October 02, 2014, 03:33:04 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 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 61
91
Software & Accessories / Re: Asus or BenQ
« on: August 13, 2014, 12:19:58 PM »
As an IT guy, I've seen ASUS grow as a company and appears to be shooting for Samsung level status.  Benq is a smaller company.  Benq monitors over the years have been value based choices to save money.  That's my opinion and I'm sure Benq makes great monitors that cost more.  But keep in mind that ASUS and Benq are not necessarily shooting for the stars in the photography / graphics design market.  They are shooting for the mass market and the gamers.  They are making monitors that scream fast refresh rates.

While the statement above says nothing about the actual quality of the particular models you are considering, if you are dead set on buying from those brand names, I would go with ASUS.  ASUS has a pretty good reputation in the market for most of their products including LCDs.

Of course, for a high end graphics quality display like you are shopping for, I wouldn't consider either company.  I would stick with the higher end products.  HP, DELL, EIZO, NEC, etc.  One way to get a high quality display without breaking the bank is to buy a refurbished (or not) DELL U2410 IPS display.  It's a bit older but it's a very well respected display that can be obtained for around $200 - $300 now.  When you get it, you'll understand what a true quality display is.  It was about $1200 back when it came out in 2009.  The newer version of it is the U2711 which is around $500 - $700.

Most of the web comparisons are biased but here is a decent list of better options.
http://reviews.squidoo.com/photo-editing-monitors

92
animoto.com... does it all for you

Do you use animoto?  It looks pretty interesting.  I'm wondering if it would be a good fit for our scout troop (non-profit) for the scouts to use to create videos.

93
FYI - Hillsilly has touched on a topic I've been meaning to pose for quite a while so I started a similar thread asking about Software, Tips and where to get MUSIC which is always my biggest challenge.

Hopefully the replies to both this thread and the one I just started will help the OP and everyone else.   :)

94
Another thread just popped up asking about slideshow software.  This reminded me that I've been meaning to ask the CR community...

-  Favorite Authoring Software?  (ProShow, PicturesToExe, etc),
-  Tips on making a great slideshow and most important...
HOW/WHERE DO YOU GET YOUR MUSIC?  The music part has always been my biggest challenge.  I am usually interested in fast paced rock/pop music because my slideshows are about youth summer camps, etc and need to convey energy, fun and excitement.

I use ProShow Gold & Producer and I want to give PicturesToExe another try sometime when I have the time.  Any other winners out there?

95
Personally if someone showed up and wanted to run an executable on my computer, they'd be shown the door.  That said if your clients are ok with the idea go for it, but I'd make sure first.

Jim

Please understand that the exe in this case is just a package.  It's not installing software, it simply launches the slideshow.  I understand your point however and running executables from outside should always be a red flag action.

FWIW, an exe is how I run my slideshows as well.  I create the exe in the best quality format, copy to the desktop of the presentation computer from a usb stick and I run it from the internal drive of the presentation computer (NOT from the USB stick).  If you create a playable DVD, the pictures are converted and lose a lot of resolution.  Yuck!

96
ProShow is nice, but tends to crash (when preparing slideshow). Also if you create too big slideshow (too many photos / too large files), you won't be able to open your presentation project file. Maybe they fixed some of these bugs, I haven't used it for past year.

I use ProShow about 3 or 4 times a year for rather large (200+) slideshows and I haven't had the issues you mention about locking up, etc in years.  It is a newer version though.  That said, I don't consider myself a slideshow master regardless of how many shows I've done and I agree with the previous posts, ProShow and P2E are excellent.  I gave up on all the others that I tried or used before such as PowerPoint.

Keep in mind however, most software I've ever used that is media or photo related tends to be flaky and unstable by nature.  (This includes all Adobe, Powerpoint, etc.)  They are all very sensitive to memory issues, etc.  Having a clean stable OS with no driver problems, plenty of RAM and frequent reboots tends to help.  This includes macs.  I actually had more 'spinning pinwheels' when I had my mac years ago than I have now with Windows 7 on an i7.

97
EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 7D Replacement Info [CR2]
« on: August 12, 2014, 09:29:06 AM »
Another pet peeve about the 5D3, they put a slow-ass SD slot in it instead of UHS-1 like they did for the 6D even though the technology was available and mature.  And when you have media in the SD slot, it slows the much faster CF rate down to a crawl.  Totally ridiculous!  Grrrr.

Haven't had that problem - under what circumstances does the CF card slow down when there's an SD card in the camera?

I boot Magic Lantern off an SD card; but write all images to the CF card.

Phil.

There were quite a few write ups about it after the 5D3 came out but here is one that covers it well enough.  In your case, perhaps if you have the camera configured to NOT write images to the SD card, it doesn't degrade the speed of the CF.

http://www.borrowlenses.com/blog/2013/01/tip-optimize-canon-5d-markiii-write-speeds-avoid-sd-cards/

98
EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 7D Replacement Info [CR2]
« on: August 12, 2014, 09:22:43 AM »
Touch screen? Now that would be an unfortunate omission. The beautifully evolved touch screen on my little travel camera, the 100D/SL1 woke me up to the power and practicality of a good touch screen. My go-to video camera, the 100% awesome Panasonic GH4 uses a touch screen that has forever changed the way I work (with video).
-pw

I thought a touch screen on my DSLR would be a waste of time.  Then I used it on the SL1 this summer and while it's not a revolutionary game changer for me, it's a nice feature I found myself using more and more, esp when viewing photos on the screen with others.  Zooming in and moving the picture around while zoomed is a HUGE time saver with a touch screen.  I'm glad the implementation was done well.

I found it useful enough that I would rather have it than not have it.  Oh and BTW, I had a touch screen protective layer on my SL1 and the touch screen still worked fine.   :)

99
EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 7D Replacement Info [CR2]
« on: August 11, 2014, 07:12:17 PM »
If the 7D ends up with more than 24MP and the next 5D is also high MP then it'll be a really tough choice. If they're both low MP... I don't like thinking about that option.

I really wish everything had Wifi (and hopefully a built in flash RT commander).

After experiencing Canon's lack of vision in exploiting the potential of WiFi, I would much, much, much rather they include a built-in flash RT commander like the SHOULD HAVE DONE WITH THE 6D.  Heck, for that matter, they should have done it with the 5D3.  It's not like the flash RT designs weren't already in the pipe when the 5D3 was being finished.

Another pet peeve about the 5D3, they put a slow-ass SD slot in it instead of UHS-1 like they did for the 6D even though the technology was available and mature.  And when you have media in the SD slot, it slows the much faster CF rate down to a crawl.  Totally ridiculous!  Grrrr.

100
EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 7D Replacement Info [CR2]
« on: August 11, 2014, 04:55:55 PM »
Yep Famateur, you pretty much nailed it.  I thought later that my post could have been interpreted as negative but it's actually neutral.  It's just a fact and you elaborated on that fact well.

That being said, there are some things that really irritate me, like the 5D3 not having a removable focus screen.  6D and 1DX do, but the 5D3 doesn't.  Same with Canon not having built-in intervalometers.  There's actually quite a list of things that Canon does (or omits) that don't really affect profit either way but yet they do it anyway.  It's very frustrating when good money is spent on a high dollar camera that isn't entry level.

101
EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 7D Replacement Info [CR2]
« on: August 11, 2014, 03:47:41 PM »
what has wifi to do with higher megapixels and framerate?

give it 802.11ac.  :)

If WiFi means polycarbonate top plate like 6D, they probably sacrificed it for the sake of ultimate build. Also, if you would ever need WiFi, you can always buy Canon WiFi module (for extraorbitant price that is :P).

There is NO technical reason to not include WiFi, regardless of toughness or type of material.  You can put WiFi in anything.  This is purely a question of how to manipulate the market and target user to get maximum profit.  That's what it's ALWAYS ABOUT.  Anyone who thinks that Canon is sweating the small stuff because they love photographers and care about building a perfect camera to help photographers be more creative is being naive.

It's ALWAYS ABOUT THE MONEY, it always has been and it always will be!

The bottom line is that Canon would rather charge $4000 for a body (that might be a 1D class build) without WiFi and another $600 for the WiFi module for all those professionals out there that absolutely must have it at any price.  (Sorry for the snark but it irritates me that Canon often chooses the ultra-expensive route.)  Me, I'll use the Eye-Fi card unless Canon does something to sabotage that idea like they have done recently with firmware updates to stop 3rd party batteries.  (Don't get me started!  >:( )

I predict I'll be getting a 70D soon.  I just need a better sensor and frame rate than my 60D.  I don't need a 1D wanna-be body with a price to match.

102
EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 7D Replacement Info [CR2]
« on: August 11, 2014, 03:38:25 PM »
Having recently bought a 12mp G1X with Wi-Fi, its a klutz.  Canon should leave off Wi-Fi until they can get it right.

Canon Wi-Fi requires that the Canon site be up and working just to do a direct transfer to your computer.  Their iMAGE site has been repeatedly down, last weekend until Thursday I was not able to use my Wi-?Fi to transfer images.  It took me until Friday to get it to work again, I had to re-register with the site because they changed the login, then erase all my wifi settings from the camera, then reload the 230 MB files and go thru the setup process again, which is slow and goofy.  Now its working again, but for how long??

In the meantime, I bought a eye-Fi card and put it in my 5D3.  Easy setup, and it works great.  Then I popped it in my 1GX just to see what happens, and it works with no setup to card or camera.

I'd much prefer it to the Goofy Canon WiFi which is unreliable.

Gotta say I agree.  I have the 6D, I'm an IT guy.  I have a lot of experience with lots of WiFi.  The 6D has pretty bare minimum functionality and it's difficult to work with on the camera.  I guess they decide on some features last minute from the marketing dept and then barely even test/use them.  That's what it feels like sometimes, anyway.   :o

103
My experience as well.  But I will add that the 70D is a significant step up in IQ over the 7D.

Which is why my 60D (same sensor as the 7D) doesn't see much use any more for swimming pictures after I got my 5D3.  And why I've decided to not buy a less expensive 7D now even though it's a great camera.  I'm going to wait to see what the 7D2 has to offer and how stupid the price is.  Then I'll probably just get a 70D anyway.   :P

104
I think there are valid points to using APS-C for small birds in daylight or prime lighting conditions. But for me, the true test of a camera is how it does in unfavorable conditions. The FF will perform admirably in these lowlight periods and capture moments in relatively clean detail.

I gots to say, this has been my experience as well which is why my FF bodies get 90% use while the 60D stays home now.  But I would LOVE it if the 7D2 sensor is so good that this becomes a moot point.  LOVE it.

105
Wow!  I just want to say that my inner engineer geek and photographer geek are really having a blast reading this thread!  I know enough to follow the concepts but I also know when my understanding isn't solid yet.  When I have more time I'm going to read it through at least once or twice more!  This thread is why I stick with the CR forum!  The in-depth information I'm seeing and back & forth discussion are riveting.

Thanks so much for putting so much effort and time into this (and many other threads).  I'm sure some are reading this and saying, "Who Cares?" but not me.  I'm seriously geeking out here.   :P

My comments on the thread so far are...

-  While I understand what neuro and jrista are saying about DR, I agree with MichaelHodges in that DR carries more significance.  At least for me it does for some of the same reasons he states.  I bristled a bit when I read jrista's DR opinions.  Of course, I'm not shooting wildlife as often as I'm shooting boy life (scouts running around, etc) but the same factors apply, except I probably won't be killed!

-  I've read things in the past about lens resolution vs. sensor resolution and while some of the discussions seemed to have a lot of evidence and facts to back up the theory, my gut has never believed it.  Good glass is good glass and if it was good enough to produce a beautiful image on film in the '90's, it should still be good enough to produce a beautiful image on a sensor in 2010.  The light, the glass and the sensor don't know when the lens was made, they just do their thing.  If the glass is clean, aligned correctly and focused properly, the image should be sharp.  If a newer technology lens uses better glass, coatings and IS so there is less light corruption then the picture should improve from those upgrades but not because the resolution of the sensor "matches" the resolution of the lens.  This idea has never sat well with me.

jrista, the techniques you are using on the the moon to get sharper images, etc are impressive.  I'm really enjoying reading about some of the tricks and gear you are using to do it.  I've always struggled with explaining to newbies why it is hard to photograph the moon with the gear they have when they can see the moon clearly with their eyes.  I've explained a lot of the obvious stuff but you take it to whole other level!  Wow!!

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 61