August 21, 2014, 10:22:09 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 - SJTstudios

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
17
Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]
« on: December 23, 2012, 09:11:04 AM »
Can't wait for these, the 14-24 I hope will be amazing.   :D

I'm suprised to hear the 35mm 1.4 ii, I though because the new 35mm f2 is was not a sharp as the origional 35mm 1.4, they wouldn't replace it, but I guess with Nikon and Sigma beating Canon in that Place.

18
Lenses / Re: Canon 24mm 2.8 IS - anyone have experience with this lens?
« on: December 19, 2012, 01:25:11 PM »
I don't have personal expierience, but I do love my 28mm 1.8 usm. The 24mm is and 28mm are supposedly sharper.

The IS will help in windy situations, or even long night shots just in case.

Bit if you can wait, look at the samyang 24mm 3.5 ts, it will supposedly be very good.

The 24 or 28 would be nice landscape option.

If you shoot crop, you may need a wider lens.

19
Lenses / Re: Canon's lens plans
« on: December 18, 2012, 02:51:49 PM »
This is one messed up poll. Why would Canon not want to improve everything? All lenses sharper, better AF, better IS, etc, etc. What part would anybody not want inproved?

Well, if canon makes a f1.2 1mm-1200mm pancake with great IS, sharpness, and only costed around $100, then all the other lenses wouldn't be practical would they.

My point is will canon be nice and make everything better, or will canon make photographers compromise?

I know primes will always have a niche, but will canon introduce any benefits?

I think the problem with this logic is an assumption that "all" photographers are the same and none are happy. It's like say we've designed a new car for ALL males on the planet. Some males have no legs, some no hands, some are 3 feet tall some over 6 feet.  There is always going to be compromise in design and development.

And the statement "make everything better" , again... blanket statements don't cut it. What's better for you is not necessarily better for me. With maybe one exception... Canon out of the kindness of their hearts decides that they won't charge for any products. The line starts to the right…

“…but will canon introduce any benefits?”  Funny, I thought they have already introduced many benefits, might be why their doing pretty well in the camera buisness …

Not trying to troll here but your run of polls and questions might garner more constructive conversation if they were thought out a little better.

Thank you for the comments, I understand where you are coming from, and it seems you actually understand my poll, since you just provided an option. I will consider things more when I post more.

Once again, thank you.

20
Lenses / Re: Long lens recommendation for surveillance.
« on: December 18, 2012, 02:48:31 PM »
Again, it's all about the distance.
Considering you've said "surveillance, I believe he will be a distance.

I'd go for a 1dx, since you can slip 2 cf cards in, the battery is great
Then the Gps module, it is small, light weight, and won't get in the way
Both the canon iii tc's he'll need them.
A big tripod
A monopod, if he is moving
A gimball head
Bracket foots, and all the gear.

And for super length, the 600 f4 is ii

At mid. Range, 300mm 2.8 is ii

At night, the 300 will be good, because you have the fast aperature.

But there are all kinds of other possibilities based on his needs.
-modify the cameras for thermal or infared
-hook up the camera to nvg's.

At dark, there are issues

My law enforcement in Fl has a really cool system the showed me, they had...
Spotting system
--------------------
A 1ds3 thermal image modified w/ 24-70mm 2.8
A 1ds3 infared w/ 70-200 2.8 is ii

Capture system
------------------------
A 1div thermal 300mm 2.8 is ii
A 1div infared 600mm f4 is
A 1div 400mm 2.8 is ii

Each system is mounted to a modified Gitzo athena head.
They have gps devices
All have the cable outlet plug batteries connected to a small power pack, and are returned to the station via satellite dish.

There are 3 capture systems and 1 spotting system.

The tech crew sets them up on ridges, in trees, anywhere.

Each system is monitored by one of the 4 tech specialists.

They've actually talked to homeland security about its possible border patrol use, butit's expensive! And only good for night.

I work as an intern for my local photography store, and they come in to upgrade and get things fixed, it's expensive, but a super expensive system.

My point is, he will be needing to see various things. When I hear surveillance, I think long range spy remote controlled cameras.

But if he just needs daytime manned shooting, it's just like a safari hunt. He brings along one body (1dx), but he will need various lenses, equipment.

And if it is something out in the desert or something, maybe even a camo suit.

The military does this stuff all the time, so try and find someone who does that.

Ask him to specify the surveillance, because there are various types he could need to do.

The setup could be simply an 800mm, a 1dx and a sandbag, but it may even be as complicated as my law enforcements.

And remember that desperate times call for desperate measures.

If he's trying to spy on teens selling drugs, a 1dx may not be necessary, but if someone is crossing the border with weapons, it could be that important.

21
Lenses / Re: Canon's lens plans
« on: December 17, 2012, 07:43:34 PM »
This is one messed up poll. Why would Canon not want to improve everything? All lenses sharper, better AF, better IS, etc, etc. What part would anybody not want inproved?

Well, if canon makes a f1.2 1mm-1200mm pancake with great IS, sharpness, and only costed around $100, then all the other lenses wouldn't be practical would they.

My point is will canon be nice and make everything better, or will canon make photographers compromise?

I know primes will always have a niche, but will canon introduce any benefits?

22
Lenses / Re: The next 24-105 v. 24-70
« on: December 17, 2012, 07:39:46 PM »
Im sorry, I didn't think spending 30 minutes on the computer during my lunch break would mean so much to some people.

Polls are very simple, they take a minute to make.

And actually, one of the ways you can get better at photography, is by asking questions, and listening to opinions.

I'm only hearing rudness from most people.

Sorry  :(

23
Lenses / Re: The great battle: primes vs zooms
« on: December 17, 2012, 07:36:10 PM »
I agree with Mt Spokane to a point. Primes used in street photography are useful stopped down for a complete telling of the scenes story. Small, inconspicuous, great for pre-focusing. It's not always about bokeh.
Don't worry, I get your point, I probably should have further evaluated on this topic, I'm just advertising one of those "would you rather situations.

24
Lenses / Re: 2.8 vs F4
« on: December 17, 2012, 07:32:18 PM »
Dude this is like the 10th vague, unnecessary, and/or incoherent post/poll you've posted today, what are you trying to accomplish here?

He's making conversation, relaying an observation about photog jargon.  I understand precisely what he's saying, as do several others here, and I've made the same observation as well.

What are you trying to accomplish by trolling his post?

Thank you, at least I know there's a few people who get it, I'm just trying to have friendly conversations.

25
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L Non-IS to Be Discontinued in 2013 [CR2]
« on: December 17, 2012, 07:30:18 PM »
I guarantee canon will give the 70-200 f4 is the 24-70 f4 is treatment, shorter, smaller, and perhaps even sharper than the 2.8 is ii, just a thought.
 I really think canon was smart with discontinuing it, I loved it, but the justification between this and the is ii, was the sharpness, and if someone didn't want to pay for the is ii, they'd be happy with the tamron or sigma.

R.I.P.
Canon 70-200 f2.8

26
Lenses / Re: 2.8 vs F4
« on: December 17, 2012, 12:04:31 PM »
Using the whole number sounds like you're judge at a diving competition. It just doesn't have much relevance. The 'point' however puts it into photography context.

There's always 2.0 as in my favorite new lens! (135 f/2L)
Love it, thank you

27
Lenses / Re: The great battle: primes vs zooms
« on: December 17, 2012, 11:49:13 AM »
I'm saying regardless of cost, I'm asking would you prefer to carry around one set or the other. Is the weight worth the sharpness

But not in total.

Ex.
14mm+24mm+35mm vs 16-35 ii

24mm+35mm+ 50mm +85mm vs 24-70ii

85mm+100mm+135mm+200mm f2 v 70-200 2.8 ii

Would you rather carry the body and the one lens, or the body, one lens, and a bag for the other lenses.

I admit I should have been more specific here, and maybe do an open topic rather than a poll, but sometimes a poll just helps me get a better idea of what people think, opinions can sometimes be confusing.

28
Lenses / Re: Canon's lens plans
« on: December 17, 2012, 11:41:49 AM »
Yea, wondering myself what point you are trying to make. Dump trucks as opposed to motorcycles? What's better... now discuss!!!

Canon rumors added the chat option for a reason, you are allowed to voice your opinion without voting.

My question is, what are you hoping for, what is more practical, what will canon do, I'm just looking for general answers, nothing specific, this doesn't relate to my personal decisions.

29
Lenses / Re: The next 24-105 v. 24-70
« on: December 17, 2012, 11:32:57 AM »
I've just been thinking, and I would like some opinions, and you realize that most answers people post change the interpretation of the question entirely. if you don't want to answer, then just don't answer, I'm not forcing anyone, I'm just asking for friendly opinions.  :)

30
Lenses / 2.8 vs F4
« on: December 17, 2012, 11:28:17 AM »
Here is a fun little topic,  yesterdayI caught my friend and he caught me saying 2.8 and F4.

It's a bit weird, most photographers call regular # aperatures Fx, and all aperatures with a decimal, just the #?

Some examples
-1.2
-1.4
-1.8
-f2
- 2.8
-f4
-5.6
-f8

Please evaluate on why you think this is, or correct me if you don't.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10