March 03, 2015, 11:43:46 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 - CharlieB

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 21
Lets get practical.

You've got a 6D.  You have a 24-105L, you have a 90, and you have a 70-300.

The real question is - what type of portraiture will you be doing?

You're covering 24-300 mm already.   Unless you're into the "only the eyes" in focus school of though, you won't be shooting wider than f/4 at head/shoulders type shots.  So  you have to ask... what sort of work will you be doing.  I personally like longer lenses for head or head/shoulders work - something in the 135mm range.  But, full length or nearly full length portraits... more like 50mm.

You really need to ask yourself how you plan to work, and then choose whats going to work best.

Lenses / Re: What's your oldest Canon EF lens?
« on: July 20, 2013, 01:09:04 PM »
I still have the orginal 35-80 that came with an old film Rebel-S.   Also have two old zooms from that era... are they 70-200 or 80-200... plastic mount stuff.  Old.  Still work fine!   The one zoom totally clouded on an early morning outing, and when it cleared up... a sort of residue was left behind on one of the elements.  Not worth fixing, so I bought another for $99 new.  Ha~  The flare caused by the residue makes that zoom "perfect" for portraiture now.   Sort of like a Softar I from Zeiss.

Oldest metal mount lens... 28/2.8.  My 50/1.4 focus died and that was replaced too.... but the 28's been doing well since the mid 1990's.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark II composition movement
« on: July 20, 2013, 01:02:13 PM »
As others have said, the 5D II has only a 98% viewfinder. The main reason for not having a 100% viewfinder isn't the cost of making it bigger, but the cost of aligning it accurately. Missing out 2% allows for some minor misalignment without the viewfinder seeing part of the frame beyond what the sensor would capture.


There is always a bit of variation when framing is critical.  Only the very top end cameras are going to give close to 100 percent coverage.   In a past life, I was able to critically align my Nikon F and also F2.  Not fun trying to get top, bottom, left and right all to focus on a screen correctly, and to have it also frame correctly.... but I digress.  Its a pain.

I bought an EOS-400 (XTi) that had a tilted sensor.  The tilt was a good 1-1/2 to 2 degrees clockwise.  Canon was able to correct most of it.... after two trips back. 

You'd expect some variation and imperfection in what was the bottom of the line camera when I bought it.  The 5Dii on the other hand... should be better. 

On the Nikon F, or any film camera, part of the complexity of alignment is the shape of the film as it lies against the rails.  It is not flat, and cannot be flat.  Film takes on a W shape when flattened on rails with a pressure plate, lifted in the center and edges, but contacting the plate  about 1/3 the way up and down from center.  On digital cameras... oh gosh... you have viewfinder accuracy, mirror accuracy, and sensor accuracy to contend with.... much different beast.

Now thats a swift kick in the pants for 'ol Canon....

I'm sure FakeChuckWestfall will be amused.....

Very good point about the sensor acceptance angles.  I'm also wondering if periferal illumination correction also might have had an effect in this case.

Lighting / Re: Softbox Size question
« on: July 12, 2013, 06:47:22 PM »
Really depends on what your photographing.  I used to use umbrellas for portraits.  Then I got all gaga about soft boxes and used those, with good results...  last few portrait sessions, one bright silver umbrella - and a big softbox.  Big for me is 3x4 foot on a Matthews Beefy Baby, which is enough stand for a non-boomed box.  If you're thinking about using a boom, you'll need a Jr size stand.

The nice thing about soft boxes, is you can always scrim them at the face, and not lose much interms of light quality, just reduce the width of the light itself.  Very good and interesting results can be had on products using creative scrimming of softboxes.  Umbrellas dont do on most product photography.

not sure of the brand, but I got from AMAZON....

tempered glass protectors for my 5d2 and 7d, which also came with top display protectors made from clear plastic

Nice borders, good adhesion... I managed to not get dust trapped between the screen and protector.  Remove by running a fishing line between the screen and protector, if need be.

So far, a year on the 5d2 and 9 months on the 7d.... zero issues

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Bag suggestions?
« on: July 07, 2013, 07:04:10 PM »
They're probably not all the rage of popular right now, but I've relied on varous Domke bags since the 1970's.  I've owned some of the one's I've got now since the early 1990's. 

The big ones hold more than you want to carry -
Bag one - 5d2, 50/1.4, 28/1.8, 100/2.8, 16-35/2.8ii, 24-105/4, old Minolta meter with stuff for it, ton of filters and adapter for Nikkor F series lenses, various reference material, two large lawn trash bags in case it rains, cleaning stuff etc.

Bag two holds 7D, EOS-5, 28/2.8, 20/2.8, 300/4, 1.4x, a pair of 283's or a pair of Leica M's, other stuff - chargers, cleaning stuff, afore mentioned trash bags etc.

Bag three holds three Leica M's with 28 through 90mm Summicron lenses (5 lenses), and an old 252 flash.

Bag four holds three more 283's and all sorts of lighting doo-dads, boat load of mafer clamps, scissor clamps, etc etc for grip use

Your milage will vary, but they travel well for me.  The Hassy stuff goes in Lightware cases

Canon General / Re: Clarification....Fine Art
« on: July 06, 2013, 10:02:34 PM »
we can just abbreviate fine art as fart, as in artsy-fartsy

Canon General / Re: Clarification....Fine Art
« on: July 06, 2013, 10:25:28 AM »
As they say, "yes its art, but will it sell?"

I think with as with all art, fine art photography should be compelling.  It should be emotionally evocative for its own sake.... apart from social or political or popular statement.

Most "fine art" is not in that league, whether photography, or paint on canvas, or clay, or steel...  Much is just a social facade and patronage.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon T2i/550d write speed n Burst mode
« on: July 06, 2013, 10:13:57 AM »
I use a 7D with a 300/4 non-IS (original design).  Use it with the original 1.4x converter too.   

Couple of things I really like there - speed, focus options, and AFMA.  My 300 needed some correction that Canon said it could no longer perform, but the body does it just fine.

I think you can find 7D's on the cheep right now... just over $1100 if you look around.

And....always get the fastest card you can afford.  It makes more sense in the long run.

EOS-M / Re: Will version 2 use the new 70D sensor?
« on: July 06, 2013, 10:07:46 AM »
Probably a bit of each....

Canon seems to be chasing the pack.  I'll personally wait.   Whatever I get... it'll have EVF, cant trust the displays to direct sun, haven't seen one yet that is really all that workable.

To me its not about the price, its about the hardware.... no matter the price, you've got an EOS-M when all is said and done.

Lets see what gen-2 brings - thats my slant on this on in particular.

I didn't feel bad getting a 5DII at great savings when the 5DIII came out - as even with the lack of awesome focus, its still a very very capable camera.   Just that... Mirrorless is ok, but I'd like to have EVF in the mix.   So, maybe next model.....

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 35mm film body
« on: June 30, 2013, 08:49:56 PM »
EOS-3, great camera.

Barring that... I dunno.  I keep a pair of EOS-5's on hand.. and I have no idea why.  Haven't shot 'em in years.

All of my weddings were/are shot in 2-1/4 film.

Two bodies.  A 35mm lens, a 50mm lens. and... if you must... a 100mm lens.   I used a 60mm, 80mm and 2x Mutar on ever shoot, was never at a loss.

Put your money into a second body - 5Dii or 6D, and some decent flash equipment.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 21