January 30, 2015, 05:06:38 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 - Axilrod

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 92
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: December 26, 2013, 02:50:00 PM »
Ahhh Eldar, I sure do envy you. Your whole lens lineup is like any Canon fans wet dream. Glad you're liking the Otus, might have to rent it one of these days : )

Lenses / Re: Best lens for night time lapse
« on: December 03, 2013, 04:29:33 PM »
Thanks Axilrod! I'm headed to northern Montana, so city lights won't be an issue :)

Ahh I envy you, that's a great spot for astrophotography. During the winter visibility is high but the brightest parts of the Milky Way don't really get too far above the horizon. In the northern hemisphere the summertime is going to give you the best view of Saggitarius (where you want to aim for those awesome pics of the spiral arm), but it's still worth giving it a shot in the winter. 

Definitely download Stellarium, it's an absolute must and will show you where everything will be at any given time.  When you launch it toggle "atmosphere" to off (hit "a" on your keyboard), other than that it's pretty straightforward. Post some results after you give it a shot!

Lenses / Re: Best lens for night time lapse
« on: December 02, 2013, 09:46:05 PM »
You want as fast as possible, f/2.8 at the minimum. The Rokinon 14mm has already been recommended and as cheap as it is you can't really go wrong, so I'll second that.

Also, a few tips that I wish someone had told me before I wasted hours shooting in the wrong places/wrong time of the month:

1. Get away from major cities, as far away as possible (see this map: http://www.blue-marble.de/nightlights/2012), this makes all the difference in the world. I don't care how dark it is in your back yard on a dark night (unless you live in middle of nowhere Iowa or something), if you live within any range of a even moderate sized city it's going to turn out like crap. If you live in the western half of the country this will be much easier for you than the east.

2. GO DURING A NEW MOON. This has a HUGE impact on how good your images will turn out, I mean massive, cant stress it enough. Consult this page: http://www.moonconnection.com/moon_phases_calendar.phtml

3. Download Stellarium to find out where interesting areas of the sky will be. To find the really amazing part of the Milky Way you see in tons of pictures look for Saggitarius.

4. Get a rock solid tripod, turn on mirror lockup, turn off in camera noise reduction, turn on Silent shooting if you have a 5D3, set your WB to 4000K, ISO 1600-6400 (depending on conditions/what you're going for), open the aperture up, remove the camera strap (wind blowing can create vibrations), and tape over the viewfinder.  As for exposure time the rule of thumb is that whatever your focal length is just divide 600 by it and thats the max exposure you can shoot without getting trails.  So if you get a 14mm, 600/14mm = 42.8 so you can do a 42 second single exposure before the stars begin to show as an oblong shape.

Honestly the biggest thing you can do for yourself is getting to the right location during a new moon, I was absolutely floored the first time I saw the results shooting out in the Texas desert on the night of a new moon. Suddenly I realized why all the pictures I had taken in Atlanta were S___e, it wasn't because I sucked it was just the conditions. Anyways, godspeed and good luck.

I edit IPB footage in FCPX no problem, just give it a whirl. Not sure what kinda Mac you have, mine is pretty fast but I'm sure it would work fine on slower systems. If it's too slow for you just select all the clips, right click, and select "create optimized media." If you already have "create optimized media" selected under import options then it will convert it automatically anyways.

Canon General / Re: So what have we bought this Black... Er, Weekend?
« on: November 30, 2013, 06:57:22 PM »
Going to have to pull the trigger on the 24-70L II at BH for that deal.  Must first get some idea if I can get $1k for my Zeiss 21 and $300 for a Sigma 50 to help pay for it.

You can absolutely get $1k for your Zeiss 21, I was thrilled to pay $1400 for a used one, that was by far the cheapest I'd seen it used. Granted that could just be because they haven't been around that long, but seriously don't sell it for $1k, waaayyy too cheap.

EOS Bodies / Re: POLL: The 2nd ff camera in 2014 will be...
« on: November 28, 2013, 06:32:22 PM »
What do you think - will the 6d be updated with a above-mediocre af system and dual pixel af for the masses, or will the 5d3 at last get a real sensor upgrade above the good ol' 5d2 and become the even more expensive 5d4?

The 5D3 did get an updated sensor from the 5D2....sure it wasn't a big jump in megapixels or anything but it's definitely a better sensor overall.

I like this guy's idea  8)
Actually, since Sony and Zeiss often make AF lenses together, I wonder if there will be an AF-version of Otus 55 mm for Sony.  That would tip the scale for me for sure..

Sony A7r Zeiss Otus 55mm by drjlo2, on Flickr

This belongs in the pornography section...you're a lucky man

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 7D vs 5Diii for video?
« on: November 06, 2013, 05:42:50 PM »
I thought lots of folks were getting Philip Bloom for his semi-downer 'enthusiasm' when it came out.

Anyway lots of folks use ML RAW because it is THAT awesome. SOOOOO much more detail than you get from 5D3 internal or Ninja recording and SOOOOOOO much more processing latitude. SOOOOOO much richer colors! I

It is amazing, but it also requires SOOOOO much more hard drive space, SOOOO much more computing power, and processing is SOOOOO much more involved  ;).

Get a monitor or EVF, but even then it's a bit difficult since the HDMI drops to SD when you hit record.

5DIII is a joy to work with compared to the 5D2. Better codec (which leads to much more reasonable file sizes), better low light performance and an overall cleaner image. Also the HDMI out doesn't drop to SD when you hit record like the Mark 2, so monitoring is much easier. And it's a far superior on the stills side, so if you do shoot stills there is a big advantage there.

As I wrote, photographers who actually need more DR than Canon offers should already have switched.  These Sony sensors have been out for a while.  During that time, many photographers have looked at their options and decided to stick with Canon.

Likewise, there is no problem with 3fps (or 6 or 8fps, etc.), but if someone actually needs more then they should buy it.  Why would someone buy 3fps and then blame the manufacturer?  The same goes for megapixels, etc.  Offering less than the maximum mp doesn't mean there is a problem or deficiency.  Not every camera has to offer the maximum of every measure of performance for us to say there is "no problem" with it.  A manufacturer chooses which measures to prioritize, such as high ISO performance.

I don't think Pi really cares what you or anyone else has to say, it seems like he's just obsessed with being "right."

Maybe try the Rokinon/Samyang/whatever 14mm 2.8, from what i hear it is a great lens, even rivaling the Canon 14mm L at a fraction of the cost. Since you're doing video, the manual focus and iris could come in handy. The distortion is kept very low for such a wide angle lens from what I've been reading and it's just about 300€ (don't know the US price) around here. You should consider it. :)

While the Samyang 14mm is a solid lens, especially for the money, it has terrible distortion, I mean super ridiculously bad. 

Holy cow, grats! Can't wait to see some images produced from it..
I just sold my 50L and bought a Zeiss 50 f2 Makro and LOVE LOVE LOVE it to bits. I've never used manual focus prior, but after seeing the images from my Zeiss, I couldn't care less about no auto focus, plus it allows me to slow down a tad and channel my creativity rather than run and gun photos. And if I were shooting photos of fast moving subjects, such as kids, I'd just use my 24-70 ii or 70-200 is ii as I'd need more DOF anyway.

I gave my 50L up for a 50mm f/2 Makro as well and have not regretted it. There have been a few times that I missed that creamy bokeh from the 50L but overall I find the Zeiss far superior.

Canon General / Re: Official: Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS
« on: October 14, 2013, 02:15:38 PM »
People guessing about the price, keep in mind that if someone had said the 18-35mm f/1.8 was going to be $799 you would have said they were crazy.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 18-35 F1.8
« on: October 07, 2013, 06:34:41 PM »
I've only used it for video on the Sony FS700 but I was very, very impressed.  Razor sharp, excellent color/contrast and it's very well-built.  For $799 you can't go wrong.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 92