April 21, 2014, 11:21:33 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 ... 38 39 [40] 41 42 ... 55
586
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM
« on: February 05, 2012, 01:48:07 AM »
Just got this lens today:

IMG_1517 by TexPhoto, on Flickr

587
EOS Bodies / Re: A guy used 1DX yesterday in Germany!!
« on: February 04, 2012, 01:26:30 PM »
As a 1DsIII user, the 1Dx isn't the upgrade I was looking for. My next body will be a 5D3 or D800, so the specs of those two bodies are all that I care about. The 5D3 probably won't be released until after the 1Dx, so that's the only reason I care about when the latter hits the market.
To be sure, it wasn't the camera I was looking for either. I think combining the 1D line was a huge mistake. I mean, isn't one of the main reasons they kept the camera at 18MP was to be able to shoot so quickly? Wouldn't a lot of studio photographers been a lot happier if they could have shot at half the speed but with much bigger images?

I hate it when somebody tells me "you don't need anything more than 18MP." I have heard that a lot. How do they know what I need? When working with a model, I certainly need 27MP much more than double digit frames per second. I was kind of hoping the new 1D would rival medium format. When I'm shooting sports I don't want full frame. It's an impressive camera, but I really think they only people it's perfect for would be like National Geographic photographers and certain kinds of sports on smaller fields/courts. It's just the wrong camera for me and a lot of others, as well, even though it has a lot of really sexy features.

Are was allowed to admit this?  :D  Will Canon revoke my membership? 
I agree completely.  I want more MP than my 5DII for studio and general photography.  And the crop factor on my 7D is much appreciated when I shoot sports, or nature.

588
EOS Bodies / Re: A guy used 1DX yesterday in Germany!!
« on: February 04, 2012, 01:09:54 PM »
Auto focus at f/8, non of the current lens line up is less than f/5.6 and as far as I remember non of the EF range ever has been.  Even the ultra rare 1200mm manages f/5.6, the only lenses which will fit are the old mirror lenses, but they don't autofocus anyway.  Given a camera costing this much what lenses are there which need this feature?

Lenses like the Sigma 50 - 500mm which are f/6.3 work because they tell the body that its f/5.6 it can't be the aperture which is an issue, simply that the software is told only to work at values higher than f/5.6 if it's too dark AF gives up even on very fast primes.

Take any f4 lens, like the 300mm, 400mm DO, 500mm, 600mm add a 2X Extender, and you are at f8.  f5.6 lenses + 1.4X extenders are f8.  And of course off brand lenses and extenders can get there as well.  How often do you need this?  I don't know.  But focusing at f8 has long been held as a "pro" feature. Nobody wants to loose it, especially when their long lenses are not so long on FF as there were on 1.3 Crop.

589
Software & Accessories / Re: RAW vs DNG
« on: February 03, 2012, 10:40:14 PM »
Who wants to wear t-shirts that say "I shoot DNG"?, or" DNG to the Core"?  Seriously, it does not have the sex appeal of RAW.

590
EOS Bodies / Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« on: February 02, 2012, 03:25:30 PM »
If this is what one goes through to get an exceptional photo, I can only guess how Moses' post-climb writeup would have read, after he had seen the burning bush and heard the voice of God.

Yeah, but can you imagine if he'd gotten a picture??   ;D

I heard that he did have a photo, but shot jpeg, lost some highlight detail, and was too embarrassed to show it.

591
EOS Bodies / Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« on: February 02, 2012, 10:47:38 AM »
"Next time you're stunned by large moon on horizon, bend over and view it between your legs. The effect goes away entirely." - Neil deGrasse Tyson

Neil deGrasse Tyson (born October 5, 1958) is an American astrophysicist, a science communicator, the Frederick P. Rose Director of the Hayden Planetarium at the Rose Center for Earth and Space, and a Research Associate in the Department of Astrophysics at the American Museum of Natural History. Since 2006 he has hosted the educational science television show NOVA scienceNOW on PBS.

Or check here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_illusion

592
EOS Bodies / Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« on: February 02, 2012, 09:35:28 AM »
Just catching up on this, I can't comment on the detail of the image, but I have seen the moon appear that big before.  Happened to me about a decade ago driving up to Maine for a Columbus Day weekend.  Think it was the Harvest Moon and coming up over Rte 128... Basically the moon was bigger than 8 lanes of divided highway and was also a gorgeous deep red.  Don't think it was nearly that sharp, but looks like something from another world.

Ok the moon can appear bigger, especially when it first rises in a dark sky.  But it is not bigger, it's just the way your brain works.  It does not change it's distance earth, or it's size, so to get a photograph of it like Peter your going to have to use a loooong lens/telescope, or crop the image.  I have been out at sea, and seen people terrified by the rising moon.  I recall a friend screaming "a huge sailboat is coming right at us!"  Nope, just the moon dude.

I did some math one time and found that if you want to fill the frame with the moon, actually get the edges of the moon to touch the edges of the horizontal edges of frame, you'd need a 2350mm lens on FF and about 1450 on a 1.6 crop. 

594
Third Party Lenses (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) / Re: Sigma 30mm f1.4 EX DC HSM
« on: February 02, 2012, 12:41:21 AM »
There is a FF shot in this review: http://www.bythom.com/Sigma%2030mm-HSM-lensreview.htm

595
Lenses / Re: 24, 35 or 70-200
« on: February 01, 2012, 08:15:05 AM »
The 24-70 and the 24-105 are fantastic lenses, and one should be in your collection.  In my opinion if shooting FF, one should be the base of your collection and every other lens, an addition to that.

I prefer the 24-105, and would suggest buying the "kit lens" with your 5D II, III, IX, whatever.

596
Software & Accessories / Re: warmer packets - how do they work?
« on: January 31, 2012, 06:25:17 AM »
Some hand warmers contain cellulose, iron, water, activated carbon (to speed up reaction), vermiculite (water reservoir) and salt (catalyst) and produce heat from the exothermic oxidation of iron when exposed to air. This type of heatpads normally lasts from 1 to 10 hours.

I have only used them to keep my hands warm. Works great.

597
Software & Accessories / Re: TIFF or JPeg for storage
« on: January 31, 2012, 06:21:25 AM »
I keep the RAW file and after that save the photoshop file. 

598
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The best ways to (not) get your gear stolen
« on: January 30, 2012, 12:38:07 PM »
But don't be too surprised if your non camera geek (NCG) friends and potential muggers are not aware white means expensive. (I think of mine as cream colored)  In my experience most NCGs will be impressed with big lenses, but the white will not be a factor, or will just confuse them.

They might not be aware that white means expensive, but they would probably be aware that big is expensive.

OK, thanks for letting me know.  ;)

I have never had a problem with gear being stolen, but I am dude, not that big, but not that small.  Anyway, common sense goes a long way.



599
EOS Bodies / Re: Lotto Winner Cameras?
« on: January 29, 2012, 08:18:25 AM »
This article was obviously written by an ignoramus (word of the day)

Or someone with a sense of humor.  I imagine <5% of the contributors to this blog have a 1 series camera, so it's not exactly common.  Among Canon DSLR owners is probably closer to 1%, but so what. 

600
I have to agree with Tina.  ;D  And if you are happy with the lens, keep it, use it.  I'd check with a camera repair place and see what the cost to have the bug removed is.I know having a front element replace is usually more than $100, but they are not replacing it.  Anyway, can't hurt to ask.  Heck, call Sigma they might do it for free.

Pages: 1 ... 38 39 [40] 41 42 ... 55