September 01, 2014, 03:17:52 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 - romanr74

Pages: 1 [2] 3
16
Canon General / Re: Guess who! :)
« on: September 09, 2013, 09:47:11 AM »
Charlize Theron

17
Canon General / Re: Guess who! :)
« on: September 09, 2013, 09:29:07 AM »
I guess I'll be accused of having a dirty mind  ;D but ... Sunny Leone?

 ;D ;D ;D

+1

18
Canon General / Re: People that don't shoot in manual...
« on: July 31, 2013, 07:45:58 AM »
a bit of a yawn...

19
Lenses / Re: to TS-E or not to TS-E?
« on: June 21, 2013, 11:13:00 AM »
I have both the 17 and 24II ts-e lenses, and while I certainly agree that to get the most out of them it's best to use the tripod / live view combination, most often I use them hand held.  It takes a bit more patience, but for stationary subjects the results are fairly easy to obtain. (I mostly use shift, only occasionally tilt.)  One thing to note is that when shifting more than about 5mm off center, the in camera meter gets pretty inaccurate.  i often meter and focus first, then shift.  The image below was taken with the 17mm with about 10 mm of shift, handheld.

can only fully agree with everything in that statement!!!!

Two handheld examples from travelling Tuscany below.

20
Lenses / Re: to TS-E or not to TS-E?
« on: June 21, 2013, 08:14:29 AM »
to TS-E!

21
Lenses / Re: TS-E 17mm or 24mm
« on: May 30, 2013, 04:35:28 PM »
A few samples with the TS-E 17mm...

2920: Tilted downwards to have the focal plane equal the floor thus that the latter is sharp foreground to Background.

3365: Most classical usecase (in my opinion), shifted upwards to preserve parallel lines.

3208: Less obvious usecase (in my opinion), shifted downwards to have more water and thus reflection in the picture while maintaining vertical lines.

All pictures were taken with camera handheld. Shifting is not so much of a problem handheld, the electronic gauge helps altough you can also control the parallel lines quite well trough the viewfinder.

22
Lenses / Re: TS-E 17mm or 24mm
« on: April 24, 2013, 07:27:51 AM »
thanks everybody, this helped...

23
Lenses / Re: TS-E 17mm or 24mm
« on: April 23, 2013, 04:09:27 AM »
so i understand from reviews the in-focus indicator will be working with this lens. is this also true when shifted or do you better work with liveview? i am currently using a 5dIII.

24
Lenses / Re: TS-E 17mm or 24mm
« on: April 22, 2013, 05:32:51 PM »
For example:


This is the textbook example of what the TS-E 17 is designed for: close-up photos of tall buildings.

Of course, that's not all it can do, and it's not all it can do really, really, well. But it's basically its primary purpose.

If you're thinking of doing this sort of thing -- or of similar sorts of close-up shots of very big things (including mountains and trees) where you don't want any geometric distortion -- then this is the lens for you. If you have other types of photography in mind, this probably isn't the lens for you.

Cheers,

b&

I've checked my metadata and 50% of my pictures shot with the 16-35 are at the very wide end. I've added a few examples which I believe work nicely. I have not added examples which do not work because of falling lines. What I obviously try to do is frame at 16mm thus that the falling lines are as limited as possible. With the 16-35 this can lead to mediocre results due to corner unsharpness (see picture 8814 showing the limits of this 'technique'). Not all of these picutres are potential TS-E candidates, of course. Picture 3938 for example surely isnt... Again, all pictures at 16mm

25
Lenses / Re: TS-E 17mm or 24mm
« on: April 22, 2013, 04:37:28 PM »
I had both and took both last August to Tuscany - including the places you mention.  The primary purpose of a TS lens is keeping your verticals straight.  In architecture for most shots if your verticals are not straight, then others will not bother looking at your work.  They're really a basic necessity type of thing.  Some may argue that you can do this in PP, but that is not true - the perspective will be different.

IMHO it's not really a one or the other proposition.  I found both necessary but if I had to take only one I would take the 24 because 17 is often too wide and it has more problems with flare.

I posted a thread here recently with examples from Tuscany with these lenses - http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=13128.0;topicseen

Very helpful pictures - thank you!

26
Lenses / TS-E 17mm or 24mm
« on: April 22, 2013, 01:17:24 PM »
I have been dreaming of a TS-E lens ever since I discovered they exist. I guess I am going to get one for my travel next month to Venice, Florence, Siena. I would probably opt for the 17mm version. So far I have been using my 16-35mm II when inside towns to do 'architecture' photography. What do you guys think 17mm or 24mm - both would be a bit cheeky...

27
use it a lot when travelling cities and love it...


28
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Buying from Switzerland
« on: September 20, 2012, 07:08:28 AM »
I can happen to you that you pay customs and import VAT when YOU cannot proove it belonged to you already when you crossed the border the other way. THEY will not need to proove the opposite.

29
Lenses / Re: Post your 24-70 II Experiences Here
« on: September 14, 2012, 01:25:01 PM »
it does do onion rings, a bit...

30
What Canon lists their price and and what actually gets charged is completely different.

I don't know about the US, but in Germany the street retail price of current Canon products unfortunately is near the list price, maybe a couple of €100 or so off depending on how shady the dealer is - but certainly not "completely different" :-o

In Switzerland official list price and effective street price are very different, in this specific case > 25%

Pages: 1 [2] 3