October 22, 2014, 05:53:53 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 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 62
406
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
« on: December 12, 2013, 02:23:34 PM »
I saw "I don't want to pay $100 for a battery" from someone, in a $1700 camera?  I don't get it . . . get your camera at the best price possible, then you can afford genuine accessories.

Are there any improvements that come with these batteries, or is it all a price game?

Do any of these, for example:
charge faster?
take more of a charge?
last longer (more charge cycles)?
operate in more extreme temperatures?

This brings up an EXCELLENT POINT.  Everyone is focused on cheap alternative batteries.  The other side of the coin is a battery built to be superior to the Canon OEM.  This isn't as common but what if someone offered a better, lighter, stronger, faster and more colorful battery than Canon (with a big 'S' on the side)?  If it helped me and improved my use, I would want to buy it, even if it cost more than the OEM.  It would suck to have the best most ultimatest and badasstical battery around and not be able to see any charge status or have it talk to my camera correctly.  So yet again, thanks Canon for making things more complicated that don't need to be.

407
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
« on: December 12, 2013, 01:40:14 PM »
Just for the record, we are big Amazon consumers in this house.  So for $20, I bought one of these 'JoeCool' batteries just for the hell of it.  I'll let you know how good or bad it is, if it charges, throws an error or simply catches on fire while in flight.   ;)

408
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
« on: December 12, 2013, 01:36:38 PM »
If the movie/music companies, (aka: the most greedy/sleazy entities on the planet) had simply made their movies/music more affordable from the beginning, no one would have wanted to go to all the trouble to copy or download inferior music files to get around the high cost. 

As much as I’d like to bash the record companies, I’m going to have to disagree.  People steal music because it’s free and easy.  People steal crap music that they’ll hardly listen to, because they can.  People steal music that they’ll hardly listen to, because like all their specialty lenses camera components that they hardly use, people get into collecting useless crap because they want to have a big collection they can tell people about.  People can definitely afford to buy the songs that they really enjoy listening to, but they don’t, because people don’t see it as stealing from these big bad record companies.

Cost doesn’t have much to do with it.  I see kids at Starbucks getting $5 coffees, on iPhones with unlimited data plans, driving fancy cars that they can afford to fill at $4 a gallon.  They can afford a $15 album or $1 song if they wanted, but why pay when you can just steal it for free.  Sorry to digress, but lets compare apples to apples.

we,can agree,to disagree on this but the cost has not gone,down in,sorry but paying 15-20 for a cd digital edition is absurd I'm sorry but that industry it way to over priced a cd should be in the 5-10$ range mot double triple that

Yep.  I see it all the time.  When something is priced higher than the market can bear, alternatives will become available.  It's only natural.  If anyone sells something desirable for a fair price that the market prefers, the alternatives will suffer.  If Canon offered their batteries for $30 - $35, I'd own 3 or 4 for each of my cameras instead of the 2 Canon batteries per camera I own and the rest 3rd party.  (I shoot outdoors a lot over several days.)  I would prefer to own all Canon batteries but not for the $65+ price they charge.  I didn't buy the cheapest alternative, I bought trusted alternative brands from both online and legitimate camera stores and they have all served me well.

I said over and over back in the 90's that if CDs were $5, no one would bother with MP3s, at least not the way they did at the time.  But at $13 - $20 each, people not only wanted to get around that high CD price, they wanted to retaliate against the greedy music/movie industry.  And as it turns out, digital technology and social media finally allowed the artists to circumvent the industry and market directly to the consumer.  If the decades that led up to the Internet had been positive between consumers, artists and the entertainment industry I think things would have been different, more positive and probably much higher quality without all the problems we are still enduring with copy protection mechanisms, digital rights management, etc.

409
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
« on: December 12, 2013, 01:19:56 PM »
If the movie/music companies, (aka: the most greedy/sleazy entities on the planet) had simply made their movies/music more affordable from the beginning, no one would have wanted to go to all the trouble to copy or download inferior music files to get around the high cost. 

As much as I’d like to bash the record companies, I’m going to have to disagree.  People steal music because it’s free and easy.  People steal crap music that they’ll hardly listen to, because they can.  People steal music that they’ll hardly listen to, because like all their specialty lenses camera components that they hardly use, people get into collecting useless crap because they want to have a big collection they can tell people about.  People can definitely afford to buy the songs that they really enjoy listening to, but they don’t, because people don’t see it as stealing from these big bad record companies.

Cost doesn’t have much to do with it.  I see kids at Starbucks getting $5 coffees, on iPhones with unlimited data plans, driving fancy cars that they can afford to fill at $4 a gallon.  They can afford a $15 album or $1 song if they wanted, but why pay when you can just steal it for free.  Sorry to digress, but lets compare apples to apples.

Eh.  We'll have to agree to disagree.  I guess it could be seen that way if you grew up in the last 20 years since the Internet has been in place, credit has been easy and consumer affluency has been so high.  But I assure you that in the decades leading up to the 90's, people didn't collect as much stuff or have as much disposable money.  And the recording industries were as greedy or more so.  Most of the artists making the content were shafted, screwed and left in the cold along with the consumers being shafted on the other end with high prices and ultra cheap cassettes and 8 track tapes.

I will agree that many folks tend to collect/amass things that are free simply because they can, esp kids with lots of free time.  But I don't think that necc supports the reason why MP3 music was created or became popular in the first place.  The battles between artists/consumers and the recording industry is a long one.  In our family, we download pirated TV shows for one reason, convenience.  We want to watch something at another time or in a series all together and sometimes it doesn't get recorded on the DVR and isn't available online or on DVD yet.  We rent or purchase a lot of online content, music CDs, DVDs, Blu-Rays, etc but when things aren't provided by the legitimate providers, we will occasionally download something because it's not available any other way.  The content providers should understand this and use it to their advantage, not fight it.

I'm not sure what circles you run in but I don't see a large percentage of the population able to afford most of what you say they are buying at Starbucks, luxury car dealerships, etc.  But unfortunately it happens anyway because there are no controls on what anyone does with their entitlement money from the government.  Believe me, my wife works in a county hospital, she sees a lot of "poor" people with nicer manicures, phones and clothes than our family has and that's just sad.  Our landscaper's daughter drives a Hummer but she can only afford to drive it on the weekends.  The phenomenon of poor folks spending money in all the wrong places has been going on for a long time as well.  Probably as long as govt assistance has been around and then probably longer still.

It's truly a strange world and it's getting stranger every year.

410
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
« on: December 12, 2013, 12:42:05 PM »
IMO, it's not up to Canon keep the third party guys happy.

Agreed, it’s not, but this isn’t about keeping the third party guys happy, it’s about spending dollars researching (futile) ways to force them out of the game.  You could write up a laundry list of firm ware fixes that people would like to see, but when they finally getting around to pushing out a release what’s in it?  A speedbump for third party battery manufactures.

Totally agree Skirball.  Exactly what I was thinking. Of all the things we want, need and Canon should feel obligated to address, this is what they focus on.  Pathetic.  Meanwhile, other things like having a red focus confirmation indicator in the viewfinder while in AiServo goes unchanged.  Thanks heaps Canon and Merry Christmas to you too.

411
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
« on: December 12, 2013, 12:38:41 PM »
Next step for Canon is to make sure that the SD/CF card is manufactured by Canon. After all the other brands can damage the camera.

If Canon really cared about us as they say with their battery scheme in the firmware, they would add a feature to test the media card in camera for bad memory sectors and transfer rate.  Counterfeit memory is a big problem and Canon could help.  "Media Verify" would be a welcome feature to have a way to verify media anytime someone wanted to in the field.  But noooo, let's just focus on the possibility that a battery could cause trouble since that has been such a big problem for soooo many people over the past 10 years.

412
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III & Third Party Batteries
« on: December 12, 2013, 12:32:50 PM »
I noticed this new phenomenon when I got my new 6D last year.  And I posted comments on it then.  In general, I pretty much agree with dgatwood.  Using an expensive piece of technology like a 5D3 to punish the buyer for choosing a 3rd party battery is sleazy and an abuse of the manufacturer's power.

I also feel like noncho has the best point about Canon simply making their OEM batteries more affordable to begin with.  That would solve everything.  (Hmm, Canon battery for $35 or cheap Chinese knock-off for $20?  Easy choice!)  Instead Canon has decided to spend more R&D time, money and lose customer good will over protecting what amounts to unfair profit in the first place.  And in the process, use of genuine batteries potentially is affected.  I had this same attitude in the 80's with VHS tape copy protection that didn't work and ruined the picture for everyone and then in the 90's when MP3 files started taking off and the record companies started suing teenagers for downloading MP3 files.  Really?  If the movie/music companies, (aka: the most greedy/sleazy entities on the planet) had simply made their movies/music more affordable from the beginning, no one would have wanted to go to all the trouble to copy or download inferior music files to get around the high cost.  As of today, they still haven't learned their lesson even after many have gone bankrupt trying to fight a losing battle.  And let's not forget how Apple treats people that try to circumvent their controls.  Anyone remember all the BRICKED IPHONES Apple intentionally damaged with an update back in 2007 when folks tried to jailbreak their phones?  Hope Canon doesn't try THAT!!  But I digress...

I agree slightly with the counterfeit protection excuse simply because there are many examples of true counterfeit Canon batteries out there that are almost perfect copies, cost more than established 3rd party batteries and are crap.  So I'm all for some kind of message that tells me it's not a true Canon battery but don't punish me by shutting off all the battery data exchange and/or crippling the camera performance.  That's just crappy.

Also, let's not forget that in 5+ years when Canon stops making these batteries or making them in enough quantity, you'll be stuck with 3rd party batteries as your only choice and won't that be lovely?

So in summary, Canon needs to stop with the battery gestapo crap, make their batteries more reasonably priced to begin with (thus solving the problem entirely) and just stick to making good cameras instead of trying to piss everyone off with stupid ideas they learned from the movie/music industry and Apple.

413
Portrait / Re: Looking for advice on my portraits...
« on: December 02, 2013, 02:59:08 PM »
Lighting and background is usually the biggest challenge.  To get the better apertures, you need enough light and that light needs to be flattering, not ugly fluorescent lights, etc.  Hence the need for flash and then the need for large modifiers.  To get a good background you either need distance from the background or create it with an artificial background.  All of that takes space.

So what to do????  GO OUTSIDE.  Use the outdoor natural light and move around in a park or other pleasing setting at good times of the day (morning and evening) and use shaded areas when the light is too harsh.  Experiment.  Make sure you still use fill flash when outdoors.  Try to use a decent speedlite.  Keep it on camera at first and then get flash modifiers/stands later that will work with your speedlite and get some inexpensive remote triggers that support ETTL like the ones from Yonghuo.  Get the camera low and try using the sky as a background or trees.

Another advanced technique is to use a ND filter or Polarizer to reduce the light and allow a more shallow DOF for up close portraits, etc.

I also agree with reading or watching online videos.  Lots of ideas can be seen/found.

I like the advice already given about the picture telling the story regardless of the camera, settings, etc.  Keep that in mind and HAVE FUN.  The best pictures of anyone will happen when everyone is relaxed and at ease.  Not feeling awkward around the camera.  If you're stressed, your subjects will be too.  So relax and have fun.

TAKE A LOT OF FRAMES!  You never know how the picture truly looks until you are sitting at the computer and you discover all kinds of things you missed.  Someone blinks, has hair out of place, background failure, trees, branches, poles, whatever growing out of a head, bad smiles, etc.  So take a lot of frames in several poses and settings to help overcome this.

Finally, get Lightroom and you'll be amazed what you can fix and recover when things aren't going your way.

414
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: ...and now Smugmug.
« on: December 02, 2013, 12:30:27 AM »
Nothing wrong with SmugMug but I wouldn't know.

I've used Zenfolio for years and consistently been happy with them.

If you decide to switch to Zenfolio, here's my referral code for a discount.

Referral Code: 6KC-FPW-PWR

Rusty


415
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Best tablet for on-location preview
« on: December 02, 2013, 12:14:26 AM »
All of the prior suggestions are great.

I have another suggestion but it will but it will be higher in price and compares more to the MacBook Air instead of the iPad Air.  Personally I think a nook HD+, Nexus 7 or Kindle HDX would be sufficient for field viewing.

The new Lenovo Yoga 2 Pro has an incredible 13" 3200x1800 IPS QHD+ Display.  It's a hybrid ultrabook laptop/tablet that weighs 3.1 lbs and the screen swivels 360 degrees.  It has a i7 CPU, Haswell chipset, 8G RAM, 256G SSD, and touchscreen.  Best Buy got some kind of deal on them so they are only $1200 right now if you can get one.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/lenovo-ideapad-yoga-2-pro-ultrabook-2-in-1-13-3-touch-screen-laptop-8gb-memory-silver/1817254.p?id=1219065404810&skuId=1817254

I set a couple up for client and they are pretty amazing.

In another 2-3 months Lenovo will release an 11" Yoga 2 Pro version too.

416
Lenses / Re: Lens condensation paranoia
« on: November 17, 2013, 10:32:46 PM »
Using a ziplock bag when going from a cold environment into a warm (as likely more humid) environment, esp one with a large crowd of breathing people, is prudent until the camera's temp warms up to close to the surroundings.  Problem for me is that I need to shoot pictures when I arrive and shooting through a sealed ziplock bag isn't a skill I've yet mastered.  And as you use a zoom lens, you move the warm humid air inside the lens and camera and can fog on the inside too.  Grrr!!

Please correct me if I'm wrong but my simplistic attitude about humidity and my cameras/lenses is keep the camera/lens warmer than the surroundings and it can't hold condensation.  For instance, when I shoot in very humid indoor pool areas, I warm up my camera/lens with the car heater on the way to the location.  (I crack the car windows so I don't suffocate inside on mild days!)

Since I do a enough indoor pool shooting during the winter, I've even considered perhaps getting a pizza warmer bag for the ride over to the pool instead of using my car heater.  I would assume a similar idea could be used indoors when returning from the cold outdoors if the camera needs to be used indoors quickly.

417
Lenses / Re: 16-35 2.8L II - Is it really THAT bad ?
« on: November 17, 2013, 10:14:56 PM »
Haven't used the 16-35-II but I have shot thousands of images with my version 1 and love the lens.  It's a great size/weight and it shares the 77mm filter size with the 24-105, 24-70-I and 70-200/2.8 I&II.  The 16-35-II has an 82mm filter size and so would throw off my nice consistent group.

I love the 16-35-1 I have and think (as many others do) that it's pretty close to the version II IQ.  I read somewhere that the version II "corrected" the edge softness of the version I and in the process got softer in the center.  D'Oh!  I have no idea if this is true but all I know is that I love my version 1.

418
Lenses / Re: Canon 40mm f/2.8 Lens: Thoughts? Reviews? Is it worth getting?
« on: November 17, 2013, 09:16:45 PM »
I like it.  Yes, it has a manual focus ring - note that it's an STM lens, so it's 'focus by wire' (power is required for manual focusing).

It's quite sharp wide open.  I find it most useful because of it's small size - when I'm primarly planning to shoot with a long lens, I can easily bring the 40/2.8 along.  I often use the 70-200/2.8 for events, and since it's hanging from a Blackrapid strap, if I need wider I can switch to the 40/2.8 which I keep in my pocket, leaving the white zoom hanging from the strap.  I could use my 24-70, but I'd have to carry that in a belt pouch - the pancake is very convenient.

Hmmm.  Neat idea!

419
Canon General / Re: How to teach a friend Photography...
« on: November 12, 2013, 11:55:28 PM »
Dear Rusty!

Yes, teaching someone is strange. You yourself as a teacher will learn a lot.
(And sometimes this process leads to a nice collaboration.)
As I told you: if youre not getting paid for this, let the pupil come to you at free will.

Again: have fun!

Ahh!  You got me.  Busted!  :)  This is the selfish part of me knowing that the more I teach things, the more I benefit from knowing the material better.  So I totally agree with you.  It's a great side benefit aside from the whole ego boost and all.  Thanks for the feedback!

420
Canon General / Re: How to teach a friend Photography...
« on: November 12, 2013, 11:52:40 PM »
DON'T DO IT!
I got involved in teaching a lady to use DSLR cameras, now she is a better photographer than me and keeps borrowing my lenses!

We got her started with borrowed gear then she bought some of our older gear (at very low prices) and within a year started to leave us behind!

You can really go off people!

LOL!  Yeah, that would be ironic, eh?  In this case, I'm not a pro and wouldn't lose a penny.  In fact, it would be great if she became as good or hopefully better than me because that would not only make me a great teacher but I might actually end up in a few pictures for a change in our scout troop.  You know the drill - as the photographer you're never present at any of the events... at least not by looking at the photos!  :-)

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 62