues more portable.
My ¢¢

17
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D to 5D Mk III - Pull the trigger?
« on: January 25, 2013, 05:38:04 AM »
I had sorted this out logically in my head, though this isn't the first time I've heard a resounding YES to move to the 5DIII.
I personally don't mind waiting til' a 12-24 + 7DII comes out.
I'm not crazy with any of the UWA offerings, except for the 14L which is the price of a 6D.
I realize it may take years, but whatever, I'm still taking incredible images with the setup that I have.

... but then I hear about people turning into magicians, and I don't even know.

18
Software & Accessories / Re: Starting to work with RAW. Help?
« on: January 24, 2013, 10:12:41 PM »
Aperture handles all my RAW needs just fine.
While I have a tiny bit more control in LR, the workflow of Aperture is more my taste.

My only qualm in dealing with RAW is it doesn't use picture profiles.
I like a flat contrast with the vibrancy turned up a bit, and I can nearly get that out-of-camera using the Technicolor Cinestyle with the vibrancy turned up.
RAW doesn't use this picture profile however, and Aperture renders the RAW files very contrasty.

I can use a preset to quickly adjust the imported files, but it is an extra step that always irks me a bit.
This is more related to how RAW files are recorded than how Aperture reads the file, so my point is sort of moot.

In any case, I endorse Aperture. It's my bread and butter.

19
Lenses / Re: Your favorite lens is?
« on: January 22, 2013, 07:20:30 PM »
24-105 on a 7D
I like the mild separation of f4, and the reach on a crop makes for my ideal walk around lens.

I would like the FOV of the 40mm on a FF, and it's sharp as all get out, but on a crop it's a tad too tight for my photography.

20
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: World's First EOS-1D C Motion Image Shoot
« on: December 27, 2012, 11:52:44 PM »
I feel like what they are talking about is a mirrorless camera that can crank out 24+ frames per second.
When you get to a certain frame rate without a buffer holding you back, it's easier to call it a video camera.
The lines are definitely blurred between the two styles of image capturing.
Seeing as Canon has the tech to do this, I would almost prefer a camera that is pushed to its buffer that can get many more than 24 frames per second, but for a significantly shorter period of time.

Hell, I'd imagine we won't need to make this tradeoff for too much longer anyhow.

21
Lenses / Re: Zoom vs Primes?
« on: December 11, 2012, 07:29:38 PM »
I say the 24-70 (either or, personally. People loved the original lens, it's funny that people no longer consider it an option now that it has been replaced) or 24-105.
I would think the 24-70, though a bit shorter at its longest, will be more useful as you can use slightly higher shutter speeds.
IS won't help you with moving subjects, and the street is rarely still.
That, and the obvious flexibility with framing the subject quickly gives tremendous advantages.
By time you step closer or farther away, you may have lost the golden prize of a shot.

Then you evaluate the advantages of a fast prime.
While I <3 bokeh as much as the next photog, I feel that street photography benefits from putting the subject in context.
If everything is a 1.2f - 1.8f blur of creamy goodness, what's the point of shooting on the street?
What I really look for in great street photography are the details that support the subject of an image.
Maybe a ratty old building, a person off to the side doing something irregular, or a cat that you notice after looking at the image for 10 seconds or so.

It's all subjective however.
You may enjoy obliterating the background every now and again, so it comes down to your taste.

22
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Pro's who use 5D MkII
« on: December 03, 2012, 06:39:48 AM »
It is funny to me that a camera chosen for the official presidential portrait is evaluated not even 4 years later for pro-worthiness.  :P

23

My 2 cents: same time next year, 6D will be on Ebay for $1200 or less.

$1200 seems pretty optimistic, I'd expect something closer to $1500.

Ditto.
$1,800 retail
$1,500 eBay

I wager $20 on it.

24
Landscape / Re: Help Me Get Better - Crashing Waves - Round 2
« on: November 25, 2012, 12:49:45 AM »
I like it.

Here is another approach: some Rebel don't remember model with 10-22 lens @10mm, EwaMarine underwater housing, and not being afraid of water. That big blob was smashing in my face and camera just fraction of a second later. Maybe will post later when, I find the one "under" water and sand actually.
This was taken just some 50 mil south from your location.

This is spectacular, btw.

25
Landscape / Re: Help Me Get Better - Crashing Waves - Round 2
« on: November 24, 2012, 11:47:09 PM »
I personally like the slow shutter speed.
As was mentioned by somebody in the previous thread, it looks like a bomb going off.
Nothing excites me about a photo that has been taken a million times, no matter how well it is shot.
What does catch my attention is seeing it in a way that I haven't seen often (or at all).

That being said, I would suggest varying your composition a lot to find what best gives you the effect you are looking for.
All of these images provided are taken at a similar height and similar angle.
If the composition isn't entirely working for you, gradually get lower and closer until you find something that really grabs your eye.

I would also like to see this series with a wider lens, but that is more my own artistic preference.

26
Lenses / Re: 16-35 ii on crop
« on: November 08, 2012, 10:36:04 AM »
I purchased one via Amazon several months back, and found it an awkward range for a crop body.
It wasn't wide enough to justify its limited reach.

If you are comfortable with the FOV of a "26-56", then it is a fine lens.
It felt stubby to me.

27
just wondering if expodisc is any good for setting WB...

http://www.expoimaging.com/product-overview.php?cat_id=1

Thx!


I've used a knockoff of this unit and it was the worst of the batch.
Could have been the cheap materials or whatever, but it provided a ridiculously cold WB, sometimes tinting it purple.  :P

28
Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS
« on: November 05, 2012, 09:52:04 AM »
Two more lenses that I don't need...where is the new 50mm and/or 14-24 Mr. Canon >:(

I had my fingers crossed for the 14-24
With the two mid range zoom lenses starting at 24mm, you would think the lens would fit like a glove in the lineup.
I would be right as rain with a 14-24 f/4, 24-70 f/4 IS, and a 70-200 f4/IS
Toss in a fast prime or two and you've got yourself a party.

29
I've found great results with this particular WB lens cap
http://www.ebay.com/itm/77mm-White-Balance-Lens-Cap-For-Canon-Sony-Nokin-Lens-/280680216117?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4159d83635

The construction is as cheap as the price, but the functionality is great.
It renders the WB just a smidge warm, which I prefer.

I've tried two other types of WB lens caps, and find them wildly unreliable.
They have a version of this cap that I haven't tried, as it is like 50 some-odd dollars, but this appears to be the same thing.

Being able to grab the camera and run is important to me, which is also a factor.
I loathe toting stuff around.

30
Canon General / Re: Canon Can't Even Make a Billion Dollars Anymore
« on: October 27, 2012, 12:43:32 AM »
Well, 6D is not gonna help any with the earnings once it is released. It is Canon's effort to pack the midrange with multiple bodies in the hopes that the buckshot approach covers that segment... all this results in lack luster bodies that don't necessarily stand out of the pack. 

I think 6D will have steeper price drops than 5D3 within months following release.  To expect otherwise given the high introductory price for this body is being overly optimistic. The added features may appeal to fanboys, but not to an average Joe who is not tied to the brand.

So expect Canon to turn out yet another poor financial report card in the next quater.  The price drops in 5D3 are no coincidence...the demand is poorer than anticipated in the mass market. Canon still has one thing going for it....the lenses. But they can't ride that horse for ever. They will have to make bold moves. Bolder than 6D.

It is difficult for Canon to make a bold move with the 6D like it did with the 5DII, as it has to play nice with its more sophisticated bigger brother.
I can see the 7DII having the leg room to make a strong impression (although the current 7D still holds its weight) as Canon will not have as many concerns about it cannibalizing another camera in the lineup.

To make a splash the way the 5DII did, I would imagine the Canon video dept would have to drop a bomb of an announcement. The C300 & C100 are exciting to a degree, but the price point makes it hard to pine over. Given Black Magic's ambitious foray into the segment (with its many shortcomings), I believe Canon could make the biggest waves here.

Just my ¢¢ + a little wishful thinking.  :P

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4