October 25, 2014, 05:00:25 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.


Messages - pierceography

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 16
16
Landscape / Re: Sunset landscape
« on: May 14, 2013, 09:12:50 AM »
Great composition. The rock makes the image.

Agreed.  The rocks and the silky look of the water really make the picture.

I also agree with JBeckwith, a longer exposure to soften the water might have also looked real nice.  But that certainly doesn't take away from the photo you got.

17
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Fuji x100(s) to Supplement an SLR
« on: May 13, 2013, 04:58:49 PM »
Thanks for the responses, everyone!

I wound put pulling the proverbial trigger on the x100s Saturday night.  It's backordered from B&H, but hopefully I'll have it in the next week or two.  While I really wanted to grab the TS-E 24mm, I ultimately decided to go with the x100s because I feel I'll get more use out of it.  And I started a 365 project a couple weeks ago, and I think I'm more likely to do well at it if I have a smaller camera with me instead of having to go out of my way to ensure I have my 5Dm3 with the appropriate lens on hand.

But I'd love to get more feedback on the x100s or sample pictures.  :-)

18
Two words: Better glass.

Both for the lenses themselves and the teleconverters.

Better glass?
in what way?

Canon glass has much better contrast and resolution when shooting black BBQ grills.

19
Third Party Manufacturers / Fuji x100(s) to Supplement an SLR
« on: May 10, 2013, 02:51:40 PM »
Hello All,
So I'm seriously considering purchasing the new Fuji x100s.  I love my 5Dm3 and my variety of EF lenses, but the entire kit can seem a bit obnoxious at times... particularly for street photography or simply for a camera to casually carry around.  I have a point and shoot (S90), but rarely use it as I don't like shooting with an LCD.  So I'm looking to get some advice from members who have purchased the x100s or a similar camera.  Which do you find yourself using more?  Are you glad to have purchased a secondary mirrorless camera to supplement your SLR?

And the other half of this question is a bit more pointed; I'm also considering getting the TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II.  However, I've come to the conclusion that I likely wouldn't use a TS lens nearly as often as a more compact mirrorless camera.

Thoughts?  Thanks!

20
Portrait / Re: my first new born baby photos :)
« on: May 09, 2013, 10:14:27 AM »
Also, just some friendly criticism.  I really like the second and third photos, but the chandelier in the first photo is very distracting -- I'd crop the photo to include only the baby and father.  It would be a tight crop, but better than including the light fixture.

And the last photo is nice composition wise, but the focus is on the tip of the baby's nose... leaving the eyes OOF.  I would either stop down to ensure the baby's entire face is in focus, or focus on the eyes and let the nose/mouth fall slightly OOF.  I've been using my center AF point only to ensure I'm focusing on my son's eyes.  If I want more in focus, I'll stop down to f/4.5 or lower.

But overall very nice shots!  :-)

21
Portrait / Re: my first new born baby photos :)
« on: May 09, 2013, 10:04:00 AM »
Nice shots.  I actually had a baby a week and a half ago and have been filling up memory cards ever since.  Here are a few suggestions that I've been applying to the pictures I've been taking the past 10 days:

1) My most used slider in ACR is clarity.  I reduce the clarity in almost every baby photo I take to create that creamier look.
2) Babies have soft skin, but our cameras/lenses are often too sharp and the baby's skin comes out looking flakey or rough.  Try using layer masks and blurring (surface or gaussian blur) to soften the skin.  Surface blur is great for keeping edges intact, and masks for ensuring the eyes, nose, and mouth remain sharp while the rest of the skin can have that soft look to it.
3) Overexpose.  Even if my shots were coming out great on the histogram, I wound up punching the exposure or highlights to achieve a brighter image.

Hope these help!

22
Portrait / Re: The official: Portrait Humor Thread....
« on: May 09, 2013, 09:49:12 AM »
What's wrong with the first picture?  I think it's great whenever you can catch a shot of a baby mid-dream with a smile on his/her face.  Well done.  :-)

The last picture is great... and been around awhile.  I photoshopped a friend's face over the guy and then the same face on the shirt over the dog and redid the text to say "World's Best Mullet" around five years ago.  Yeah, the friend had a mullet.  ;-)

23
Street & City / Re: Bleak city streets on the edge of suburbia....
« on: May 08, 2013, 10:18:57 AM »
The flat colours, overexposure and increase in micro contrast is all part of the plan, as is the design...

good or bad, imo,  and with respect, that's all in the eye of the beholder and I much prefer images that illicit a strong response, good or bad, like yours, than a blanket approval or otherwise...

If that's what you're going for, then they're great images.  :-)

24
Street & City / Re: Bleak city streets on the edge of suburbia....
« on: May 08, 2013, 10:00:03 AM »
Hmmmm... I don't quite understand the point of these photos.  The first and last shots seem to be lacking a clearly defined subject, the colors are extremely muted, and they look overexposed and very flat.  I'm not trying to be harsh, but they're not very good shots.

The only suggestion I can make is perhaps try converting them to black and white and do some selective cropping to see if you can pull some composure out of them.  Mid-day light, in my opinion, makes for better B&W photos than it does color.

I've seen some of your other photos, and they all seem to suffer from similar problems such as poor composition, color, and depth.  If this is the look you're going for, then by all means disregard my comments.  I'm simply hoping to offer some constructive criticism.

But thank you for sharing!

25
Street & City / Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« on: May 08, 2013, 09:27:01 AM »

Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.

I just looked up your profile for more inspirational photos and found this one

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5334.msg103060#msg103060

I guess difficult for anyone to take this?

Ahahahahaha!

btnphotography, I really enjoyed the photos, thanks for posting!

26
I always focus the AF point on the eye.  I think I was using one of the peripheral AF points.  I was using AI Servo... and there wasn't any motion...

I also have to ask... Why were you using Servo?  Servo is meant for subjects in motion.  In the case of the lion, it's pretty clear she's not going anywhere.  Personally, I only use Servo when shooting a moving subject where I want to rattle off several photos in the hope that at least one of them will turn out.  Servo can be very jumpy, even on a stationary subject.  So it's going to be almost impossible to determine AF front/back focusing when the photos you're analyzing were shot it anything other than single shot AF using only your center AF point.

If you're primarily using Servo and are getting AF inconsistency, switching to single shot AF will solve most of your problems.

27
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 1x-24 ??
« on: May 06, 2013, 10:06:06 AM »
I would love to see this lens released in the next year or so.  But expect it to cost $2,500+.  Though I would gladly pay that... <24mm presents a bit of a hole in my camera bag.  Even with the Sigma 12-24mm... I'd love to have something faster with better corner performance.

28
Lenses / Re: 85 1.2mk3 anytime soon?
« on: May 05, 2013, 12:25:53 PM »
The mk1 was released in 1989 and the mk2 released in 2006.  With the mk2 being only seven years old, and a 17 year span between the mk1 and mk2, I highly doubt there will be an mk3 anytime in the next few years.

But I love my 85mm f/1.2L II.  I'd definitely recommend it if you have the capital to part with. :-)

29
Two words: Better glass.

Both for the lenses themselves and the teleconverters.

30
Lenses / Re: Canon 85L II AF speed on 5D III???
« on: May 02, 2013, 01:12:30 PM »
Impatience, perhaps?  Though my 85 won't engage manual focus, even after spinning it.  My point was if that's my only complaint, it's a very small one and that the 85 is a wonderful lens.
AFAIK the camera has to be on for the manual focus of the 85L II to engage. In other words, you need to set it to MDF before you turn the camera off.

Right, manual focus works fine when the camera is powered on and the lens is in manual... which was exactly what I had stated in my original post.  My point was that this is the process I have to take to retract the front element before removing the lens and storing it.  I realize you can spin the focus ring to engage MF, but I usually just flip the switch out of force of habit.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 16