Messages

61

Canon General / Re: FYI: This Is The Gear Used To Take Obama’s New Official Portrait

« on: January 20, 2013, 05:30:41 PM »

I think it's good that they left the telephone on the desk behind him.  It implies that it is a working office, not just a decoration.  It's kind of a 'people in their workplaces' type photo.

62

Canon General / Re: FYI: This Is The Gear Used To Take Obama’s New Official Portrait

« on: January 20, 2013, 07:55:35 AM »

I was very surprised that no one commented on the composition/balance of the shot. There doesn't seem to be enough head room. I'm thinking this was probably due to not being able to backup and he had to make a quick decision to either making an unpleasant cut at the bottom of the shot or selling off his head room real estate. If this was the case he probably made the right decision, or maybe the 70-200 would have been a better choice to buy the extra headroom at 70 mm, and still have flattering compression. Who knows

To be honest, I think this composition was intentional - it creates a sense of power and authority.  If the rule of thirds were strictly applied (at eye level) he would seem a lot smaller in the frame.

63

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Thinking of downgrading my 5d3 system

« on: January 20, 2013, 06:43:23 AM »

You might just find that this pocketable Fuji is way superior to your 5D MK3 in most respects except fast tracking AF

I know I prefer my Fuji X cameras (X-Pro1 and XE-1) to my 5D MK3 with any L or Zeiss lens you care to nominate.
I've owned or tried most of them and they are soft and lackluster in comparison...

ET

Fuji cameras are pretty - I have an X10 because it has decent image quality, is reasonably small, has a manual zoom, and looks cool.  Some of my friends have bought X10s too - simply because it looks stylish (they're not interested in taking photos with it - they have iPhones for that).  I've tried getting to the point where I can go out on a serious photo mission with nothing but my Fuji, but I always find myself wishing I had my 5D3 or 1V with me.  I'm just an SLR person really.  I like the responsiveness and the no-nonsense layout of the controls (especially on the 1V).  I've handled the XE-1 at my local camera shop and felt that it was still quite a large camera and I couldn't really see the point in buying one when I already have SLRs.  The XE-1 is well known for its sharpness though - it lacks an AA filter which contributes to this.  (I'm not sure how this affects its moiré aliasing though - probably badly).

Today I had a play with an EOS 6D with the new Sigma 35mm f/1.4 lens attached.  The lens was gorgeous.  The 6D just felt like a x00 series EOS, but full-frame... Sturdy and trustworthy, no doubt, but overpriced for what it is.

64

Canon General / Re: FYI: This Is The Gear Used To Take Obama’s New Official Portrait

« on: January 20, 2013, 06:08:00 AM »

It's not often I see people flaming each other like this on CR.  Quite amusing, but unnecessary I'm sure.

The portrait looks good to me.  If someone paid me to take a photo of a president, I'd be wanting to make sure the darned thing was in focus - so I can understand why he'd be wanting to use f/7.1.  Shoot at f/1.2 and you'd probably only get one eye in focus - how embarrassing... "Mr President?  I need to come back to the White House to take your photo again because it's out of focus."

"You're fired."

65

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Thinking of downgrading my 5d3 system

« on: January 06, 2013, 07:19:22 AM »

I think what you haven't mentioned, which has a lot of implications, is when you bought all that kit, what did you intend to do with it? What style of photography and where? And why do you feel you are not able to do it? Is it solely the weight?

+1.  This is what I'd like to know too.  Was it just a situation where the OP had a lot of money and just wanted to own a pro camera, or was there a creative objective and the 5D3 was the best tool for the job?

66

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 5D Mark iii + 50 1.4 ii?

« on: January 03, 2013, 06:23:01 AM »

Like i always say...get cheap m42 lenses with an adapter and manual focus screen for ur 5d mk3 if u really depend on having different focal lengths. 135mm 2.8 m42 lenses arent expensive for example.
Oh but im not sure if they work on FF since i use them on APS-C. Well whatever u have a really nice combo now! I wish i had the 1.4 instead of 1.8, I think it lets double the amount of light in hehe.

Unfortunately the focus screens on the 5D Mark III are not replaceable.  I know how you feel about wishing you had the 1.4 instead of the 1.8 lens... I'm exactly the same.  Although I believe the 1.4 is 2/3rds of a stop brighter than a 1.8, rather than a full stop.

67

Reviews / Re: Review - Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD with Pictures

« on: December 29, 2012, 06:12:47 PM »

Nice review!  Just one note though (to help with your writing), the plural of 'lens' is 'lenses'.

I'm only pointing this out because the word is used a lot in your review, for obvious reasons, especially in the first two paragraphs (intro and build quality).

68

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Is it hard not to buy 3rd party lenses now?

« on: December 23, 2012, 05:05:29 AM »

The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 does exist for a while now. Aren't those reviews made at the beginning of the release of the Sigma? Later on the production models improved. I own the Sigma bought it in 2010 and it does not have focus problems though granted its IQ is less on my 5D MKIII than on my 7D

Yes that's correct; Sigma have (from what I've read) improved the quality of the 50mm/1.4 lenses since those early reviews.

69

Lenses / Re: Sigma 35mm f/1.4 vs Canon 35mm f/1.4

« on: December 08, 2012, 05:55:18 PM »

Interesting review.  His focus speed test method was rather flawed though - most people will not be focussing from infinity every time they focus on a subject, so the Canon's faster motor will definitely be appreciated for smaller focus adjustments.

I'll probably pick up a Sigma once they come into New Zealand, although the indicative pricing is high: US$1250.

70

Abstract / Re: Goofing around could lead to $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

« on: December 04, 2012, 08:56:34 PM »

OK...I'll bite. Don't know if this counts as abstract or not

Rebel XSi, kit 18-55mm @ 18mm; ISO 200; f/5.0 1/160s. Camera jpg altered in Canon's Image Browser.

It doesn't quite fit the definition of abstract art, in that it needs to be something that's not really recognisable for what it is.  But as long as we're all having fun I suppose it doesn't matter how you want to define it.

71

Abstract / Re: Milenium Bridge

« on: December 04, 2012, 07:04:28 AM »

The Millennium Bridge was one of the first landmarks I saw when I moved to Britain (where I no longer reside), so it brings back fond memories.

72

Abstract / Re: Goofing around could lead to $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

« on: December 04, 2012, 07:01:27 AM »

Try your hand at film. The entire process. THAT is an art and a craft. Any fool can press a button, move a mouse and a slider. I know  because I can do it (Both film user and self  acclaimed digital fool)

+1 to that!  I develop black and white film on the floor of my bathroom, and every time it's finished I'm thrilled with the results.  It's true that I don't look dignified while I'm doing it though...

73

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 50 f/1.4 for $299 at B&H

« on: December 04, 2012, 06:41:12 AM »

Great value... I can buy it from B&H for $424 New Zealand dollars, including shipping.  That's instead of paying NZ$775 from my local camera shop.  It's really no surprise that NZ businesses are struggling due to Internet shopping...

74

Abstract / Re: Goofing around could lead to $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

« on: December 03, 2012, 07:23:08 AM »

The first one looks like street lights shining through a wet window (it definitely looks like something wet).  The second one looks to me like a cork (from a wine or beer bottle), although someone mentioned a nail head, which is also a good guess.

75

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions

« on: November 30, 2012, 04:55:23 PM »

My impression is quite good regarding the Sigma 35 ...

Thanks for the review.

Haha!