July 24, 2014, 06:40:42 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 ... 39 40 [41] 42 43 ... 59
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:

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.

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.

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)

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?

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....

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.

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!

Lenses / Re: Just how important is IS?
« on: February 17, 2012, 12:16:01 AM »
IS is awesome. That said, the lens you own is going to outshoot the lens you can't afford all day.  Seriously, there is always going to be more expensive equipment available.

Lenses / Re: hum...what's this lens ?
« on: February 16, 2012, 11:24:24 PM »
Wow, looks all shiny and new.  Good catch DL.

Lenses / Re: hum...what's this lens ?
« on: February 16, 2012, 10:21:25 PM »
Cool!  Definitely looks like a version II IS super tele, but does not appear to be a 300,400,500 or 600.  That just leaves the 800, and i have not seen a photo of that one.  it looks smaller than an 800 though.  I'd guess 500mm f4 by it's apparent size.

Lenses / Re: 24-70 too short for full frame?
« on: February 16, 2012, 10:10:13 PM »
Nikon users call their 3 big pro lenses the "holly trinity".  14-24, 24-70, and 70-200.  I have read more than one Nikon user say they have the 14-24 and 70-200, and a 50mm f1.4.  They see no reason for the middle ground 24-70.

Me on the other hand, I love my 24-105mm f4 IS. 

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: High MP Full Frame "Crop"
« on: February 16, 2012, 01:07:27 PM »

But if that's what it does, can it use the crop only lenses with a smaller image circle?  Or is that a problem for nikon as it would be a problem with ef-s lenses?

Yes, Nikon FF cameras can take their DX lenses and then default to "DX" mode.  The 12MP camera then take a 5.5MP or so photo.  Or when using FF lens, you can choose the DX mode for faster frames.

Canon has not done this and indeed EF-S lenses canon be used on FF cameras.

Lenses / Re: Recommendation: Tele lens for 60D
« on: February 15, 2012, 08:01:12 PM »
70-200mm f/4L IS would be my first choice to be honest.  But all of this really comes down to money.  The 70-200 2.8 IS II, is obviously the best, it's just a question of do you want to pay for it, and then do you want to carry it.  It's big and heavy, but awesome.

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Guinea Pig
« on: February 14, 2012, 05:59:41 PM »
Obviously, the 5D was purposefully limited in some areas just to keep from cutting too many 1Ds sales.  AF was one of them.  I mean -2 to +2 on the exposure compensation instead or 3?  That's software for $@#$%#$ sake.

On the other hand, it is/was one hell of a camera for the money.

Pages: 1 ... 39 40 [41] 42 43 ... 59