Messages

46

Lenses / Re: I have just lost confidence with Canon Rumors & B&H

« on: April 17, 2013, 12:59:30 AM »

over reacting much?

+1

Those are pretty reasonable deals from arguably the most reputable dealer in the US.  I don't see the harm in reporting decent (albeit not great) deals.  Especially when many of us are always on the lookout for our next piece of glass.

47

Technical Support / Re: MacBook Pro : Best RAW Processing Software?

« on: April 16, 2013, 01:43:50 PM »

I like to keep things relatively simple workflow wise: Photoshop.  But for my entire process I have a home grown solution for photo storage/management (NAS over samba on a linux box with software RAID) and a custom web application which allows me to view/catalog my photos.

Software side, I like photoshop quite a bit.  The problem with NAS and some of the workflow/catalog software (Aperture, Lightroom, etc) is that it can get really s-l-o-w, especially if you're over wifi (I often am).  So using a web app to quickly access thumbnails in a gallery style layout is very useful.  If I want to open an photo for further editing, I have a link which opens it in Photoshop.  I've also recently started using the Nik plugin suite after Google put it on sale.  Huge thumbs up for Nik, especially Silver Efex.  But that's not necessarily a RAW processing platform.

Plus the added benefit (for me) of using NAS and a custom web app for cataloging is I can access my catalog anywhere over a browser or even an iOS app I wrote.  </nerd>

But if you're looking for super simple and inexpensive, Lightroom is the way to go.

48

Canon General / Re: How do you buy equipment?

« on: April 16, 2013, 10:01:32 AM »

On the Internet (whoever has the best deal) with a credit card (which I pay off every month).  :-)

+1

The way I see it, unless you absolutely NEED a piece of equipment you probably shouldn't finance.  If photography is mostly your hobby, then paying an interest rate on a hobby isn't a great decision.

I don't know whether one can really say that ... people do a lot of weird stuff over their hobbies / stuff they don't really need ... like car(s) purchased on finance, for instance. Its just a personal preference.

I usually wait for a deal and/or pay out of my savings account.

Hence prefacing that sentence with, "The way I see it."  It's certainly a matter of personal preference for me, but photography is a hobby.  While I don't claim to be great with money, I try to finance as few things as I can (unless I can get some ridiculous interest rate).  Big ticket items for most people need to be financed: Houses, cars, usually anything over a certain threshold.  And while that lovely 600mm f/4 IS II would fall under the needing financing category for me, I simply can't justify it as I don't need it to sleep in, drive to work in, or make money with.

But, this is entirely a personal decision.  If someone is comfortable putting a camera, lens, or other equipment on their credit card and paying it off monthly, then go for it.  But that can quickly become a slippery slope... especially with photography, as I've found it can be quite addictive.  :-)

49

Canon General / Re: How do you buy equipment?

« on: April 16, 2013, 09:09:55 AM »

On the Internet (whoever has the best deal) with a credit card (which I pay off every month).  :-)

The way I see it, unless you absolutely NEED a piece of equipment you probably shouldn't finance.  If photography is mostly your hobby, then paying an interest rate on a hobby isn't a great decision.

50

Lenses / Re: Insurance on camera equipment

« on: April 11, 2013, 12:49:48 PM »

Call your insurance company.

My comprehensive homeowner policy covers personal possessions including all the camera gear. Even if you rent, you should still protect yourself with home insurance.

Also +1.  I have a separate articles policy that covers all my gear for around $100/year.  However, I will point out that while it's very inexpensive to cover gear this way, I've already decided I won't make a claim against a single lens or camera body unless the cost is above a certain threshold.  Reason being that many insurance companies these days will look for any possible excuse to raise rates.  So making a claim on a $1,000 lens doesn't make much sense if my homeowners rates go up by several hundred dollars a year because of it.

Also make sure your insurance company has gear make/model/serial number on file.  I even have pictures of everything offsite in case of a house fire.

51

Animal Kingdom / Re: MY dog

« on: April 05, 2013, 12:25:32 PM »

Thought I'd share one more since my previous shots didn't convey a lot of personality.  Here's my golden doing one of her favorite things, rolling in the grass.  (Ignore the dead February Michigan grass)

52

Canon General / Re: 24-70Mk2 fell off my 5DMk3 and smashed

« on: April 05, 2013, 11:14:47 AM »

So after doing a lot of swapping out my new 24-70mm II the other day when I was performing some lens testing, I can kind of see what the OP is talking about.  When I was behind the camera (tripod mounted, not much room to stand in front of the camera) it was more difficult to mount than my original 24-70mm.  Trying to grip and twist resulted in zooming if I wasn't careful.

Of course, I'm always VERY cautious when mounting a lens, and make sure I hear and feel the click of a secured lens.

I still don't see how someone could accidentally hit the lens release button once the lens is attached, but everyone holds their camera differently.

53

Animal Kingdom / Re: MY dog

« on: April 05, 2013, 09:47:50 AM »

I might as well throw my hat in the ring, since I'm a big dog lover.  Here are my and my wife's dogs:

54

Animal Kingdom / Re: Early bird dinner

« on: April 05, 2013, 09:25:01 AM »

Nice.  Interesting that you were able to get that close with a 40mm lens.

55

Site Information / Re: Love or Hate Canon Rumors Forum

« on: April 04, 2013, 03:04:04 PM »

Being what I consider a "learning amateur" photographer with a recent gear budget that's larger than it should be, I'm able to glean quite a bit from these forums.  There are quite a few very knowledgeable people in here.

That being said, for every knowledgeable person in the CR forums, there's another person equally rude or otherwise lacking in proper manners.

56

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Ankorwatt goes to angkor wat

« on: April 04, 2013, 09:33:07 AM »

Something that isn't a test chart! A step up in productivity mikael.

+1

57

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dynamic range, high lights information D800 vs 5dmk2

« on: April 03, 2013, 09:32:23 PM »

Well, it's just never enough.  Not sure which crappy camera took this photo, but it doesn't matter.  I pushed the shadows 8 stops here, and if only that could have been done cleanly, we'd have documented proof that Alien Elvis exists.

The picture was taken with a 5dmk2 and 24/1.4 mk2 and it is perfectly possible to lift the shadows to se visible details because the subject has low contrast range and  the picture was taken in  400iso where banding is not so strong as at base iso.

58

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dynamic range, high lights information D800 vs 5dmk2

« on: April 03, 2013, 04:06:59 PM »

You and others do not seem to understand the difference of what we are discussing, moreover, many photos was taken with  my 5dmk2.

But.... I don't understand.  Having been show the light, how could you have taken pictures with such an obsolete piece of photography equipment?

The DR is terrible, so how could you possibly have even taken a picture with that camera?!?!?!

59

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dynamic range, high lights information D800 vs 5dmk2

« on: April 03, 2013, 03:57:08 PM »

Is that  all you have to say?
Turn around  a discussion of physics and also question my skills as a photographer?
well I have been working with photo since more than 30 years, how about you?

Here are some   pictures  I can show from last month  when I  was working in Indochina.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=13987.0

MY GOD, look at the DR in those shots!  There's absolutely NO WAY I could have taken those pictures with my Canon 5Dm3.  Looks like I'll be switching to Nikon.

Thank you for showing me that my equipment is inferior, Mikael.

60

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dynamic range, high lights information D800 vs 5dmk2

« on: April 03, 2013, 12:56:15 PM »

Canon < Nikon

That's right. 

There it is!  But alas, that still won't be enough to satisfy Mikael Risedal -- er, I mean ankorwatt.