July 22, 2014, 02:05:55 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 - studio1972

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]
61
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 3 review
« on: November 15, 2010, 08:44:48 AM »
Thanks for the info on the low light noise reduction ability. It's a great product but my only complaint is the import function is extremely confusing (at least I thought so) after one gets used to the one in Lightroom 2.

Aperture long ago left a bad taste in my mouth so, feeling like a bug-ridden resource hog. That was the first version though but I'd moved to Lightroom not long after.

Yes, I agree with you on fact that the import did take a little while to get used to, but trust me, it is MUCH easier to have a real folder with all of your photos instead of having a single 2 gig Aperture Library avatar.

That's a strange reason to not like Aperture. The Aperture library is just a special type of folder (called a package) that you right click and select 'show package contents' to open. It isn't a single huge file.

62
Lenses / Re: Are L lenses becoming the standard.
« on: November 06, 2010, 02:06:17 PM »
Well, I don't think I'll be losing any sleep over it, it's just that Canon themselves describe the L series as "conceived as professional tools". I would rather them be designing a lens that will help me earn a living than nice to have type lenses. For example, a 24-70 2.8 IS or a 50mm 1.4 IS would be a lot more useful than this 70-300. Was there actually anything wrong with the old 70-300 anyway, the new one isn't even any faster?

63
Lenses / Re: Are L lenses becoming the standard.
« on: November 06, 2010, 10:21:41 AM »
I have to say that I don't know any pros  using the 100 - 400mm IS L.  Most commercial portrait & wedding work stops at 200mm, I'm unusual in having a 300mm f/2.8, most times a longer lens is needed it's so rare that it's off to the hire guys.  At the other end wildlife & sports, they all seem to be using the big white primes.  I've yet to see a press line up of big lenses where one guy has brought his 100 - 400mm it just doesn't happen.

That's exactly what I mean. These compact (relatively) lenses with wide zoom ranges appeal to hobbyists who can't justify the cost of faster lenses, but they are not suitable for pros. I have never seen a pro using a 70-300 or 100-400 lens but loads of hobbyists seem to have them. As for the 400 5.6, Canon also make a 400 f/2.8 and If I was making my living from images in that range I would buy the 2.8 as it would soon pay for itself.

64
Lenses / Are L lenses becoming the standard.
« on: November 05, 2010, 07:52:39 PM »
It seems like Canon are slowly moving towards phasing out non L lenses (EF, not EF-S). The new 70-300 seems to me to not actually be a professional lens, it's far too slow! It seems to be aimed at amateurs with cash and is a straight replacement to the previous version which wasn't an L lens. The Macro 100mm L lens is another example, although this might be useful to some pros. Are we going to end up where L doesn't really mean anything anymore?

65
EOS Bodies / Re: What does canon do for Sony NEX-VG10 ?
« on: October 04, 2010, 05:25:55 AM »
Full frame would have the same benefits for video as for stills. I.e. greater control of DoF, better compatibility with EF lenses, superior low light performance. Also, it makes total sense to go full frame for cannon, unlike Panasonic who only had 4/3 chips in the parts bin and who don't have a range of full frame lenses to flog.

66
EOS Bodies / Some questions about the M9
« on: September 27, 2010, 05:07:40 AM »
I thought that was a really interesting article, but as somebody who's never used a Leica it left me with a question in my mind:

Am I right in thinking that you focus the camera by judging the distance and setting the focus ring to whatever number you judged the distance to be?

If that's the case, how can you get a portrait sharp on the eyes when using these very fast prime lenses? It seems a shame there is no live view function as that would allow some kind of through the lens feedback at least.

I can understand that you might get quite good at this with practice, but when the depth of field is just a few mm surely there is no chance?

67
Lenses / Re: 24-70 Please R.I.P.
« on: September 21, 2010, 02:36:22 PM »
Considering that 105mm / 2.8 = 27.5mm, why did Tamron have to make the front element 82mm ?

I thought the only reason Canon made the EF 24-105mm front element's size 77mm is to allow L glass owners to use the same filters, and collect $200 for passing through 'oversized front element' square.

The maximum aperture size is not the sole decider of the width of the lens, this is why zoom lenses are larger than primes with a similar maximum aperture.

68
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 60D v. Nikon D7000
« on: September 17, 2010, 06:24:41 PM »
I'm totally new to DSLRs and deciding between Canon 60D and Nikon D7000. Either of those will be my first DSLR -- a huge jump from Canon IS S3 series. Though I really love my Canon IS S3, it's time to upgrade and seriously learn to take great photos.

I love the articulated screen of Canon 60D, but it seems D7000 has a lot more to offer. And it seems there is a big disappointment among Canon lovers on the 60D. I can't decide which one would be better for my $1500 budget (camera + lens(es)).

Could you guys tell me the pros and cons of these two models?

Thanks!

With a $1500 budget I would think about getting a cheaper body and better lenses, maybe a prime or two?

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]