April 18, 2014, 06:59:39 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 - TexPhoto

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 55
541
EOS Bodies / Re: 16 bit color anyone?
« on: February 25, 2012, 09:29:25 AM »
I'd love to have 16 bit color, if the camera was actually able to resolve color to that level.  But considering the bayer interpolation our sensors use to take color from the neighboring sensors (before the RAW image is recorded), I can't see the camera actually reading color to that depth. 

542
Landscape / Re: Post your best HDR Photographs
« on: February 24, 2012, 05:41:32 AM »

543
Lenses / Re: How is the 24mm TS-E V1?
« on: February 23, 2012, 12:12:04 PM »
I've owned both, and the mark I is well, OK.  It is not real sharp in the corners, and the more you shift away from center, the more the corner shifts towards the center.  Tilting was something I did not use much.  If I was shooting a landscape and wanted the bushes and mountain in focus, I stopped down...   I did shoot some cool tilt videos for that "miniature" effect.

On a crop camera this might be fine.  on FF, i thought the results from my 24-105 shot at 24 (or 35, or...) then "fixed" in Photoshop to have straight lines, were just as sharp.  If I was going to do that, why carry it?

The VII is decidedly better. 

544
EOS Bodies / Re: The Next 5D on February 27/28, 2012 [CR3]
« on: February 22, 2012, 06:01:08 PM »
If those are indeed the specs, I will hang onto my 5DII and put the money towards Pizza and Beer, I mean lenses.


545
Sports / Re: Surfing photos
« on: February 22, 2012, 04:10:16 PM »

Untitled by TexPhoto, on Flickr

546
Lenses / Re: Canon 200-400mm f4 lens - worth waiting for?
« on: February 22, 2012, 08:15:59 AM »
One pro photographer I know uses the Nikon 200-400 exclusively for his long lens wildlife work and loves it.  Canon does not put out lousy lenses, or slap an "L" on it.  But why don't we wait and see.

The Sigma 120-300 f2.8 plus 1.4X or even 2X sounds like an interesting alternative.

547
United States / Re: One Week Away From FEBRUARY 28, 2012.
« on: February 21, 2012, 05:21:26 PM »
New camera or not, i have to agree it will be Feb 28 in a week. that is CR3 in my book.

I think we will see a new camera or 2 in the near future, 0-3 months.  It will be awesome, but will not outclass the 1DX, as a few people seem to be wishing for.  And My 5D2 is hanging tough in the mean time. 


548
United States / Re: Annular Eclipse May 20th, 2012
« on: February 21, 2012, 02:36:27 PM »
What you need to shoot it, depends entirely on how you want to shoot it.  Do you want a close-up of the sun, long telephoto.   A sweeping shot of all the people looking dumbstruck, wide angle...  What I would do is google "solar eclipse" photos and pick some that are what you want to come close to.

Filters?  Well for your eyes, but the camera will be fine.  You include the sun all the time in your photos right?  It's the same sun.

I'd be trying for something like this:

549
Software & Accessories / Re: Lightroom for $70 at B&H only on 2/15
« on: February 21, 2012, 11:04:45 AM »
When I upgraded Photoshop the last time, they offered lightroom for an extra $99.  So CS6 might be a chance to pick it up cheap.

550
Lighting / Re: Flash in sunlight?
« on: February 21, 2012, 07:55:20 AM »
As others have said, fill flash is a great way to improve daylight photos.  Personally I like to dial in -1 to my flash compensation and leave it there.  This seems to work great for fill flash.

One thing to keep in mind is turning on the flash ussually means dropping your shutter speed to the max flash sync speed.  So if you are out shooting with your 85mm f1.2, and of course in A priority and locked in at 1.2, turning on the flash can suddenly turn all your photos bright white, terribly overexposed!  But it's not the flash.  It's that you were shooting at 1/2000 or so and now the flash forces you to 1/250.

Another thing to try is when the main problem is dark eyes, and under the nose, flip the camera upside-down.  This puts the flash on the bottom when it will do more good.  Would look terrible as the only light source, but looks good as fill.  Tough shooting position if you do not have a vertical grip.

551
FF EOS film SLR's came long before crop DSLR's, and when DSLR's came along, they used FF lenses from the film Era.  The first DSLR's were APS-H. Their were no special "digital" FF lenses that were not interchangable on film bodies, anf still aren't!

However, it was very difficult and expensive to build high quality FF lenses at 10mm.  It is possible, however to design lenses that sit closer to the film plane and have a smaller image circle for a lower cost.  Some of the lens elements might hit a FF mirror, however. 

Thats why the EF-S lenses were designed to be incompatible with FF, in 2002, there were still lots of FF film cameras in use and Canon did not want people damaging their camera.

Early Canon Crop cameras, D30, D60, 10D only had FF lenses to use, and this caused a lot of complaints from users wanting very wide angle lenses.

Lens technology has evolved, and it is now practical to make wide angle lenses that work with crop bodies, but it would be very confusing to create a third Canon EF lens type.

Canon made Film SLRs before they made DSLRs!!?  How has this been kept a secret? -Just Yankin your chain.  Yes, i understand that Canon's First DSLR was APS-H.  But what about the The Canon EOS DCS 3?  It was a 1.7X crop and came out in 1995, six years before the EOD 1D.  I wonder what kind of lenses it used?

And maybe it's just me, but looking at Canon's naming conventions of 1D-1Ds, Mark this or that,5D, 50D, 500D... I can't imagine they care about confusing people.  What is the plural of 1Ds ?  Imagine standing at the Canon drive through and trying to order; Yea, give me 5 1Ds, 5 1Ds-es  and 2 5D Mark IIs.... What? Um Yea, and one EOS Kiss Digital X. (A  japanease 400D)

552
The really weird thing is that Sigma's and other 3rd party Lens maker's "crop" lenses work fine on Canon FF.

Now Canon did have the 10-22 way before there were Superwide Nikon's or Sigma or anything equivalent...

Honestly i wonder if way back in the day when crop DSLRs were the 1st and ONLY DSLRs available, did Canon think there were never going to be FF DSLRs?

553
Canon General / Re: Canon footage in Nikon promo
« on: February 19, 2012, 06:40:29 PM »
Reminds me of the Intell 3D ads back in the 90s that were made on Macs (with Motorola chips in them)

Really seems like something you'd check into....

554
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Eneloop batteries for my flash
« on: February 18, 2012, 11:50:28 PM »
I use Energizer NiMH rechargeable and sadly, they are not as cool as Eneloops.  Cheaper, more flashes, and faster cycling though, so I stick with them.

Here is a good page about Eneloops: http://www.stefanv.com/electronics/sanyo_eneloop.html
Basicly it says you should be fine with your charger.


555
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Clean Your Camera With Water Hose ?
« on: February 17, 2012, 11:49:50 PM »
Is he crazy?  That 300mm f4 IS does not have a seal on the lens mount!

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 55