February 26, 2015, 06:25:01 PM

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 - dave

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
Pricewatch Deals / Re: The Illumination Experience With Shane Hurlbut
« on: September 16, 2014, 05:53:19 PM »
Good for you. We are obviously the right target people this stuff at. Undoubtedly tolerance for the balance between ads and content is personal taste. I have no problem with a certain number of ads on the site as long as they are positioned so that I can easily ignore them if I wish. I think there should be clearer delineation than fine print wording. The primary reason I come here is not for the rumors but for the fantastic members and their experience. For my taste I would prefer to not see ads listed in the rumors feed in the same format as non-paid spots. Between the ad itself and the over the top superlatives used by the guy to describe himself I found it a turn off. When i come I don't necessarily want to feel like I am at a market or county fair or something where people are just trying to get money out of you in as many ways possible. I'm am aware that the site needs revenue to both provide the service and make money but I don't want to be beaten about the head by it.

I guess it was just feedback that can be taken or left. Unlike you I don't see the site as a giant ad for Canon because positive and negative reviews are posted, problems discussed and you can certainly come here and listen to all of the perceived flaws of Canon products (not mentioning the S word). If I'm the only one who finds a bit OTT with the actual ads I can live with that.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: The Illumination Experience With Shane Hurlbut
« on: September 16, 2014, 09:42:57 AM »
Research says that the key to getting more clicks is making ads look like actual content. Quite frankly I think there are enough ads in the site as it is. I just find this a complete turn off. Doesn't show a great lack of respect for members. Way to drag down a really good site.

Portrait / Re: 'Straight' Portrait of a Young Woman
« on: October 22, 2013, 09:46:49 PM »
I like the exposure and pp as well.

Now, this is not a criticism but simply an observation about how I viewed the image. For some reason I find the white singlet/bra strap edge repeatedly catches the eye. Whether this is a good or bad thing is subjective I suppose. For me I would probably have covered it up, but this doesn't mean you should have.

Maybe you should just give it a go.

Also depends on the camera.

Not a book but I reckon Lynda.com is perfect. They give you project files and the courses have really clear structure which is probably where the YouTube method can fall down.

Lenses / Re: digitalrev return policy
« on: September 23, 2013, 10:23:34 PM »
While the dude in their youtube channel is funny
the info you get out of their video is almost zero.

Just walking around stating the specs, crappy shots, and inconclusive talk on and on.
I think they were trying to create their own unique styles which could be funny at first
but in the long run, I think these videos are useless

I suggest videos from theCameraStoreTV

Also they had bad business in the past:


I agree, their videos are funny, their camera store sucks compared to some of the other so called grey market dealers.

Lenses / Re: Gear Upgrade Advice
« on: September 23, 2013, 05:51:53 AM »
Thanks for your comments - always good to hear different opinions.

I really like the 6D, so I'll get used to shooting FF images, and will learn more about the camera until I feel the need to upgrade to a 5D III (which may be a 5D IV if such a camera exists in 2 - 3 years).

I read a different thread over the last few days about the 6D and 24-105 compatibility, and that a few people experience differing quality images with the combination. Personally, I haven't noticed any issues, but I do wonder whether the c.£1,600 outlay for the 24-70 F2.8 II will provide me with a dramatic improvement in image quality over the 24-105. Maybe I will wait a year or so to see if the 24-70 F2.8 IS will reach production considering that there are rumours of a patent in place.

The 70-200 F4 IS is a fantastic lens, most of the images I get are excellent. What I find I am missing on occasions is the extra reach after I have upgraded from the 550D. So, if I upgrade to the 70-200 F2.8 II, this would work better with a 1.4 or 2.0 TC?

Or would it be better to invest in a longer focal length, such as the 300 F4 IS?

For me, the 24-70 ii is a bigger jump in image quality than the 70-200mm f/2.8 ii. The f/4 version of that is a cracker.

Having said that, a good tripod is a great investment and probably a better bet if you don't have one yet.

Lenses / Re: 14mm mk2 or 16-35 mk2?
« on: September 22, 2013, 09:58:35 PM »
I did, I used two 14mm L's, both were a huge disappointment, I ended up getting the TS-E 17 and couldn't be happier, it is in a league all its own for landscape work, considerably better than either the 14 or 16-35. A two stitch 17 image using shift gives you an 11mm fov.

Totally agree with this.

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Choosing the right tripod
« on: September 21, 2013, 07:32:56 PM »
After buying several tripods priced from the $200 to $800 range I find my go-to tripod is the Manfrotto 055CXPRO3 Carbon Fiber Tripod Legs. They are light weight very ridged and very versatile. I recommend you look at its features.

+1 for the price the 055CXPRO3 is just about perfect. They do a four section version CXPRO4which is shorter when closed but is a little less stable due to the thinner leg section at the bottom.

I really like the Acratech GP ballhead. it is really nifty and much lighter than most of the alternative manfrotto heads at only 450 grams or so. This combo should last years and be easy to lug around.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 2 5d3's or 1d x
« on: September 20, 2013, 12:24:27 PM »
What do you need a second 5D Mark III for?

If I were you, I would keep the one 5D Mark III and put that extra money in your pocket to a holiday (or two) to take pictures on, or possibly a lens you do not have.

With the lenses he has, the photo holiday sees like a top suggestion.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 2 5d3's or 1d x
« on: September 20, 2013, 12:22:36 PM »
Unless your parachuting into warzones, marching through wet jungles, shooting Pro Sports or extremely clumsy, you don't need a 1Dx.

Actually, if you are super clumsy get the 5d3. Drop a 1D X on concrete from a reasonable height and it still bites the dust. Then, no camera!

Lenses / Re: Canon 16-35 II f/2.8L AND/OR Canon 14mm II f/2.8
« on: September 20, 2013, 12:17:19 PM »
I've had two Canon 14mm f2.8L MkII's, both were the biggest let down of any Canon lens I have used and they certainly don't deserve to be L lenses. Corner softness and CA are not good. I have found the 15mm fisheye defished to be better in IQ than the 14mm L, no, I am not joking.

Depends on what you want want the lens for, the only reason I see for the 14 is if you need the widest angle AND AF, if you don't need good fast accurate AF then the TS-E17 is a vastly better lens and, with a simple auto stitch, goes much wider. If you do need AF I'd still rather use my 15mm and defish as needed.

+1 The TS-E 17mm is a cracker. You would have to really, really, really want to go wider for the 14mm to be worth the money and in some ways I wonder if the Zeiss 15mm isn't a better option as a sharp prime than the 14mm anyway. Obviously at extra cost but what a lens.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 2 5d3's or 1d x
« on: September 20, 2013, 12:18:36 AM »
The 1D X is a great camera. However, from your previous posts, I don't think it is worth the extra for what you are shooting.

I also think that you need to be less preoccupied with shuffling your gear around and keep improving your use of it. You seem to have been constantly changing or considering changing for ages now. There is absolutely no reason that you couldn't be a successful photographer with the gear you have. Yes, the 1D X is a better camera but unless you do sports or wildlife for a living is probably not going to help that much.

If you want to have a photography business, changing gear is not likely to make much of a contribution.

I am sorry if this sounds harsh but over the past year I get the impression that your mindset is focused too much on the gear and you think that if you keep changing you will eventually make it as a photographer.

If you are going to change your gear just make sure you do it for the right reasons. There is not some magic dust in the 1D X that makes you better just by holding it. if you don't believe me have a look at the 1D X and 5D3 image galleries on this forum. The image quality is basically equivalent. You may just find the subject matter in the 1D X gallery to be slightly different, but quality wise, hardly any difference.

Canon General / Re: Bangkok
« on: September 19, 2013, 10:48:11 AM »
The problem with budget gear is that it tends not to work as well in low light.

Yes, and NO-----Depend -How to use the Cheapo camera  as Their Maximum Ability,  When I walk in Every City in USA ( last month in Denver, CO.), I carry Cheap Canon P&S SX 160 IS = $ 150 Us Dollars, But With Big Tripods for Shoot in the Night time with Low Shutter Speed and  Low ISO---With Self Timmer shooting = Get the Great Photos too----But On anothe Hand ---I have the Big / Heavy Monopod for just Protect my self too-----Ha, Ha, Ha.
Here are the P&S  Cheapo Canon on the Heavy Tripods

I tend to include people in my street photography, so for me the tripod solution is less attractive... Although the thought of you monopodding some no good thiefs makes me happy.

Canon General / Re: Bangkok
« on: September 19, 2013, 08:11:00 AM »
...but good gear works even less well when it is stolen from you.

The photographer's life. To paraphrase the great Malcolm Tucker - it's never easy, never f$@$?ng easy.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9