16
Lenses / Re: What is your favorite lens and why?
« on: March 28, 2013, 03:08:21 AM »
Just got my 24-70 ii as well, and woooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwww, is all I can say!
May 22, 2013, 01:43:15 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.
17
EOS Bodies / Re: How to spend money
« on: March 27, 2013, 01:45:13 PM »
Upgrade your body, 5d mkiii will probably do. You'll have improved image quality, and you'll love the AF system.
Then you can just save the left over money for when a 300 2.8 IS II turns up.
Then you can just save the left over money for when a 300 2.8 IS II turns up.
18
Lenses / Re: How Much do you use your Canon EF 16-35mm L ??
« on: March 27, 2013, 03:22:27 AM »
Sold my 24-105 and 24 f1.4 ii to get the 24-70 ii, can't wait for it to arrive tomorrow!
19
Lenses / Re: How Much do you use your Canon EF 16-35mm L ??
« on: March 27, 2013, 01:01:10 AM »And how are you finding it?
Excellent.Wickedly sharp, great colors and contrast, blazing fast AF, solid build.
Did you sell your 24-105?
20
Lenses / Re: How Much do you use your Canon EF 16-35mm L ??
« on: March 27, 2013, 12:32:00 AM »If Canon had the 24-70mm MK II on their refurb sale that started today, I'd have it on order.
I've decided I'm not going to order a 24-70mm MkII.
The fact that mine arrived from B&H last week might have something to do with that decision...
And how are you finding it?
21
Lenses / Re: Canon 24-70mmL II v Canon 50mmL 1.2
« on: March 17, 2013, 05:52:27 PM »
Depends if you want superior low light & bokeh or sharpness & versatility.
Whilst the 24-70 is an amazing lens, I love my 50 1.2, it just feels great, looks great and sparks my creative love for photography, and also a lot more fun to use so it says on my 5d mkiii most of the time!
But if you don't plan to shoot below 2.8, get the 24-70 II
Whilst the 24-70 is an amazing lens, I love my 50 1.2, it just feels great, looks great and sparks my creative love for photography, and also a lot more fun to use so it says on my 5d mkiii most of the time!
But if you don't plan to shoot below 2.8, get the 24-70 II
22
Lenses / Re: 5DIII+35mm or 50mm？
« on: March 15, 2013, 07:01:58 PM »35mm. It's more versatile. The 50mm is such an overrated lens not to mention not a good portrait lens.People's heads will get distorted when shot with the 50mm (unless you're going for the distorted head look).
I agree with Peteroc. Keep the 35mm and get either the 85mm or 135mm.
Either you've never used one or you're... Im going to just go with you've never used one. I own and use all the primes below 135mm. They all work well for portraits, especially the 50mmL, 85mmL and 135L. They are tools, when you know how/when to use them they work fine.
Since moving onto the 5D3... the 50L is my go to lens for most shooting environments. The 35L was my fave lens until my first 5D3. The 35L is a great-walk around lens but now I gravitate to the 50L. 50mm is a great PJ focal length, and has been for many years. It also excels with portraits but… again, put it in the hands of a monkey and YMMV. Sure you can buy the 1.4 but it has a notorious habit of taking a crap when you need it... shabby build is why it's such a deal. If you don't mind that, then go for a 1.4. If your looking for a workhorse tank 50mm, the 50L is your lens.
50mm f/1.2 on a 5D3...
Nikkei Matsuri, San Jose 2012... by David KM, on Flickr
Robinson... by David KM, on Flickr
Lovers at the park... by David KM, on Flickr
I've used to own one and sold it. I notice you stand quite a distance away from your subjects. Get in closer and shoot just their heads and watch their heads get distorted and how unflattering they become.
The 50mm is not a close up headshot lens, knowing the limitations of the lens can still lead to great portraiture.
That's like saying I hate my 135mm for portaits because I need to step back too far to include the surroundings.
The 50mm is a great environmental portrait lens, great for including surroundings and giving more of the story, not all portraiture are just headshots, as you can see by those great examples!
23
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Which camera brand you actively use, other than Canon?
« on: March 14, 2013, 08:40:24 PM »
RX100, so small and compact, I carry it everywhere.
24
Lenses / Re: I'd love a little adivce...
« on: March 11, 2013, 05:43:56 PM »80mm is 'standard' only on a MF body, and will be a short tele on the 5d.80mm is 80mm, it doesn't matter what the body is..
I think he meant equivalent fov? 80mm on medium format is about the equivalent fov to 48mm on 35mm format, which is considered a 'standard' focal length, but on 35mm format 80mm is a short tele.
25
Landscape / Re: Landscape photography from around the world, shot on Canon
« on: March 11, 2013, 05:27:15 PM »
Very nice! Good job mate!
26
Canon General / Re: crap portraits of me
« on: March 09, 2013, 08:17:49 PM »
Set one of the custom mode dials to Av, set aperture to what you want, set min shutter speed to 1/250 or 1/125 and auto iso, zone focus, lock focus priority, and you're all set.
Pretty much full auto mode, with controllable dof that you can preset the aperture to accordingly.
Pretty much full auto mode, with controllable dof that you can preset the aperture to accordingly.
27
Landscape / Re: How Would You Edit This Landscape Photo?
« on: March 09, 2013, 12:11:50 AM »
Spent another 5 minutes to make another version, sunrise you say?
28
Landscape / Re: How Would You Edit This Landscape Photo?
« on: March 08, 2013, 11:11:38 PM »Here's my take; tried to keep it as natural as possible with slight tint of my interpretation of sunrise colours and not an overdone sky, keeping the interest on the amazing rock formations.
I didnt realize ducks could live in that part of the country. What species is it? The rubberitis duckyitis? It reminds me of an old b movie with overgrown creatures.
It's a rare species named Brobdingnagian Geolu Anatidae, super rare, sort've like the Loch Ness and Big Foot.
29
Landscape / Re: How Would You Edit This Landscape Photo?
« on: March 08, 2013, 05:32:02 PM »I'd edit it to look like I remembered it.
Exactly. To me, photography is about capturing what I see - not what I can imagine. If I wanted to make something fake and use my imagination, I'd pick up a paint brush - not a camera.
You missed the point of the thread, OP did not say here's a photo, recreate what I saw, but instead here's a photo, show me different techniques of interpretation through post processing.
And imo photography isn't all about capturing what you see either, example, if you think about people who use speedlights doing portraits, the lighting is manipulated to create an effect they envision.
But that's what forums are for, different opinions,
30
Landscape / Re: How Would You Edit This Landscape Photo?
« on: March 08, 2013, 06:16:07 AM »Here's my take; tried to keep it as natural as possible with slight tint of my interpretation of sunrise colours and not an overdone sky, keeping the interest on the amazing rock formations.
Haha! Love this one!!!!
Why thank you,
