August 31, 2014, 04:30:44 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 - RustyTheGeek

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 58
Software & Accessories / Re: Camera bag for camping
« on: July 18, 2014, 04:55:30 PM »
Carrying plenty of water is dependent on the environment, particularly the temps and the availability of water along the trail.  I carried between 4L and 6L of water depending on whether trail camps were dry or not.  We also carried a Katydyn Water Filter and purification tablets as backup.

Everything in your pack should be protected from water in dry bags, ziplock bags, etc, esp your sleep gear.  If your water bladder spang a leak, that should be no different than if the pack fell into a river or stream or got drenched in a rain storm.

The external pockets and configuration of my Kelty backpack allows me to use my MSR Dromedary 3L bladder on the outside of my pack but otherwise it would be on the inside like most other folks.

Software & Accessories / Re: Camera bag for camping
« on: July 18, 2014, 04:36:42 PM »
This is what I'm thinking to get, this one is expensive but there is a cheaper one in same brand.
What kind of trip are you taking?  A 35 Liter pack isn't very big and it will be even smaller after you put in camera gear.  A 35 liter pack is usually only big enough for warm weather weekend trips.  Will you have to carry a tent, sleep gear, etc or are you just doing day hikes?  I really hope you are already an experienced hiker/camper so you know what you're doing on the trail.  Remember that back country pro photographers sometimes hire assistants to help them carry gear when necessary.  Don't over do the gear carrying it by yourself!

Software & Accessories / Re: Camera bag for camping
« on: July 18, 2014, 04:29:19 PM »
you are much better off using a proper backpack and putting your camera gear in it. or strap a small camera back to your backpack. you will not have a good time trying to pack weight in a camera bag. i just put my lenses in their soft cases in the lid of my gregory pack, and hang my camera in a dry-sack (brooks bag) off a shoulder strap, or on a capture clip if its dry out.

you arent going to get a hiking backpack on as carryon

Big Ditto!  In this case, it is hiking/camping FIRST PRIORITY, photography DISTANT SECOND.  Keep yourself comfortable and safe first, then consider the photography.

This means buying everything for the camping first, especially the backpack.  Hiking with the wrong or improper fitting pack is a huge mistake.  DO NOT BUY A PHOTOGRAPHY PACK FOR CAMPING!!

I just finished a 70+ mile 10 day trek at Philmont Scout Ranch in New Mexico (2nd time).  I used a Kelty RedCloud 90 backpack.  Depending on Food and Water variables, I carried between 40 - 60 lbs on the trail and about 6 lbs of that was the camera gear.  I carried a Canon SL1 with a Tamron 18-270 lens, a 10-22 EF-S lens and extra batteries.  The extra lens was in a LowePro lens bag inside a dry bag inside my pack where ever it would fit.  The camera hung flat against my chest from a custom made rig of super magnets and flex straps that were connected to my back pack shoulder straps.  When I wasn't hiking, the camera simply hung from a climbing carbiner that hung from my belt at hip level.  I also had a dry bag in case I needed to protect the camera but I never used it.

In other words, keep it simple.  Don't try to take all your gear, just the essentials.  Abundant water is more important weight to carry than camera gear.

I also get a kick out of the two shots where Surapon is in the picture in shadow silhouette with his cameras sticking out of the shadow and away from his front.  Cool!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: HUMIDITY ALERT!
« on: July 18, 2014, 01:50:18 PM »
I have lived in very humid places for years and never worried about it, but you have to understand the causes to prevent any issues. The best way to prevent fungus is to use your gear, sunlight stops the problem. If you have to store stuff or use it intermittently then this is the most economical and fun solution I have come across.

This "hot box" is a good solution.  If you want to overcome humidity, you simply must keep the gear warmer than the dew point of the surrounding air.  That's what this box does.  It doesn't have to be very hot, just warm enough to prevent condensation.  Even if you have a sealed container humidity can form if the temp drops below the dew point of the air it contains.  (Refrigerators and ice chests grow fungus quickly when they are closed for long periods.)  Using dessicant packs requires frequent attention to swap them out when they become saturated.  The "hot box" never needs any attention except to change the bulb.  A 60W incandescent bulb is all that is needed.  (NOT a CFL bulb.)

Another place where this becomes a problem is gun safes.  Gun safes are cool sealed environments, guns rust and humidity will facilitate rust.  So gun safes benefit from dessicant products, internal lamps and even electronic monitors you can buy that will alert you if the internal humidity becomes a threat.

In the winter when I go to shoot my son's swim meets, bringing the cold camera into the warm humid pool area instantly fogs up everything on the camera for quite a while including the lenses, etc.  So I warm up the camera/lens with the car's heater vent on the way to the event.  Since the camera is warmer than than the humid air inside the natatorium, it doesn't fog up.

EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR ? - thinking out loud ....
« on: July 17, 2014, 02:30:41 PM »
As I read through the back and forth of this thread, I'll just say that we are witnessing a lot of trends that are swinging back and forth as the entire market, both lay person consumers and professionals buy all kinds of technology, try to figure it all out and how it fits their needs.  Not only is the pendulum swinging, but there are many pendulums swinging within multiple spaces simultaneously.  This is why it is so hard to see the future of photography gear as well as other tech devices.  Many of the traditional device tech spaces are becoming blurred together.

IMHO, there still exists a market that values convenience, small size and simplicity (Camera Phones and P&S).  Another market that values high quality and performance (DSLR, etc.).  The needs are going to exist for both for a long time.  10 years from now, I don't expect to see a major sports event sideline filled with professional camera phone shooters.  And I also don't expect to see a lot of people talking and texting on hybrid DSLR phone devices.  There is a need for both types of devices now and in the future.  The technology inside these devices will continue to advance but the form factors will still be important for a long time to come.

EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR ? - thinking out loud ....
« on: July 17, 2014, 02:18:47 PM »
As for the DR and color, that's precisely why I want an EVF: I want to compose using what the sensor can see, so I have a better idea of the final image.  This is another plus for EVF.

So you want a better idea of what the in-camera JPG conversion will look like, if displayed on an uncalibrated monitor with low resolution and a poor color gamut?  Sounds like a big minus for EVF to me, particularly for anyone who shoots RAW...

+1  Ditto!

Lenses / Re: Camera setup for dental clinic
« on: July 15, 2014, 06:15:38 PM »
Looks like the 100mm non-L macro is what others are using

I did some web searching as well and it appears that just about any decent lens, esp the macro lenses will work.  The real trick appears to involve using special mirrors inside the mouth to help expose the target tooth, etc.

Personally, I would probably just get a decent Rebel body, EF (not L) macro lens and a decent aftermarket flash and/or ring light.

Lenses / Re: RLPhotos first impressions of the 16-35mm f/4L - Video
« on: July 15, 2014, 12:48:07 PM »
RL, do you have a favorite set of ND filters you typically like to carry?  Everything takes up space and weight so I figure you have 2 or 3 that you use that work best and offer the most versatility.  I've put off buying these because I figured I would eventually just purchase a variable ND filter from probably Singh-Ray with some filter adapters.  But of course that's expensive so I keep putting it off.  Thoughts?
For my NDs, it's all LEE filters. My polarizers are all B+W screw on and combining both together get me what I need.

I have
1. 2 stop pro glass LEE ND.
2. 10 Stop glass Big Stopper LEE ND.
3. 2 stop resin hard and soft edged LEE NDs.
4. All the wide angle adapter rings.

If I use a polarizer, I use B+W Kaesmann x-s slim mount filters then the Lee system on top. It works pretty well @ 17mm with some slight vignette but disappears by 19mm. I have no vignette if I just use the LEE system alone.

Good filters are worth the cash and actually hold some value over time. I like to buy once and use them for years instead of cheaping out and getting something subpar and having to buy again. I don't have experience with Singh ray filters and Don't own a variable ND. :P

Thanks for the ultra-fast reply post RL!  I agree and do the same, buy the higher quality filters, etc and keep them a long time.  Cheap = disposable which has it's merits/uses as well but most of the time I prefer a much harder, more durable filter that will last for years and provide better images along the way.  For instance, I use cheaper clear filters when shooting swimming because the chlorinated pool water splashes can damage the filter coatings.

I'll consider your filter method before I purchase.  But if I get the variable ND instead, I'll try to provide you some feedback if it works as well as I've read some photographers have said.

Lenses / Re: RLPhotos first impressions of the 16-35mm f/4L - Video
« on: July 15, 2014, 12:19:34 PM »
RL, do you have a favorite set of ND filters you typically like to carry?  Everything takes up space and weight so I figure you have 2 or 3 that you use that work best and offer the most versatility.  I've put off buying these because I figured I would eventually just purchase a variable ND filter from probably Singh-Ray with some filter adapters.  But of course that's expensive so I keep putting it off.  Thoughts?

Lenses / Re: RLPhotos first impressions of the 16-35mm f/4L - Video
« on: July 14, 2014, 10:14:35 PM »
My last post to wrap up this thread. A final goodbye to the 17-40L for me and looking back at some of my favorite photos it captured before it's sold on evilbay.

Very cool little discussion that really makes me want to take some ND filters with me more often.  Thanks for the nice walk through some of your fun images and their back story.  This helps inspire me to try more stuff, even when I'm tired or not always in the mood while travelling!

Lenses / Re: RLPhotos first impressions of the 16-35mm f/4L - Video
« on: July 14, 2014, 10:03:24 PM »
I scanned/skimmed all the responses/comments on this thread about the new 16-35/F4 IS Lens.  Unfortunately, instead of discussing the lens, for the most part everyone just discussed RLPhoto's chosen video review method and more comments on each others' posts/personal views or asswholishness.

So to follow the flow of this thread, I guess I should comment on the comments... or wait, maybe not.  Who cares?  I read the CR Forum because it's NOT like most other threads that degenerate into petty comments about irrelevant things like whether RL should or should not have used video, if other posters are polite enough or whatever else.  Aww crap... I just commented on the comments.   ::)

RLPhoto - great job.  I viewed the videos from the perspective of joining you at your house for a beer while you share your new lens.  The videos came across that way with informed thoughts and information.  I can read written reviews in many places and it was nice to put a face/voice with a name after all this time.  Next time however, might I suggest at least 2 or 3 hot babes dancing while you do the video review.  That might distract anyone that would otherwise notice other problems with your video or methods.   :P

Question:  I assume that what you are shooting at F4 with IS allowing you to extend shutter time to almost a second in low light is a still subject, correct?  Because if the subject moves, IS is useless.  I know you are aware of this but didn't mention it in the video.  No big deal but some folks might forget that little fact.

I am impressed with the idea of using IR to expose hot spots of the lens.  Great!

Lenses / Re: Camera setup for dental clinic
« on: July 14, 2014, 09:16:50 PM »
I think I have a good EF 60mm Macro lens if you're interested.  I agree that live view + articulated screen would be a good setup.  I also have a 60D to go with the 60mm!   :)

IMHO, you could probably do fine with a 3rd party macro light, at least until you're sure that the equipment setup is working the way you expect.

Question:  How do you plan to get the image files transferred over to the computer/dental software?  Eye-Fi perhaps??

I'm an IT Guy and I've worked with a few dental offices.  Does your dental office software have a easy to use photo import feature to attach photos to the patients' record files?  Do you already have an iCat or other type of x-ray device that your dental software manages the image files from?

My thought is that the camera might be the easiest part.  The hard part is getting the photos imported and attached to the patient records correctly and easy enough that the entire staff can do it correctly every time.

Don't forget that whatever workflow you come up with should adhere to the HIPAA laws.  (Like the WiFi must be encrypted and ideally the SD cards never leave the camera to avoid loss/theft/confusion.)

Canon General / Re: CF CARDS
« on: June 17, 2014, 04:58:55 PM »
This is all good info.

I personally prefer CF because I've always found it to be more reliable and stable.  (More grounding, etc makes the signal more reliable too.)  In general, I've rarely (if ever) had trouble with CF data but I've had several problems with SD data or images being corrupted, if only slightly.

CF is usually faster overall than most comparable SD cards regardless of the written specs.

CF is easier to handle, manipulate, write on, etc.

I totally understand the argument for SD.  SD has a lot of benefits and it is an extremely versatile format.  I'm not trying to slam SD, I just want to show my support and preference for CF.

I also understand some folks' problem with the CF pin design.  That is a weakness of CF but I have to admit I've never seen a problem myself.

It will be interesting to see what format(s) emerge/survive over the next 2-3 years.

Personally, I haven't had a problem buying CF cards yet but I can see where it might be possible for CF to be hard to find in some areas based on market demand.


How do you transfer images?  With a card reader, you generally see the folder architecture, so you'd see the '101' folder. 

Personally, I have extra cards - the card with the images doesn't get formatted until the set is at least triaged (so I know it's complete) and stored on the internal SSD and at least one external HDD.

Ditto here, I have a similar workflow.

And you can easily recover the images even after the in camera format with some recovery software.

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 58