December 21, 2014, 07:04:17 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 - danski0224

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 40
181
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Best Nikon DF Review! By Fstoppers.
« on: January 24, 2014, 07:30:55 PM »
Around the world turning left :)

Nut room :)

182
Software & Accessories / Re: Macro and Tripods and offset
« on: January 24, 2014, 09:52:58 AM »
The RRS bars look interesting.

I'll look at the Manfrotto info, but for now, I'd prefer to not purchase an additional tripod. Adding something to what I have seems more practical and takes up less space.

183
Software & Accessories / Macro and Tripods and offset
« on: January 24, 2014, 09:36:16 AM »
I started experimenting using an actual tripod instead of a monopd. Truth be told, not a big fan of the process compared to a monopod.

I did find myself wanting a way to hang the camera off to the side because positioning the tripod was not really possible for what I wanted with the stuff in the way on the ground. Not much, but 6 to 12 inches of offset would have helped.

I really wouldn't want to buy a whole new tripod, so is there some sort of attachment that could give me an offset?

184
Lighting / Re: Looking for a macro ring light for 100mm L
« on: January 19, 2014, 11:35:42 AM »
Yes, it's bulky. But no cords is nice.

Figured it was worth a mention for those that may have the RT stuff to give it a shot vs buying a dedicated macro flash.

185
Lighting / Re: Looking for a macro ring light for 100mm L
« on: January 19, 2014, 08:24:15 AM »
The F2 looks quite promising, and I like the fact that you can use it with the 600.

I did not think about the convex shapes, so it would be hard no matter what, but at least you can get more pleasing results. 

Again, thank you for your answers :)

Gerhard.

The Wimberley F2 pieces are much easier to justify when you think about using them with 2 600EX RT flashes and a ST-E3 controller (or equivalents).

I have a MT24EX only because I got a very good deal on a used one. The new RT stuff sure seems to be a whole lot more useful- if only Canon (or someone else) would release a smaller RT slave compatible flash...

186
Lighting / Re: Looking for a macro ring light for 100mm L
« on: January 18, 2014, 01:20:13 PM »
Do you know if there are any options where there are two arms? A buying version of the DIY of Surapon. I was thinking today after posting here, that it would be great if one existed with a type of arm like the gorillapod; that are flexible in all directions, but still stiff enough to not move when taking a picture. Straight arms would be a good second.

Wimberley F2 (you need to purchase two- sold singly).

You also need a cold shoe.

187
Lighting / Re: Looking for a macro ring light for 100mm L
« on: January 18, 2014, 07:49:49 AM »
Neuro-

Is there some sort of quick release clamp being used to attach the Manfrotto 233B to the camera body?

188
Lenses / Re: TSE + Macro?
« on: January 17, 2014, 07:12:10 AM »
I also have a couple of macro lenses, and I like the Sigma 150mm the best.

I usually use AF, and in my seat of the pants experience, the Sigma focuses faster than the Canon 180mm (probably has to do with how the Sigma lens is classified by the camera compared to the Canon 180). The 150mm focal length is a sweet spot for me- just a little more than the 100mm and closer than the 180mm. The 150mm in the middle seems to make a big difference.

Sometimes, I'd like to get more of the subject in focus without resorting those smaller apertures that also bring more background into focus and it steals light. Focus stacking is an option, but only for still days- and even a tiny breeze messes that up. Then there is the whole tripod thing.

That's why I think I would like a TSE lens with macro capability, probably at least 100mm and 120mm would be even better. That Hartblei 120mm macro would be nifty (I think), but I lack the ~$5k to buy one- being able to rent one would be cool. I also see that Schneider has some top shelf TSE macro lenses.

However, I can round up a 24mm TSEII, a 1.4x and an extension tube to experiment with. The 90mm TSE as mentioned by Neuro could become an option if one came up used for a good price, or maybe Canon has something in the works for release this year.

189
Lenses / Re: TSE + Macro?
« on: January 16, 2014, 05:42:46 PM »
Dear  danski0224
Yes,  My TS-E 24 mm. F/ 3.5 L MK II is great for Macro Photos too, This Lens have Min. Focus Distant = 0.21 M or 0.69 FT. That great for the Macro of Flowers in this distant. But if you want  more bigger Macro of the Insect, Canon Extension tube EF 12 II is recommend, BUT Canon Co. do not recommend EF 25 II Because the Lens - to-subject distant will be too close.
The Attached Photos are by TS-E 24 mm II( No Extension Tube), Hand Held Shooting.
Enjoy
Surapon
Ps. Pic. TS-4  is 200% Enlarged and Crop

Nice pictures, Mr Surapon.

I suppose they are more of a "close-up" rather than macro, correct?

I noticed "hand held" above. Do you use the viewfinder or live view? Given your comments in another thread about TSE lenses, I suspect you are proficient in their use :)

What did you use to enlarge the TS-4 photo and then crop it?

Looks like I have to mess around a bit with a TSE lens...


190
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« on: January 16, 2014, 05:27:30 PM »
Yup. I am totally convinced that you don't ONLY get a better body and more custom functions for the huge extra amount of $ you have to fork out for a 1D body. Image sensor, RGB and AA filters, parameters and processing should be better and more controlled, resulting in an overall better rawfile on many levels. Also, I find the 1D images (1Ds3 and 1DX) to be a bit "clearer" and crispier from scratch than anything from the 5D3 or 5D2. Fine details are a tad better rendered. The difference isn't huge but it is there.

As for the underexposed part; I have an example where I tested the shadows of the 1DX vs 5D3. I underexposed the two equally and then lifted the shadows. The difference in IQ is quite remarkable. Almost like one of those Nikon vs Canon shadow noise examples out there. I'll see if I can find the test images. So yeah...the 1DX sure can take more beating in post because the files are better built. For sure...

Just a bit of a tangent...

I recently picked up a minty and complete original 1D for a very reasonable price. Different sensor tech that still has a following and the price was good. Enough of a reason to see what the fuss is about.

The images are way better than what I would have thought from a camera with only 4 megapixels- I was thinking 4MP point and shoot image quality. I really don't see an issue printing up to 13" x 19". Maybe more, I am still messing with it.

This camera outputs TIFF and JPEG. I had to reformat a card so it works- it wouldn't recognize a CF card formatted in a CR2 camera.

Canon's DPP works just fine with these TIFF files. Just a little bit of sharpening and it looks great.

So, why did Canon switch RAW formats when this camera from 2001 puts out a nice TIFF file? (end of small tangent)

Well, apparently, the TIFF format sucks when things change, like camera settings. See the short rant here in the 4th paragraph: http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/canon_raw.html

So, I guess that someone at Canon early on recognized the limitations of the TIFF format.

This previously linked page (http://lclevy.free.fr/cr2/) has a whole bunch of stuff that is over my head, but I can pick out parts where portions of the code are used to identify things like the camera model.

There's also a bunch of blocks with a "?" in them.

Given that Canon can easily cripple camera features with firmware, it is easy to assume that there is a bunch of stuff happening between the tags in a CR2 file and software like DPP and therefore why some feel that DPP renders the Canon image better than other software.

191
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« on: January 16, 2014, 04:43:03 PM »


Apart from personal taste or differing internal DIGIC-changes, there is no sign of advantages for the 1Ds3.

Edit:  I choosed the 1D3 instead of the 1Ds3, but the results remain the same except of a nearly not detectable advantage of 0.2 stops @ISO100.

There must be more to it than charts and graphs. I can listen to stereo amplifiers with comparable specs and they sound different.

Given a properly exposed image, I'd agree that there is little difference.

But, if the image is underexposed (accidentally or intentionally), 1D files have a lot more working room.

192
Lenses / Re: 7D user - advice on my best option for a 'go to' lens?
« on: January 16, 2014, 10:10:14 AM »
Buy the 17-55 now and enjoy it. Sell it later, call the difference a rental.

193
Lenses / Re: 7D user - advice on my best option for a 'go to' lens?
« on: January 16, 2014, 08:34:17 AM »
Hi

I'd like some advice on which lens to get for my 7D.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0 L IS USM

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

I'm torn between these two because I don't know which one will suit my style more. I have been used to a 17-85mm f/4.0 kit lens and a 50mm f/1.8, both of which I'm selling. I'm concerned that the 24-105 is slower and will limit me with depth of field and low light shooting. And the 17-55 has less reach and may be less of a future investment as an EF-S. Here are a few details about my photography...

I think I'm quite lazy about the technical side of things, and like to keep gear as simple as possible. I don't mind small losses in quality or control for the sake of convenience (eg. staying with my 17-85mm lens for years before getting the 50mm). I like being zoomed in rather than zoomed out. Being wider than my 17mm shots has never seemed necessary to me. I like shooting in low light, and I like shooting with shallow depth of field. I think I will be sticking with my 7D for a while, and I will be getting the Canon EF 50mm - f/1.4 USM.
Any advice greatly appreciated!

Given the two lenses in your post, and references to low light shooting and shallow depth of field also in your post, the only one to choose is the 17-55.

194
Lenses / TSE + Macro?
« on: January 16, 2014, 08:01:13 AM »
Is there a tilt-shift lens with macro capabilities?

I did come across this: http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/hartblei_120_4_pc_n10 but it is certainly priced as a professional piece of equipment.

Is there a combination of tubes and/or extenders that would work with current Canon TSE lenses to provide acceptable macro capabilities? I have access to a 24mm II TSE lens to experiment with- just not sure where to start.


195
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« on: January 16, 2014, 06:46:43 AM »
I have heard, increasingly lately, that 1DX RAW files are better than 5D3.  I have noticed myself, in other posts, that they tend to be able to be pushed farther.  Why is this?  Thanks for any insight.

My speculation is that there is more latitude built into the 1 series raw file.

I'm certainly not knowledgeable enough to understand the properties of a CR2 file, but I am willing to bet that there is stuff buried in the code that differentiates a 1 series image over "everything else", especially when using DPP.

It's not just DPP, though. An underexposed 1D series file can be brightened quite a bit in Lightroom with little/no apparent problems. Noise cleans up nicely, too.

"Latitude" may not be the right word, but there must be some fundamental yet major difference in the CR2 file between a 1 series and "everything else".



 

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 40