August 20, 2014, 09:33:53 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 - sagittariansrock

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 82
181
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D810!!!
« on: June 26, 2014, 09:43:01 PM »
Can someone (I am thinking of you, jrista) explain why no low-pass filter is better than a non anti-aliasing one (except to Nikon, who can probably save some money).
Thanks

182
+2 for FredMiranda.
It will take time to get started and it always helps if you need to buy a few things first. But in the long run, if you have provided excellent business transactions, you will reap the benefits from no fees and reliable photographers dealing with you.

183
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D810!!!
« on: June 26, 2014, 06:18:48 PM »
So, why is not having a low-pass filter (810) better than having one that doesn't anti-alias (800E)? I thought the low-pass filter is useful for protecting the sensor from dust...  ???

If your camera is in good enough condition to be sold as "mint" or "near mint" condition then you obviously haven't used it very much.

There is a difference between 'use' and 'abuse'. I sold my 2-year old iPhone 4S back to Apple and got their maximum possible buyback price (for 'mint'- which anyone who sold back to Apple will know, is pretty rare). And I used my phone every day, all the time.

Snobbish generalizations aside, these incremental improvements will send a bunch of Nikonians scurrying to pick up the last of the 800s at their current price before they are discontinued. Maybe that was the ulterior motive- to boost D800 sales!

Better lenses...yeah, as long as you don't shoot UWA...cus besides the 17mm TSE Canon is pretty weak in that regard.  I'm still using my old 5D2 but I would be a pretty happy camper if Canon came out with something like the D810.

Nikon has one excellent fast UWA zoom, yes. But the other three are quite mediocre. And with the new 16-35 IS, Canon has closed that gap quite a bit (if early samples can be believed).
It is funny how people read posts on the forums and make these generalized comments! Other than a fast UWA, Nikon isn't significantly better in ANY aspect compared to Canon lenses. Head-to-head they are either close or Canon is much better. And that fast UWA isn't the paragon of lenses. Short range, difficult to use a filter, expensive, and prone to flare. How many Nikonians use the 14-24, I ask?

184
Photography Technique / Re: Shallow DOF vs lighting
« on: June 26, 2014, 02:36:50 PM »
Thanks for all your responses!

Having both is certainly ideal, but I find myself forcing to choose one or the other. Shooting on a 7D, when using a long lens for shallow DOF, I need to stand further away from the subject and the lightstand. In windy conditions, the lightstand gets blown over all the time  :-\ Sure I could use a sandbag, but it's a lot of extra weight to carry. My wife already dislikes the idea of me carrying lots of gear when we go out.

So I like to put my foot on the lightstand, which needs to be relatively close to the subject. In that case, I'll need to use a wider angle lens -> reducing blur.

I guess the ultimate solution is to go full frame!

You can compromise on shallowness of DoF and still get excellent pictures.
I can't see how one can compromise on lighting and get even good pictures.
Camera bag is an excellent solution, but you can be resourceful otherwise and find something else to support your light stand.
Or get a faster wide angle lens. I am guessing you don't shoot portraits wider than 35mm anyway and both the 35L and the 50L provide plenty shallow DoF with close subject distances. Even the 35/2 and 50/1.4 (@1.8) will work quite well.


185
Look similar to Op/Tech Reporter/Backpack System Connectors.
One side has a male quick connect, and the other a female. Not sure how short you can adjust the webbing though.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/TECH-Reporter-Backpack-System-Connectors/dp/B0010HA68I/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1403765039&sr=8-1&keywords=op-tech+reporter



Thanks!
This is exactly what I need- I wonder if I will get it shipped before this trip, though.
Going to check local camera stores now that I know what to look for...

Edit: Might be able to get it via Amazon Prime. Thanks again, a lot!

186
In a pinch, consider going to Home Depot

http://www.homedepot.com/p/Nite-Ize-18-in-Gear-Tie-in-Bright-Orange-2-Pack-GT18-2PK-31/203210990

Cheap, work great, multiple colors help make your bag stand out, very strong.

I use them.  Plus, they come in lots of sizes.

sek


That's a great suggestion- unfortunately I should have explained- I need it to act as a strap to secure my backpack to the strolley handle. It should not be elastic but more like a webbing.

187
Similar to the F stopper gatekeepers.
Doesn't need to be that fancy.
My Lowepro backpack has lugs for them and I need something here badly. Unfortunately Lowepro doesn't sell them separately- only one came with the bag.
Anyone?
Thanks!

http://dancarrphotography.com/blog/2011/05/18/an-in-depth-look-at-the-new-f-stop-guru/110515_9328_dancarr/

188
Canon General / Re: Should we tell them?
« on: June 25, 2014, 11:22:20 PM »
It's good exercise for the finger to keep pushing the flash down. Maybe they'll get tired of it and upgrade to (a Canon) full frame.

189
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS in Stock at B&H Photo
« on: June 25, 2014, 01:12:45 PM »
Please post pictures as soon as you can.
Thanks, guys!

190
So, any advice for shooting locations in and around Niagara?
I understand there are some islands nearby?
(We won't be crossing the border).
Thanks for all your help in advance.

191
Sorry to speak against 3LT, but I had purchased the Adrian, and I wasn't impressed by it. Here's why:
1. It felt rather flimsy compared to my then tripod, Manfrotto 190X ProB. My current GT2541 is much sturdier, too. The leg joints flexed too much, especially when fully extended (w/o center column).
2. The ballhead allows movement even when fully tightened with bare hands (i.e., not utilizing the torque of a heavy lens).
3. All the materials, knobs, etc. just felt cheap and poorly made.
Now, for the price point it's probably fine, since Gitzos and RRS are much more expensive. But try before buying, and compare with some other brands, would be my advice.

192
Lenses / Re: The sharpness curse!
« on: June 24, 2014, 04:03:18 AM »
I am not sure I understand what the post is about.

What is the reason for your frustration? Are you feeling bad for the lenses? Are you feeling bad for the people who make the wrong choices?
I don't see anyone else who is suffering from this sharpness addiction- I am sure no one is losing a client or a competition because his amazing shots weren't taken with an L lens or because his lens has low MTF values!

The 50L still sells well, and commands a high price. If it were more popular it would be even more expensive. And those new IS primes- thankfully they got 'ignored' and the prices came down. Now you can have all your limbs AND a prime with IS.

Objective tests matter to a small minority of people. Don't get frustrated- just ignore them.

The frustration stems from two things:
1) It is a shame that some write off lenses because of sharpness tests, as some of the real gear treasures aren't the sharpest lenses.  A lot of folks missing out on the good stuff...
2) From one that likes the look of the 50L/85L, I fear Canon might start prioritizing sharpness over bokeh in future lens design for instance so lenses can get higher review scores.


So, you're feeling bad for those making the wrong decisions. Well, it's their loss if they don't listen to the wise and don't believe their eyes in favor of some specs. But, fair enough.
Regarding 2, I am sure you need not worry. Canon knows their market, and they care more about what the top pros tell them rather than the review sites. Otherwise, you'd see Canon shipping lens hoods with non-L lenses.

193
Lenses / Re: The sharpness curse!
« on: June 23, 2014, 09:59:56 PM »
I am not sure I understand what the post is about.

What is the reason for your frustration? Are you feeling bad for the lenses? Are you feeling bad for the people who make the wrong choices?
I don't see anyone else who is suffering from this sharpness addiction- I am sure no one is losing a client or a competition because his amazing shots weren't taken with an L lens or because his lens has low MTF values!

The 50L still sells well, and commands a high price. If it were more popular it would be even more expensive. And those new IS primes- thankfully they got 'ignored' and the prices came down. Now you can have all your limbs AND a prime with IS.

Objective tests matter to a small minority of people. Don't get frustrated- just ignore them.

194
What I'm trying to explain is that in fashion you rarely/never shoot in a way to get most of the model lost in bokeh. Wide open or not, it's about showing the clothes. So if I shoot at 1.8, It's likely a full body shot, or at least a bust, but even when it's a bust, it's likely to have focus on something in the shot, like accessories.

I'm trying do distinguish popular wedding look, which is bokeh, bokeh, more bokeh, from actual commercial way of shooting which is product, product, more product.

Yes, I understand why event photographers that shoot wide open might find their focus lacking.

However, I don't get why people complain for "still" work. So, okay, yes, my camera would probably search for focus endlessly if I set it to a focus point other then the center one, especially in low light, so I don't.

I'm trying to learn here. I guess my question should be: What/how/when do you use those other AF points for? And how do people do it on MF systems where there is only one, is there a way to apply same techniques?

MF Hasselblads have a focus system that readjusts itself when you recompose.

That's the True Focus PhillipP74 mentioned. Now, that is quite revolutionary.

195
That's why I am asking. I don't understand where is the issue? So many are complaining about it, so it does exist, I just can't get it.


Neuro put this link in one of his earlier posts. Click on the link- the phenomenon is quite nicely illustrated.

http://www.visual-vacations.com/Photography/focus-recompose_sucks.htm


Cheers.

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 82