July 31, 2014, 04:13:23 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 - TexPhoto

Pages: 1 ... 41 42 [43] 44 45 ... 59
631
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS USM
« on: February 07, 2012, 08:04:26 AM »
Love the car photos.  Birds are OK, but...

632
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Announced
« on: February 07, 2012, 07:57:14 AM »
Without using this lens, or reading a comprehensive review, I've decided to...  :D

Hopefully this lens has improved optical performance and will nicely compliment a 30+MP Camera.  I'll wait to see it tested.  I'll probably also wait a year or so for the price to drop $400 or so like the 70-200 f2.8 IS II.

In the meantime my 24-105 "kit" lens keeps delivering awesome results.

633
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D800 is finally here
« on: February 07, 2012, 12:20:31 AM »
Looks cool.  Hope the 5D3 is better.

634
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II
« on: February 06, 2012, 03:31:06 PM »
I suspect payoffs from the filter manufacturers. 82mm? :o

635
EOS Bodies / Re: 2 different 5Ds coming in 2012 ???!!!!!
« on: February 06, 2012, 12:23:03 PM »
Only 2?  I think we'll see a 5D3 soon, I just don't think it will smoke the 1DX.

Have to agree. of course there will be a new 5D, it will just no be a better camera than the 1DX, or a better Video Camera than the C300.

636
EOS Bodies / Re: The next 5D: Someone posted this on Dpreview
« on: February 06, 2012, 12:14:44 PM »
I was pretty drunk and this guy came into my store speaking English which I have never really understood.  He asked how many glasses of Sake I drank so I held up three fingers and he smiled knowingly. He asked how long I'd been drunk and I said 7 to 10 days.

I have not been this drunk since I worked at the Salmon factory where I still know some people.  I told the English speaking guy about my good times there, and he was very happy.

637
Canon General / Re: Is it worth *really* studying photography?
« on: February 06, 2012, 12:31:24 AM »
No. Those schools are largely baby sitting services. Unless mom and dad are paying, no its not worth it.

But here's the thing. Photogrphy like any form of art has 100 people working at Dennny's to pay for their equipment and expenses, than it does making a good living from it.  I'm not counting the people at Sears portrait studio as photographers. And if you can't sit through a few classes, are you sure you can stick with it?

638
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

639
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.

640
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.

641
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.

642
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.

643
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

644
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. 

Pages: 1 ... 41 42 [43] 44 45 ... 59