September 16, 2014, 03:36:49 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 - Chosenbydestiny

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 16
Software & Accessories / Re: I think I may want a Monopod
« on: October 24, 2013, 02:36:04 PM »
A good alternative is a flat tripod, extremely portable, and stable enough for most travel situations. I'm looking at a Benro C1190T myself, when I was at the store it just felt so light and seems like it will pack easily. Unfortunately I was making a more important purchase at the time and came up short, I'm definitely going to buy one when I return. I already have a monopod, and it even has legs. I don't like it because it isn't versatile or stable enough for me for trips, it's also too long to fit in my backpack where the flat tripod looks like it might.

Portrait / Re: 'Straight' Portrait of a Young Woman
« on: October 22, 2013, 10:29:02 AM »
Contrasty* <- I know, that's not a real word either, lol

Portrait / Re: 'Straight' Portrait of a Young Woman
« on: October 22, 2013, 10:27:39 AM »
It seems to only be overexposed by a little bit, obviously a flattering look for the skin. Most importantly, the details that show the shape of her head, hair, and indicate she has all of the basic features of a human face are all still there. I wouldn't cry over it, it's still a good image and I'm using both calibrated and uncalibrated screens to view it. As someone said previously the contrasts look via post processing does looks intentional.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II
« on: October 11, 2013, 09:53:25 PM »
How many patents is it now? ???

I thought (hoped) this lens was right around the corner, but then Canon files another patent. That kinda means that the lens is far away from production, doesn't it?

I hope it's not the same with the 14-24L, because I am hoping that lens is right around the corner too.

Also included in this patent are formulas for a 14mm f/2.8 and a 24 f/2.8.
I'm guessing the 24 f/2.8 has IS, and that we'll see that lens way ahead of the 35L II.

They just recently released a 24mm 2.8 IS...

Lenses / Re: Ok, so I took my T3i/24-105 combo to Mexico
« on: October 10, 2013, 03:12:07 PM »
You could have perhaps done a pan or tilt and stitch. A friend of mine does it handheld with a 50mm on full frame and the results were unexpectedly good.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Talk [CR1]
« on: October 10, 2013, 03:02:10 PM »
I, for one, am a bit tired of my bodies being "video oriented". My 5DII, 7D and 60D have not shot a second of video. I guess I'll just have to hang on to them until the pendulum swings a bit in the other direction.

I hate people that own multiple bodies, complain about the next iteration of canons not having enough megapixels and complain about video capabilities. (Sounds like a spoiled brat). In my opinion, save your money and invest in a medium format camera!!!

It gives you all the MP you want.... which in turn has amazing IQ.... and guess what? No video!

Now now, no need to resort to name calling. The video nay sayers can cry foolishly all by themselves in their little corner. I mean, it's obvious that video changed the price of the bodies, and even the lenses. For example, It's definitely not the dramatic performance upgrade to the 5D3 that supposedly made it so unaffordable. And the bayer sensors they've been using this entire time even before video was added isn't holding development back at all, no, supposedly it's....dun dun dunnnn. Video. Thanks to video, we couldn't have 62 AF points instead of 61 on the 1D-X. Boo frikkity hoo. How can I press the shutter button now knowing my camera has features I don't use, oh no. This is worse than the print button. Save me.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Talk [CR1]
« on: October 09, 2013, 09:06:19 AM »
Wow. lots of frustration about the video feature. Before you get to frustrated you should realize that DSLR became extremely more profitable when it increased its customer base. People everywhere are buying dslrs now that they can do both. People who also want a cheaper interchangeable lens system would gladly buy these over similar priced camcorder of far lesser quality.
Also if they get a new person to come on board the canon boat that is a whole new set of lenses, cameras and toys. If a current user buys one new camera its valuable and they love it but the margin difference is massive.
Be happy a bunch of video people decided to pump fountains of money into the R+D the help benefit your picture quality. Now feature wise it does seem that most features are coming out for video but look at the cameras that are out there 1dx and 5d3 are top of the line image producing machines.
We will soon have a megapixelmonster.
Both Photo and Video features have a huge dollar sign. I think it is silly to complain about something that will not disappear and according to historical pricing has not dramatically affected what either party is paying.
Long term this is awesome. More customers to canon=more canon product=more product compatible with canon=more customers to canon.
Its good for all of us. Don't get wadded up on the fact video features are part of the team now too.

+1 people whine way too much about video on a dslr and have very selfish reasons to do so. If you don't like it, simply don't use it.

Please share:
body name / lowest temperature / how long etc...

I hope we will all benefit from this info.
Thank you very much

Plural for gear is still gear, not gears. Gears mean something completely different.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon announces waterproof, shockproof MILC
« on: September 19, 2013, 01:57:28 PM »
I like the idea, I just don't like the price.

Lenses / Re: 85L or 135L?
« on: September 09, 2013, 09:33:27 PM »
The 85L doesn't do too bad when the subject (kid) is at a considerable distance and running left and right with a few erratic turns. Running (or even walking) towards me from infinity to MFD was the only issue for me.

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L
« on: September 09, 2013, 09:21:36 PM »
For what it costs, the size and weight, I think it is an excellent lens.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumored Sigma Lenses Coming in the Next Year
« on: September 09, 2013, 03:11:46 PM »
RLPhoto is gonna be all over that 135mm f1.8. I hope that's what they announce at photokina, I've always wished for stabilization on my Canon 135L for when i went street shooting at night with it.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 24-105 f/4 OS on the Way? [CR1]
« on: September 08, 2013, 09:12:20 PM »
I wouldn't be surprised if this was really a 24-105mm f/2.8 for full frame users. With the release of the 18-35 f/1.8 one might expect more amazing releases with Sigma.

EOS-M / Re: The Next EOS M [CR2]
« on: September 04, 2013, 11:44:54 PM »
Lenses, lenses, lenses. More lenses to match the form factor and weight without having to use an adapter. Then maybe more people will buy into it as a "system".

I think the current discount prices should help with that. Selling lots of cameras creates a market for lenses.

While selling the camera cheap may not make Canon much money now, I think it was necessary to get the line going.
Once there is a sufficient user-base, then they can make some money selling lenses/accessories/upgrade cameras.
It will also start to attract other companies to produce products.

Also true, but if they're going to market this to photographers (or cinematographers) who want a secondary or backup body I'd like to see more utility out of it. Some people are waiting for the EOS M to get it's feet wet as a system rather than have it updated over and over with still only a few native lenses out. The fact the 11-22mm EF-M isn't even being sold in the USA is actually discouraging me from buying. But that's just how I feel about it.

Lenses / Re: Can 24-70/2.8 II replace 35/1.4?
« on: September 04, 2013, 10:52:12 PM »
What I have come to see is that prime users are envious towards the 24-70 users with all their versatility and weight saving. While I see zoom users that envy the prime users for the better image, and of course bokehliciousness of 1.4 and faster. Some girl that spent all she got on a 5D2 and the 24-70L II later wanted to get primes instead LOL, wish I could afford that lens though...

I think I'm with that girl.  I'm probably weird, but I don't find 24-70 zooms very appealing.  They're nowhere near versatile enough in focal length for me (for versatility my 24-105 is more useful), and within their rather narrow range zooming with your feet makes as much sense.  I would rather cover that range via a couple of light primes - a 28 IS or a 35 1.4 plus a 50 1.4, say - and save the zooms for lengths where foot-zooming isn't a good substitute: ultrawide and long.  So I would likely be asking the question in reverse....

Still, it's hard to change the perspective between 24 and 70 with your feet. I don't use the 2470 to get closer, I use it to set my perspective and then footzoom to the crop I want. Plus the AF of the 2470 kills every prime under 200mm.

+1 as much as I love primes, you're right about perspective. That's why I use one body with 24-70 and another body with a 135mm L prime. Sometimes I need to go wide and get some drama into the shot, zoom in and step forward for some normal shots. Can't switch fast enough during a performance to get the shots you need. Having a prime on a second body is nice for when you know it can do things a zoom cannot for creative DOF, higher shutter speed, and low light.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 16