October 01, 2014, 09:34:58 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 - Jim Saunders

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 58
1
Lighting / Re: First Flash
« on: September 30, 2014, 08:42:51 AM »
Consider the Yongnuo 600 clone, if it works like the Canon one then it is worth it for the interface and the power.

Jim

2
Software & Accessories / How to use a non-collar lens on a gimbal
« on: September 29, 2014, 09:45:52 PM »
I'll leave it to the user to decide if this solves a problem or not, but an eBay duplex ARCA-Swiss clamp allows for this; there is still room to move the body down before it contacts the clamp for a collar too.

In the first image it looks like the duplex clamp hangs on by a thread but it in fact has contact over most of its length, and there is room to move it down as well.

The second shows room past a big lens, and I didn't have to move anything.

So if you have one great tripod and a gimbal, there is a least one way to attach a body to it.

Jim

3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Next purchase?
« on: September 28, 2014, 01:05:57 PM »
What about a 5D3?

Jim

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Improved Cooling for DSLRs
« on: September 28, 2014, 12:24:05 PM »
I wouldn't be surprised to see a few generations of cameras with some means of channeling heat from the sensor to the outside of the body.  Maybe they could run a heatpipe up to the hot shoe so you could attach a heatsink to that.

Jim

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Can "Flicker" feature of 7D2 be a firmware update to the X?
« on: September 28, 2014, 12:07:19 PM »
It'd be nice to have, but if it costs (say) a million in R&D then Canon can either put that effort into the 1Dx and give it way for free (zero profit), sell it (unlikely) or save it for the new pro body and get some of that cost back.

The way I see it such an upgrade is probably physically possible, but unlikely economically.

Jim

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Can "Flicker" feature of 7D2 be a firmware update to the X?
« on: September 28, 2014, 01:36:13 AM »
If it's useful, it'll be in the 1Dx II.  :-\

Jim

7
Lenses / Re: What telephotos do we own?
« on: September 28, 2014, 12:59:50 AM »
No love for the 200 f2?  Not long enough?

It is certainly expensive enough.  :D

Personally I miss the 300 f/4 I had; great performance, light, small, comparatively cheap.

Jim

8
Landscape / Re: Fall colours
« on: September 27, 2014, 11:15:54 PM »
Last weekend in Great Tetons

That light is crazy good, ichetov! Did you use a reflector or flash to bring the bark on those trees up from the shadows, or is it a good use of HDR?

I am curious also, great shot there.

Jim

9
A close-up of the North star from the previous.  I wouldn't have zipped them but the forum doesn't allow tiff.  The only adjustment made to the image is the lens profile in LR5.

Jim

10
Here is what I got the other night with a 16-35 f/4.  Please keep in mind that I don't do much of this.

Jim

11
Photography Technique / Re: Air Show Settings with 100-400mm?
« on: September 27, 2014, 12:57:12 AM »
I'd suggest wide open (maybe down a stop if you have direct sunlight) and trade off ISO for shutter speed.  1/800 will get you a little prop blur and a decent chance of a sharp airframe.  For jets wind the shutter up as far as you can go.  A gimbal will keep the horizon level even if it isn't in frame.  Spot metering and AF worked for me, lots of jazz going on around your subject.  Bring lots of water, snacks, sunscreen, hat, ear plugs, seat etc. 

Jim

12
Lighting / Re: Speedlites - How many are enough?
« on: September 26, 2014, 10:53:21 PM »
Two more would make indoor rodeo a lot easier.  Two more past that really opens up some options.  However the four I have now are enough, and external batteries are no small expense to go with them.  (Never mind something to support them!)

Jim

13
Lenses / Re: Which L prime will be the first Canon upgrade?
« on: September 25, 2014, 07:21:11 PM »
Canon 50mm F1.2L at this time is more expensive, and worse sharpness than the Sigma Art.

I'd guess this one as well.  The 35 is in the same boat but by less of a margin.

Jim

14
Lenses / Re: Inexpensive standard walk around lens question
« on: September 24, 2014, 10:28:00 PM »
I'm surprised someone hasn't mentioned the 17-40, not bad for the price.

Another angle is a 40D and a 17-50; the Tamron non-VC one is pretty good and you could get both for under $500.

Jim

15
I love the TS-E 17mm.   The current 90mm TS-E has been around for more than 20 years, and lacks the optical quality and independent rotation of Tilt and Shift.   Have rented it, but not in love.     

Should I buy the current TS-E 90mm, or wait and pray (and rent) until a new one is released?

Schneider makes a 2.8/50 PC if that's the length for you.  It is a bit spendy though.

Jim

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 58