March 06, 2015, 07:59:58 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 - danski0224

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 44
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100 f/2.8L IS Macro autofocus?
« on: December 29, 2013, 09:10:23 AM »
I also like macro photography.

I much prefer a monopod to a tripod, but that fits in with what I take pictures of most of the time. Tripod and/or rail is really for stationary subjects, or for those that wait for the bugs to come to them- as one example I saw one guy taking pictures of monarchs with what looked like a 600mm lens on a 1D series body on a tripod. I doubt that lens has a macro setting, but he probably filled the frame :)

Little bits of wind can be a huge problem. AF can help. AI Servo can help. Multiple frames can help.

Little changes in AF make big magnification changes- just something to be aware of.

Yes, sometimes I turn off the AF, set the lens at 1:1 and move in/out until focus is achieved. Little bits of movement make a big difference.

Probably my most used tool is the monopod followed by the lens collar. Even having the end of the monopod way off to the side in contact with the ground stabilizes the camera enough for me when the same shot purely handheld would have been much more difficult or not possible.

I have also noticed "odd" focus behavior once in a while and I'm not sure what causes it- it isn't repeatable in my case. It could simply be that the AF system is operating near the limitations of the system. The Canon f2.8 macro doesn't use the f2.8 AF points and I'm not sure what AF points the Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro uses.

Edits: monarchs = monarch butterflies, not royalty :)

back button focus is a huge help for macro in general.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5d mk III, the honeymoon is over
« on: December 24, 2013, 05:02:00 PM »
Yeah.  Had my 70-200 ii delivered at work because FedEx would not redirect it to a local store.  But, too many people see the stuff there.  I don't worry about any dishonesty.  I just don't want them to know I've spent that kind of $ on something.

The declared value of an item can limit your (the receiver) options for re-routing packages- UPS and FedEx.

Sometimes, delivery options can only be changed by the shipper.

Next time, call the shipper and have them re-route the package.

Canon General / Re: Why Wedding Photographers’ Prices are “Wack”?
« on: December 24, 2013, 09:25:24 AM »
USD 3,000 / per wedding price is too high. Clients are not interested in your experience, equipment, lighting equipment, insurance. They want to buy specific product - wedding photos. Nobody cares about your expenses. If someone is doing wedding photography during weekends, has a good equipment and required skills he  / she is able to make wedding photos much cheaper.

Not knowing a few key variables, but with a reasonable assumption and some easy math...

Lots of so-called "professionals" are near the $100.00/hr rate for their services. Some are considerably more.

So, $3,000.00 USD gets you 30 man-hours of time at the hypothetical $100.00/hr.

Seems to me, from the outside looking in, that it would be fairly easy to rack up 30 man-hours of time on a wedding job. Easier (faster) if you have paid assistants (8 hour day can equal 12-16 man-hours for 2 people, depending on the billing rate). Remember, you have to track and account for all time spent for that one job: Initial consultation, site preview, the event itself, proofs, more client conversations, delivery (those are just off the top of my head).

Depending on what you really want or need to make per hour, there is some latitude. It always comes down to some sort of hourly rate.

Then the other stuff like mileage and equipment depreciation, supplies and so forth comes out of that hypothetical hourly rate.

So, just from a business perspective, there is justification for the price. Value and selling those services to paying clients are completely separate entities.

I bet if the $500.00/event photographers figured out what they were making per hour after lugging several thousand dollars of equipment around, many would be very disappointed.

EOS Bodies / Re: Install DPP without a CD ROM?
« on: December 23, 2013, 02:48:36 PM »
Remember the 3.25" floppy disk?  Apple was the first major computer manufacturer to drop those from its machines.  Today, show me a PC laptop that has a floppy drive?  Gone.  Poof.  Optical drives are next.  Get with the times!

I hear that Apple has also eliminated those pesky MicroSD slots and USB ports... ;)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 1DX paired with Ec-S focussing screen
« on: December 22, 2013, 07:58:46 AM »
I still find it odd that Canon's current top shelf offering does not support the Ec-S screen.

From a sales standpoint, what's the big deal?

A person needing the durability of a 1 series body would most likely trash a 5DII or 6D. The trash and replace idea may work for unlimited budgets and result in increased sales, but surely that is a small segment of camera buyers.

A "hard core" manual focus photographer/enthusiast with the means to buy a 1Dx for the "best of all the rest" is left out of an upgrade path.

If the "1DxS" supports the Ec-S screen, will people pay the premium for that feature?

Unless there is some insurmountable technical obstacle, it makes no sense.

Canon General / Re: To Buy Now or Wait?
« on: December 21, 2013, 09:59:27 AM »
The 7DII is vaporware at this point.

If you like the 70D, buy it and use it.

Sell it later to fund the 7DII (or whatever new name it has) if it is ever released.

Lots of good pictures wasted waiting from now til then otherwise.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Dual-Scale Column-Parallel ADC Patent
« on: December 20, 2013, 09:29:26 AM »
My first tablet laptop, a HP TX series, couldn't even do pinch to zoom. There were 2 different screens available, and not knowing the differences, I chose poorly. I could switch between input devices without issues, but the rest of the "touch experience" wasn't there yet- at least for me. Vista only added to the problems.

I tried the early Windows smartphones, a HTC TouchPro2 and a HTC HD2, and I found both to fall short of expectations. When these devices were new, Microsoft didn't impress with upgrades and continued support. The HD2 still lives on if you like to mess with phones.

I went Android after that. Got burned with the HTC Amaze bluetooth issue, so that has soured my HTC experience.

I messed around a bit with Cyanogen on the HD2 through the SD card, and I actually prefer the "plain" Android interface over the skins that almost everyone else uses. Unfortunately, the phone OEM's make it increasingly difficult to root your device. I'd be happy with less bloatware.

When it came time to shop for a new phone, I would have went with the Nokia 1020, but it isn't available on my carrier natively and I'm not moving to AT&T. So, I stuck with Android, but no longer HTC.

A unifying experience across platforms (computer, tablet, phone) has appeal and that is lacking in Android.

EOS Bodies / Re: Do you have a 4K display?
« on: December 20, 2013, 08:44:18 AM »

10'+ back is getting to be pretty far and no you don't have to be 5' or less

it's ridiculous all the talk about how you need 55" for even 1080p to matter, utter nonsense, the same people go on about how their 24" print looks so much better at 300ppi. My 24" 1920x1200 monitor looks grainy as hell after using my retina ipad for a little bit or looking at any printed magazine or book for a little bit.

and if you really want the full impact from video the screen should be fov filling, not a little box taking up a fraction of your vision from 20' away

I'm 9' away from a 63" set. I wouldn't mind being a bit closer.

But, too close and the individual pixels start appearing. I don't think I could comfortably watch it much closer than 8'.

If 4k could smoothly upscale HD content and give me a clean ~60" display at ~8', that would be nice.

If I was to replace my current set with a 4k display and keep the existing arrangement, the new one would have to be bigger. Probably won't be happening anytime soon.

Having experienced ~40" panels at ~10', I often wonder: what's the point? And it becomes worse when watching letterbox content.

EOS Bodies / Re: Do you have a 4K display?
« on: December 19, 2013, 06:29:33 AM »

Viewers can't tell the difference at normal viewing distance, you have to be close, like 5 ft or less.  That's why video stores arrange them so that you will be close to the screen.  At 10 ft, it makes no difference.

I'm not so sure I agree. One set had a demo video of some sort that showed 1080 on one side and 4k on the other and the difference was clearly noticeable from about 8 feet out.

I suppose that each of these sets had demo content that was optimized. As I understand it, native 4k content is pretty scarce.

I wasn't there to do an evaluation, I just looked while I was there- not in the market for a new TV at this time.

I didn't view "normal" HD content upscaled for the resolution, either. That could be pretty cool if it smooths out pixels on larger screens. 

Lenses / Re: New to Canon - please help me decide on lenses
« on: December 19, 2013, 06:15:32 AM »
I'm not getting much feedback on lenses wider than 24.... people have said why don't you just shoot at 24, but fact is I want to shoot wider than that.... jury still out on UWA. I find 14mm (ie. Samyang/Rokinon) just too out there for me. Maybe there's a shortage of good lenses wider than 24 (for less than $2000)? Will nobody speak up for the 17-40?  ;)  I want to shoot things at around 20mm.

I happen to like the 16-35 II. Very useful. No experience with the 17-40.

I don't spend my time pixel peeping the corners.

I mentioned the Tokina 16-25 because you mentioned a budget that the 16-35II would pretty much take up all by itself. 

Lenses / Re: New to Canon - please help me decide on lenses
« on: December 18, 2013, 06:35:25 PM »
I don't think you can beat the Canon 100L macro. It's a great macro lens and many have said it is also a great portrait lens, so 2 birds with 1 stone, and there have been some deals at Amazon recently (at least for USA shoppers).

You mention landscape work, and one typically assumes wide angle. A 24-70 could fit the bill, or the 24-105.

Not too many "cheap" options for wider, especially if you want AF. The Tokina 16-28 comes to mind.

The Canon Price Watch alerts work if you have time.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Dual-Scale Column-Parallel ADC Patent
« on: December 18, 2013, 06:16:39 PM »
Yeah, the PC rules. :D This is also why I think Microsoft will be a very successful company in the long term. They may not still be a "WOW" company like Apple or Facebook or Google or Twitter, but they have it where it counts. Windows 8, for all that people complain about it, offers the best of all worlds in a single, unified platform experience...WITHOUT forgetting about the desktop, keyboard, and mouse. That will be the key thread of their success five, ten, twenty years out.

One thing that amazes me about the Surface (Pro 2 specifically) is I can use my finger (or two), the keyboard touchpad, the stylus or the wireless mouse at any given point and it works. I can switch from any one to the other seamlessly. I've never had an iPad, so maybe it isn't a big deal for some, but prior iterations of touchscreen on Windows has kinda sucked...

The wireless keyboard adapter is pretty cool, too.

My only beef is I would actually prefer the iPad 4:3 form factor.

Windows 8 on a touchscreen is pretty awesome.

Big touch monitors are still kinda pricey, but there are some touch mice for desktops.

EOS Bodies / Re: Do you have a 4K display?
« on: December 18, 2013, 06:01:16 PM »
20/20 vision is by definition average. I'm a little better than that, but when I say that the difference between 1080p and 4K is blatantly obvious, I have confidence that it will be just as obvious for the average person reading this.

I also find the difference to be blatantly obvious.

I checked out the 4k TV display at an electronics store, and I was floored.

Unfortunately, at least for upgrades, my current set still works (and I hope it keeps working for a while).

The next one will have to be bigger... 63" isn't big enough. So glad I didn't buy a smaller set.

I have four Laser printers, two color Xerox, and two monochrome HP printers.  None of them function once a toner runs out.  You are not going to see a change there.  It used to be that you could set certain color inkjets to keep on printing if color was out, but I haven't had a inkjet home printer for 15 years.
There are some pretty good reviews of laser printers.  Beside quality and speed, some of the weak points to look out for are:
1.  Low tray capacity.  I prefer 600 pages.
2.  Flimsy paper trays
3.  No network connection
4.  Crappy scanner software that makes it neigh impossible to scan to your computer over a network.
5.  Poor or unreliable paper handling, jamming, etc.
Its very likely that you can find a good used Xerox printer for a couple of hundred dollars that will blow away the cheap home printers.
You can also get toner on ebay for the older machines much cheaper than for home machines in terms of price per page.

I am almost positive that my Dell 1320c laser *will* do black prints if a color is out.

I'd have to do some digging to see if the new Lexmark has that option- but it isn't an important feature to me.

Considering that both models are more targeted towards small businesses, that may be a factor.

I had 2 small inkjet printers at one time and one would do black prints if a color was out and the other wouldn't, but that was almost 10 years ago. The one that wouldn't pushed me to buy the Dell laser, which was on sale at the time.

I suppose if the ability to print black if a color was out is an important feature, that would require extra digging before purchase.

Scanning utilities can be challenging in a Windows environment- at least in my recent experience.

When I went to W7, I lost the WIA drivers for the Canon MF4690, which drove me to consolidate two machines. The WIA driver issue for the MF4690 is well documented on the web and I couldn't get mine to work despite downloading the new drivers from Canon. Interestingly enough, that scanner now shows up in the "printers and faxes" and I can initiate a scan through Windows- so something was fixed- but it was broken for a long time.

The lack of OEM driver support is what pushed me away from Canon this time. It would have been nice if the driver packages were updated a while ago, but that won't force you to buy new stuff. That Dell 1320c is ancient in tech time, but the drivers have been supported.

The scanner portion of the MF4690 could be controlled with VueScan, and this produced way better results than going through Windows. I never got the hang of the Canon utility.

The new Lexmark has a TWAIN driver utility that must be used to get a scan- I suppose VueScan would work there too. The Lexmark does *not* show up in the Windows "Cameras and Scanners" dialog box- probably due to the lack of WIA drivers.

Lighting / Re: Trigger Speedlite 600EX with 270 EXII?
« on: December 17, 2013, 06:23:33 PM »
Yup, might as well just get the ST-E3-RT. Basic remote wireless flash is easy as pie now.

The big glaring oversight from Canon is the omission of the focus assist lamp.

The Yongnuo version has just been released, and it has a focus assist lamp, however the quality of that assist lamp has not been reviewed yet.

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 44