March 06, 2015, 09:18:31 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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 87
61
Photography Technique / Re: Travel set up
« on: January 10, 2015, 12:16:29 PM »
Maybe he never returned!  Perhaps he found a nice pretty native that captured his heart and convinced him to never leave!  Or maybe a few days into the trip, he was kidnapped and put to work harvesting crops for the drug trade!  Anyway, I guess we'll just have to wait and see if he chimes in and tells us his exciting story!

In the meantime, we can always make up versions of what might have happened!  LOL!   ;D

62
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Preparing for the switch
« on: January 09, 2015, 02:15:19 PM »
I shoot mostly events, school sports and portraits, with occasional travel photography thrown in.  In my case, the 70-200 f2.8L II is my most used lens.  This was the case with my 7D and is still the case with my 5D3.

I bought the 5D3 with the 24-105 f4L IS kit lens and I really like this lens.  It's my first choice for a walk-around lens when I want to travel light with a single body and don't have a specific subject in mind.  (For "serious" shoots, I use two bodies.)  I also like the flexibility of shooting scenery around water (streams, waterfalls, etc.) with very slow shutter speeds and IS.

Still, the faster 24-70 f2.8L II was very tempting for its extra speed.  For people shots, I prefer 1/100 min and generally shoot 1/200 and up.  But, losing the IS was a huge concern.  Until the temptation grew to strong to resist.

I now keep the 70-200 on one body and the 24-70 on the other (both 5D3's).  I really like the 24-70.  It's great for action shots.  Because it's faster, it focuses quicker in low light.  It also seems to be a brighter lens.  Comparing the 24-70 at 70 with the 70-200 at 70, both at f2.8, the 24-70 seems to be 1/2 to 2/3 stop brighter.  This helps me use a little faster shutter speed or lower ISO. 

Typically, I shoot above 1/100 with the 24-70 and sometimes down to 1/60 without concern.  On occasion, I will use 1/40 or 1/30 and take extra measures to brace myself.  But, more likely, I'll bump up the ISO.

I can't gloss over the focus speed benefits of the 24-70.  I shoot action -- which can include a fleeting moment during an event.  The 24-70 is better at the quick aim-focus-shoot than the 24-105 f4 lens.  Part of this may be an improved USM, but part is also the f2.8 aperture and the brighter optics.  For me, this outweighs that benefit of IS on a short zoom for most of my shooting.  (To be clear, I do rely on IS frequently with the 70-200.)

I also have the 35 f2.0 IS and plan to get the 50 fx.x IS if and when Canon refreshes it.   The 35 is a fun lens and my "extra low light" lens of choice.  I anticipate the future 50 to be the same.  the 35 is as bright as the 24-70 and comparable in IQ with the 24-70 at 35mm.

I will admit that I have no plans to sell the 24-105, at least not yet.  With IS, it is a a bit of a "security blanket lens".  There was a time when I carried it and the 24-70 to events, but no more.  The 24-70 has quickly become my preferred short zoom.  If I get concerned about a low light situation and want IS, I tend to grab the 35 now -- two stops faster than the 24-105 with IS to boot.

Admittedly, I'm still torn about landscapes.  Although not a main interest, I like IS for them and often use polarizers.  While I stop down smaller than f4 for landscapes, the 24-70 may still be better suited (unless there's moving water and I want a slow shutter) because it is a bright lens.

Of course, your mileage may vary.  But, I would recommend the 24-70 f2.8L II.  If I could only have one 24-xxx Canon zoom, it would be the 24-70 f2.8L II.

Big time Ditto.  I could have written this entire post myself except for the bit about the primes because I don't own the 35 IS prime.

Another thing... we did a premium senior portrait shoot for my son a few months ago at a great studio with a great reputation.  Spent over $1000 for the printed products and the digital image rights.  The sitting went very smoothly and guess what they shot it all with?  Canon 1DX, 24-70 f/2.8 II and 70-200 f/2.8 II.  Portraits all came out great.  I'm not saying some high end L primes wouldn't do better but they are definitely not crucial to have if you have those two stellar zooms in your kit.  Just get them and see for yourself.   :)

63
EOS-M / Re: Why do I keep my Eos M?
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:47:00 PM »
Ditto.  Bought mine a few months back for $249 + $62 for an adapter.  I was impressed with the build quality.  It was an extremely "neat-o" little camera.

But, I never used it.  I couldn't get too excited for the same reasons mentioned above and I already had the SL1 that works great.  Plus, since Canon crippled it with firmware limitations, I couldn't use it for special projects that a mirrorless non-shutter design would have been perfect for.  So I took the chance to sell it for what I paid as essentially brand new recently.

I'd love to try again someday though if Canon would release another one that hits it out of the park!  The whole concept has a lot of merit.  Come on Canon!

64
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Preparing for the switch
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:41:40 PM »
I actually started a thread a while back about whether to sell or keep my 24-70 f/2.8 II after I got a great price on the new f/4 IS version.  (I wondered if I should reclaim some of my cash for the more expensive f/2.8 version.)  The overall response was to keep the f/2.8.  After much thought, I agreed.  It's a great lens that is so good, it even negates the need for expensive primes in some cases.  So with the lenses you have listed, you will probably not have a huge need to buy more than maybe one special prime in the future.  And that helps justify the higher cost.  Good luck and welcome to Canon!   :)

65
I forgot all about turning it off until you said that!

Note that I didn't state that I'm running and adblocker (though there are ways of detecting it) :-> ... it was just a theoretical possibility. Remember: Superheros always watch ads and buy products by clicking on affiliate links :-p

Now I feel really bad for anyone not running an Ad Blocker.

Reminds me of the poker wisdom: "If after 10 minutes you don't know who the sucker is, it's you".

I don't mind Ads until they cause a significant impact on the site's core function/purpose.  Then they are counter productive and drive people AWAY from the site.  If I had to scroll down every time I visited the CR Main Page to see what I wanted, I would definitely visit less because I would get tired of all the extra wasted effort simply due to a bad design choice.  It sends a message that the site is more interested in free revenue (generated at my expense) than providing a good user experience.

66
Yesterday, a large "AdChoice" Ad Block on CR Home Page was apparently added to take the place of / push down the trending Forum Discussion List on the right side.  WTH??   ???  There was already an Ad Block below the Forum Thread List.  Why do we need one on the top as well?

Probably the "paradigm of constant ad revenue" - for more people using adblockers, sites need to place more ads. Sooner or later, the one user left that still hasn't installed an adblocker will get a site only consisting of ads :-p

Thank you Marsu42!!  A day or two ago, I had to view a site that didn't work right with the AdBlocker running.  I forgot all about turning it off until you said that!  I just turned the AdBlocker back on and Viola!, no more problem!  I've been running the AdBlock so long, I forgot how useful it is!   :D

Now I feel really bad for anyone not running an Ad Blocker.   :(

67
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III Replacement Talk [CR2]
« on: January 09, 2015, 09:44:28 AM »
It'd have to be a really awesome camera to make me spend more monies from my mk3.

Hey, weren't you the one saying the same thing about the 5d1 until just before you upgraded :-p ?
Yup. 5d1----> 5D3(held out on buying a 5d2 for along time) and it's very likely it will be 5d3---> 5D5 if it doesn't have those things.

And even when the MK3 was released, I waited until the price was ripe @ $2499 before I bought it. I can wait and make money just fine with the mk3 as I did with the 5d1 at the time.

I think RLPhoto and I think in the same way and we have followed similar upgrade paths.  I used my 5D and skipped the 5D2 on purpose, then waited about a year to buy my 5D3 after its release.  Plus, I would like to see what the 6D2 is before I jump.

What I fear is they will put truly coveted features like internal RT only in the highest priced 5Ds model to try and force you to buy the highest priced version.  I doubt I'll be too interested in the high MP version but I definitely want the other features that could improve the overall experience and workflow.

68
EDIT:  I discovered that my AdBlocker was the reason.  With it enabled, I see the Discussion List on top like I prefer.  I disabled it temporarily and forgot so the AdBlock appeared on the top instead.  Yuck.  But I guess it's been that way for a while.  Too bad.   :(

Yesterday, a large "AdChoice" Ad Block on CR Home Page was apparently added to take the place of / push down the trending Forum Discussion List on the right side.  WTH??   ???  There was already an Ad Block below the Forum Thread List.  Why do we need one on the top as well?

CR AdminsPlease move the Forum Discussion List back up top right where it was!  It sucks having to scroll down to see it every time I check the home page for new topics.  I'm not trying to whine here, this is a real issue.  I don't mind tolerating the Ad Blocks as long as they don't affect functionality.  This one does!

IMHO, if this change is permanent, it will significantly reduce your traffic because checking for new forum topics will not be as quick or easy and folks will be less inclined to go to the extra scrolling effort.  When the Forum Discussion List is where it was before at the top, you simply needed to refresh the pageNow it's hidden completely without scrolling down.  Yuck!!

69
EOS Bodies / Re: NEW CAMERA - EOS 80D?
« on: January 08, 2015, 08:40:02 PM »
The dial looks like a P&S or Eos M. But the body looks too bulky to be a mirrorless.
Maybe a newer version of the superzoom Powershots?

Powershot is kind of what I was thinking.  The dial is also what makes me think powershot or some kind of new M or S line type thing.

70
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Ice sculptures - any tips?
« on: January 08, 2015, 03:38:50 PM »
You say you want Ice Sculptures?  Well, here you go!!   :D   Maybe these images will give you some ideas.  Enjoy...

http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2015/01/the-2015-harbin-ice-and-snow-festival/384265/

71
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
« on: January 08, 2015, 03:35:42 PM »
I appreciate the discussion from everyone.  I think this lens is going to be a little polarizing because Canon is moving the STM technology out of the EF-S/EOS M sphere and into full frame lenses (most will agree that the 40mm Pancake was a different story for a lot of reasons).

I'm actually happy to hear the 24-70 f/4L have some ardent supporters.  Frankly, I hadn't seen evidence of too many of them!  For me, however, this is the biggest reason why the 24-70 f/4L still doesn't make a ton of sense:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=786&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=823&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Wow Dustin!  That little image comparison is hard to argue with.  (I realize there are a LOT more factors to consider before choosing a lens but that comparison is thought provoking.)

72
EOS-M / Re: Portfolio of my favorite Eos M pics of the last year...
« on: January 08, 2015, 10:58:45 AM »
Thnaks and yes, I have been experimenting with Viveza LR plugin with these images...I definitely made them a lot more saturated and contrasty than I normally do, as you rightly noticed...

Thanks for the explanation.  I think your edits work for the most part.  Some folks may find they go too far but it's subjective.  If they were any more dark or saturated, sure.  But since many of them are in daylight, I think it's good.  Who doesn't like to see a nice blue sky?   :)

73
Animal Kingdom / Re: NatGeo 2014 Photo Contest Winners...
« on: January 08, 2015, 10:55:04 AM »
I agree that some of the images are less impressive and puzzling as to why they were included, considered, awarded or whatever.  My only idea about why might be that they didn't receive a large collection of images to choose from in that particular category.  You know, they had to give the prize to someone and maybe that image was the best one out of the small sampling they received.

74
Animal Kingdom / NatGeo 2014 Photo Contest Winners...
« on: January 07, 2015, 10:47:05 PM »
Some of these are stunning.  The winner is great but I think my favorite is the Shinagawa Station.  Enjoy...

http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2014/12/winners-of-the-2014-national-geographic-photo-contest/100875/

75
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Difference in image from APS-C to FF
« on: January 07, 2015, 08:57:42 PM »
Not to highjack, but I'm in a fairly close situation myself. I bought a T2i kit as a noob and thought I'd have to buy a "big shot" camera someday if I wanted better pictures than I was taking. Naturally, the more I shot- the better my pictures got. To the point that through these years, I've come to love that cheap little plasticky thing, and really have a hard time selling myself on the thought that a new body is going to make my captures that much better for the investment. I've sold some pictures, and even have a full covershot of a local paper to my credit, but I'm ultimately just a ham and egger. The only reason I'm considering changing bodies is I've finally felt a little hindered by the T2i's light sensitivity and hunt and peck focusing, and I've got a couple trips this year that I really want to make the most of from a landscape wide angle perspective.

My gear is the aforementioned T2i
EFS kit lens I never use
EF 70-200 2.8L II
EF 16-35 2.8L II

I'm really torn between a)getting a 6d, simply because it's "FF", my two good lenses are made for it, etc. or b)upgrading to a 70d with better focusing a feature laden by caparison, getting an efs 10-18 for landscape, and waiting for the trickle down when Canon finally competes with Nikon in MP

I guess even at it's current $1500 pricetag, I just doubt a 6D will have been worth it. Thoughts?

That's a tough question Buzr.  The way I see it, you are more in touch and honest with yourself and your gear than most.  And obviously you don't buy a lot of gear just for sake of merely owning it.  You have a lot of confidence and experience with that T2i crop camera.  You're used to it.  You like it.  And you don't feel limited by it.  So with that in mind and your apparently frugal nature, the 70D seems like a good idea and a great value.

But let's push your boundaries a bit with the 6D FF question:  While you own two amazing fabulous lenses that would benefit in a big way from the FF aspect ratio, you don't seem that interested in FF.  But then you mention buying a somewhat inferior and dedicated EF-S lens to gain better wide angle FL.  Buying the EF-S 10-18 with the 70D will also increase your investment to essentially what you would pay for the 6D.  So that is a contradiction.  You already own a MUCH better wide angle zoom lens (EF 16-35L) than the EF-S 10-18.  The 16-35 would give you everything you could ever dream of with the 6D.  And I promise you that you haven't lived until you use that 70-200 lens on a FF camera.

Lastly, you also have a bit of a gap in your lens collection between the 16-35 and the 70-200.  Why not 'go for it' and buy a 6D + 24-105-F/4L Kit and fill that gap with a great walk around L lens in the bargain?

I think that based on what you say you shoot and the skill level you are probably at, it is probably a perfect time for you to embrace full frame and see what it can do for your creativity.  Great low light, remote shooting and expanded FL options all are waiting with a FF body.  And currently, the 6D is about as cheap as it may ever be new.  (OR, buy a used 5D Classic FF and see what it's all about for less $$.)

Look, it's a given that you'll love the 70D.  That's a no brainer.  What I think I am reading between the lines in your post is that you might secretly be pining for a FF 6D.  That EF-S 10-18 lens is a bit of a tell and possibly a step backward with the lenses you already own.  You are already in a higher class of gear with those and you may likely be disappointed with a variable aperture EF-S lens that can only be used on crop cameras.  Thoughts?

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 87