Messages

376

Abstract / Re: Transit of Mercury - Hydrogen Alpha

« on: March 28, 2013, 09:00:55 AM »

 

377

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?

« on: March 28, 2013, 08:56:30 AM »

Enough with the flame wars already 
 
As the OP I never meant to be a Canon vs Nikon rant, just to assess the veracity of owning the best of both worlds and whether it made sense business wise.
 
All I got was that people stick to their system even if it shot them in the foot... repeatedly. Brand loyalty does not make sense.

Well you chose the words "go Nikon" in your subject title on a Canon forum, what did you think would happen? its like going to the Republican convention and raising a question, about being a Democrat for a little while ... I guess free speech allows them to sing songs of praise and worship about Nikon, Sony or whatever sensor but it'd be more appropriate if they sang their glorious tunes in one of the Nikon, Sony forums that way they'll get people who will appreciate their songs of worship and praise

378

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]

« on: March 28, 2013, 08:40:39 AM »

I see a place for this in my camera bag ... I hope it has in-camera HDR, comes in very handy.

379

Reviews / Re: My full street photography kit and why my 5dmk3 is perfect for street shooting.

« on: March 28, 2013, 08:38:47 AM »

You can do great street photography with any of the 5ds. It's more about the skill then the camera.

Check out this guy for instance:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/maciejdakowicz/
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/maciejdakowicz/popular-interesting/

+1

380

Reviews / Re: My full street photography kit and why my 5dmk3 is perfect for street shooting.

« on: March 28, 2013, 08:37:01 AM »

the 2 groups of people that think the 5Diii is too heavy and that try and hide the fact they're going around taking photos of people.

I'll also throw in the people that complain about the new bottom of the range cameras that get released not being as good as £2000 cameras

... good one.

381

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Overly Hot Hotspots On 5Dmk3

« on: March 26, 2013, 04:29:59 PM »

such as outside at noon on a hot summer day.

You just described Qatar, 12 hours a day for 8 months of the year ... "perfect lighting conditions" (if there is such a thing) for photography, account for less than 2 or 3 weeks here ... I envy most of you folk from Europe and the Amercias with nice blue skies, natural green trees and all.

382

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Speeding AF point selection on 5d Mark III

« on: March 26, 2013, 04:19:41 PM »

I think you would be better off with the 7D, I prefer the AF on the 7D vs the one in the 1d mkiv.

Sounds outrageous but I'm open to surprises and learning ... so do tell us why.

383

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Networkable DSLRs trivially hacked

« on: March 26, 2013, 04:13:37 PM »

Interesting, thanks for sharing ... but, if I am not wrong, I don't think most photographers would be concerned with it.
I use 5D MK III with CamRanger for my WiFi needs and it is secured with a password, so me not worried 

384

Lenses / Re: Question for owners of Canon 200mm f2.0 and 70-200mm f 2.8 II lens

« on: March 26, 2013, 04:04:08 PM »

My guess, 'cos I love playing this stuff 

First one 200 f2, second on 70-200 f2.8.

+1

385

Software & Accessories / Re: Tripod Legs for Manfrotto 393 Gimbal Head

« on: March 26, 2013, 02:47:19 PM »

Are you referring to 055XPROB?

Either. The ergonomics are different between the two, but the basic build is the same.

I much prefer the ergonomics of the 3021BPRO, especially the fact that I can quickly completely remove the center post, making it really easy to basically convert it into a tabletop tripod. I seem to remember having better options for hanging a weight off of the 3021BPRO for additional stabilization, but I wouldn't swear to it.

But both will support the heaviest of loads equally (very) well.

Cheers,

b&

The reason I asked that question was bcoz I use 055XPROB but it is build to handle only up to 15.4lbs (7kg) load ... but the 393 Gimbal Head is built to carry up to 44lbs (20 kg), so isn't that kinda mismatch? Ideally one would want to buy a tripod and head with identical or similar load capacities.
Of course, I have to admit that I don't know the load capacity of 3021BPRO
Regards

A quick search suggests that the 3021BPRO has an official load capacity of a bit over 13 pounds.

However...that doesn't seem to have much bearing on anything in reality.

I've often put the post horizontal, extended all the way, with a gripped body and medium telephoto (such as the 180 macro) pointed straight down, and a lot more than 13 pounds hanging from the center to keep it from tipping. Never even a hint of a problem, except that you have to watch out for vibrations...I only do this in the studio with flash, where not only is there nothing to cause vibrations but the flash itself eliminates the problem.

I suppose in its least sturdy configuration...say, legs fully extended and fully splayed, with the center post sideways, then it might have a problem with a 13 pound load...but, even then, such a failure would really surprise me.

That, and it's a bit of a challenge to get a load that heavy in the first place. The 400 weights 8 1/2 pounds. The 5DIII is another two pounds; with the grip, it's three. The Wimberley head is three pounds, which brings you right up to the official limit -- and, again, my setup is so rock solid that it wouldn't even occur to you that there's even a theoretical possibility of a problem.

Lastly, manufacturers are notorious for specifying bogus weight limits. For example, RSS conservatively rates their BH-40 at a mere 18 pounds, even though it'll support twice that without problem. It just won't be a very pleasant experience working with much more than a 300 f/4 on a ballhead that physical size. The competition would go ahead and rate a similar ballhead at 35 pounds.

For me, that's what the 13 pound specification means for the 3021BPRO: works great with a 13 pound load -- and it does. If you're regularly going to put a heavier load on the legs -- such as a studio video camera -- then the tripod isn't for you. But you're also not looking for a tripod such as this in the first place.

Cheers,

b&

IC ... thanks

386

Lenses / Re: Lens recommendation

« on: March 26, 2013, 06:39:35 AM »

Hello this is my first post to this website. I recently purchased a 6d and am on the fence between 2 lenses. I currently have a 70-200 2.8 sigma os, and am borrowing a family members 17-40l in the meantime. I upgraded from a rebel t3i which i still have and plan to still use.  I take portraits, occasional street photography and would like to get into weddings at some point. The 2 lenses I would like to get are the sigma 35mm 1.4 or the tamron sp 24-70 2.8 vc. Id like to get both in the future but will have to settle on one for the time being. Which one would I be happier with result wise?

I use the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC and it is a good lens to complement your Sigma 70-200.
I've never used the Sigma 35 1/4, so can't comment on that.

The things I like about Tamron 24-70 VC are:
1. Performs excellently in stabilizing camera shake, I found its stabilization to be better than my EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II lens.
2. I found it to have same image quality as EF 24-70 f/2.8 L (first version)
3. The only Full Frame compatible f/2.8 lens that has built in Image Stabilization / VC (Vibration Compensation)
4. Very reasonably priced.
If you liked your images made with the EF 17-40, you will like the Tamron 24-70 VC even more ... its a lot sharper, crisper and a lot less barrel distortion then the 17-40. 
If it helps you could check this short video review, of Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC lens, I made a couple of months ago:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6XHTIEeOvs

387

Software & Accessories / Re: Tripod Legs for Manfrotto 393 Gimbal Head

« on: March 26, 2013, 06:00:05 AM »

Are you referring to 055XPROB?

Either. The ergonomics are different between the two, but the basic build is the same.

I much prefer the ergonomics of the 3021BPRO, especially the fact that I can quickly completely remove the center post, making it really easy to basically convert it into a tabletop tripod. I seem to remember having better options for hanging a weight off of the 3021BPRO for additional stabilization, but I wouldn't swear to it.

But both will support the heaviest of loads equally (very) well.

Cheers,

b&

The reason I asked that question was bcoz I use 055XPROB but it is build to handle only up to 15.4lbs (7kg) load ... but the 393 Gimbal Head is built to carry up to 44lbs (20 kg), so isn't that kinda mismatch? Ideally one would want to buy a tripod and head with identical or similar load capacities.
Of course, I have to admit that I don't know the load capacity of 3021BPRO
Regards

388

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DxOMark trashes the Leica M9 sensor

« on: March 26, 2013, 01:05:05 AM »

There seems to be a lot of intensity and emotion trashing DXO

I don't think most people (including me) necessarily have any problem with DxO ... however, when DxO fans come to Canon users neighborhood using words such as DxO "trashes" etc there is bound to be some "intensity" brother

389

Software & Accessories / Re: Tripod Legs for Manfrotto 393 Gimbal Head

« on: March 26, 2013, 12:45:05 AM »

I'm a huge fan of the Manfrotto 3021BPRO legs. Huge, huge fan.

I've also got the replacement model, the 055XPROB...but, honestly, I only use it when I need two tripods at the same time. Otherwise, I'm always grabbing the original.

It's not the lightest tripod in the world, but it's not excessively heavy. It's amazingly configurable, and as steady as you're going to get in a portable tripod.

And it's well within your price range.

Cheers,

b&

P.S. It'll hold your gear and then some. I regularly use mine with a gripped 5DIII hanging off a 400 f/2.8 attached to a Wimberley head. Solid as a rock. Once you get the rig balanced, the lightest touch positions the camera and it just stays wherever you point it. b&

Are you referring to 055XPROB?

390

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DxOMark trashes the Leica M9 sensor

« on: March 25, 2013, 11:28:01 AM »

DXO mark means nothing. They take their objective tests and interpret them in completely subjective ways, all (as it would seem) on Nikon's dime. Super biased, all rubbish, especially their ISO scores. Canon should be top of the mark for every camera they've put out in the ISO division, right next to Pentax, and Nikon and Sony should be right in the bin every time. But it's absolutely the opposite. If you've ever seen the DPReview studio comparison tool, I highly recommend cranking up the ISO on there and seeing for yourself what I'm talking about. D5200? Rubbish. D800? Rubbish at anything above or below ISO 200. 5DIII? A f@ck!ng mint. DXO scores the opposite in every case.

DXO meassure signal /noise
if you do not understand the simplest  things of physics I suggest that you study the subject before writing statements as yours.
http://www.sensorgen.info
http://home.comcast.net/~nikond70/Charts/PDR.htm

Example:

Thank you professor, had no idea that "DxO measures signal/noise"