April 18, 2014, 10:24:43 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 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 46
46
Lenses / Re: New 50mm Sigma ? There are other options !
« on: April 14, 2014, 08:40:49 PM »
While we are talking about misquotes to the handful of people who keep yacking on about the 24-70 2.8 mk2 , there was never a reference to this lens in my post you all just forgot to read it properly, The lens i replaced and compared with is the 24-70 2.8 mk1 and as already stated i am not making assumptions about the mk2 it may well be better than the 35 IS i haven't used it so cant comment.

Hmmm... so if you have never used the mk2 maybe you shouldn't have used the generalized comment below?

specifically we are talking mainly about quality, and in that respect the prime lens offers the client the best quality possible  :)


47
Canon General / Re: Insurance for Camera gear
« on: April 14, 2014, 08:32:19 PM »
Theft is not the only reason to have renter's insurance.  What if the place burns down, gas line explosion, water pipe breaks and floods your living area.......... All the security won't stop things like that from destroying your property.  Renter's insurance is cheap, you need to get a policy.

That's sound advice. I am sitting on a quote, I guess I need to get off my ass and approve it.

48
Lenses / Re: Bokeh onion rings
« on: April 14, 2014, 08:27:18 PM »
As danski said, it might have to do with the varying intensity due to the AC current cycles.
What was the shutter speed?
AC current is usually 60 Hz (might be different in Norway)- so it swings from one extreme to the other in 1/60 of a second, passing zero. So it only needs 1/120 of a second to go from one extreme to zero.
So, if slower than 1/120 (or Norway equivalent), can you try higher shutter speeds?
Norway is 240V/50Hz.

For a lot of other things that has to do with light, the AC frequency of 60/50Hz comes into play. The Christmas candle picture is shot at 1/25s, with very clear onion rings. If the 50Hz theory was correct, it should have been clean. This one is shot at 1/40s (handheld)

Ah, I see. I must have misunderstood- I thought you got onion rings with AC and not with candle light or DC.

49
Lenses / Re: Bokeh onion rings
« on: April 14, 2014, 02:28:24 PM »
As danski said, it might have to do with the varying intensity due to the AC current cycles.
What was the shutter speed?
AC current is usually 60 Hz (might be different in Norway)- so it swings from one extreme to the other in 1/60 of a second, passing zero. So it only needs 1/120 of a second to go from one extreme to zero.
So, if slower than 1/120 (or Norway equivalent), can you try higher shutter speeds?

50
Lenses / Re: Wait for Sigma 50mm Art or purchase Canon 135 f2L.
« on: April 14, 2014, 02:20:52 PM »
And here I thought that the camera tracked where your eye was looking and then focused there. Silly me.

I thought that at first, too. I had the 7NE- a very cool feature. Dunno why Canon discontinued it.

The Canon A2E also had eye controlled focus but the camera only had 5 AF points.  I don't think you could do eye controlled focus with todays cameras with 5 dozen AF points.   ;D

Neither could you, with the restless eye of today's average smartphone user :P
Anyway, Canon did not have this feature in their flagship models (e.g., EOS 1-v, although oddly v apparently stood for 'vision') with 45 AF points, so they could have given this feature to 6D or to the Rebels.

51
Canon General / Re: Insurance for Camera gear
« on: April 14, 2014, 10:35:47 AM »
Unfortunately, none of the State farm agents in Houston agreed to a stand-alone policy. I think it differs by location and the agent involved.

Do you have a homeowners/renters policy with them?  I'm pretty sure that's the only way they'll write a Personal Articles policy.  It's the same policy that covers jewelry, fine art, etc., above the basic limits on the primary policy, so if you have home/rental coverage with them, and the agent still won't write a PA policy, I'd get a new agent or call State Farm directly.

+1

Also....I would add that a $180 annual policy for personal articles insurance isn't the type of business that a ST Farm rep would want to take.   Too much risk, too little reward for the agent.  IMO

+1. I agree, especially in a high-crime city like Houston.

52
Canon General / Re: Insurance for Camera gear
« on: April 14, 2014, 10:34:50 AM »
Unfortunately, none of the State farm agents in Houston agreed to a stand-alone policy. I think it differs by location and the agent involved.

Do you have a homeowners/renters policy with them?  I'm pretty sure that's the only way they'll write a Personal Articles policy.  It's the same policy that covers jewelry, fine art, etc., above the basic limits on the primary policy, so if you have home/rental coverage with them, and the agent still won't write a PA policy, I'd get a new agent or call State Farm directly.

You are right, they will write a personal articles policy WITH a renter's/homeowners policy. However, they didn't agree to a stand-alone PA policy as miah mentioned in his post. I have heard State Farm agents do so elsewhere, but not in Houston.
I don't need a renter's since I live in a high-security apartment for doctors and scientists with police surveillance and close-circuit cameras, so I am trying to get an insurance just for the photography equipment against accidental damage and security away from home, as is available in the UK (for non-professionals). I guess I might end up getting a renter's after all, but I would like to see if there are any options.

53
Canon General / Re: Insurance for Camera gear
« on: April 14, 2014, 12:07:17 AM »
You should be able to buy a State Farm Personal Articles Policy as a stand-alone, with no connection to homeowner's or renter's policies. Mine covers 17K with no deductible for $176 annually.

Unfortunately, none of the State farm agents in Houston agreed to a stand-alone policy. I think it differs by location and the agent involved.

54
6D Sample Images / Re: Shooting in Namibia with the Canon EOS 6D
« on: April 13, 2014, 11:58:13 PM »
You know, I like the pictures, especially the two of the dunes, the one with predominantly sky (and what a beautiful sky!) and the silhouetted one that looks like it was taken in the late afternoon.  But have we become so sensitive to anything negative that someone simply expressing their opinion on the quality of one's work causes such a backlash that forces the poster to remove his comments?  Are we only supposed to post if we have something positive to say about the images?   While what sanj said may not have been that constructive, neither is "pretty images" or "beautiful shots".  In fact, I'd argue that what sanj said is more constructive than simple appreciation.  It allows one to think about what could be done better, if the composition was optimal, if the lighting was right, etc, moreso than any simple compliment.

If you are familiar with sanj and his work, you will understand the level of constructive input one can expect of him. I wouldn't have made the same comment towards anyone of lesser caliber. I am sure he might add something constructive if he has the time, and we all can benefit from it.

Also no one could forced him to remove his post. I admire and respect his voluntary gesture, and think it was very big of him.

55
Lenses / Re: New 50mm Sigma ? There are other options !
« on: April 13, 2014, 08:46:33 PM »
...yet it has over 60 replies. In fairness to the OP, he introduced the thread as a discussion on alternatives to the much hyped new Sigma 50.

-pw

Does that surprise you, considering you have over 1400 posts on CR?
Apart from detailed debates about the 35/2 IS I have not seen any discussion on alternatives to the 50A (and sorry, the 35/2 IS is not an alternative- not in FL, speed or use). Maybe you spotted something I didn't. 
Of course, it doesn't matter. It is a weekend pastime anyway :)
I shouldn't have been so harsh to criticize the thread.
Cheers!

56
6D Sample Images / Re: Shooting in Namibia with the Canon EOS 6D
« on: April 13, 2014, 07:20:21 PM »
With all due respect I would expect better photos from you.

With all due respect I would expect more constructive criticism from you, with your experience in photography and cinematography, teaching workshops and shooting in Africa.

57
Lenses / Re: 135mm L if I already got the 100mm L?
« on: April 13, 2014, 06:55:15 PM »
I usually don't shoot macro, so when I wanted a shorter, more portable telephoto lens to accompany my 70-200 II, I naturally went for the 135L.
I am pretty happy with my decision, and since have purchased a 500D close up lens for those very rare macro moments.
In your case, it is hard to say- do you envision a situation when the additional f-stop will come handy? For me, the portability of the 135L was the main incentive. If I had another short tele I already liked, I wouldn't have dropped several hundred dollars just for the 1-stop and bokeh advantage.

58
Photography Technique / Re: 10,000 Monkeys Shots
« on: April 13, 2014, 06:40:34 PM »
All the more reason to follow your signature line, Jim (I was about to quote it and noticed you have just posted a comment, LOL!).
i.e,. more reason to go out there and shoot.
Lovely shot!

59
Lenses / Re: New 50mm Sigma ? There are other options !
« on: April 13, 2014, 04:16:50 PM »
That hopefully demonstrates where i am coming from with the judgement on the 35 f2 IS

Call me slow, but I still have no fricking idea how that has anything to do with the new 50mm Sigma.
One of the most directionless threads I've come across on CR.

60
Canon General / Re: Insurance for Camera gear
« on: April 13, 2014, 03:39:51 AM »
I've been wondering about this myself, is it possible to insure my gear if I'm not a homeowner?
I'm not a home-owner either, no problems getting the insurance. As another user mentioned, it might be why my rate was a little higher, but, it could also be that I'm in a big city and my gear is a higher risk of being stolen

Would you mind sharing what insurance company you use?
I don't mind paying a bit higher, but I am not a home-owner and I have no reason to get renter's either.
However, neither State Farm not Geico offers personal items (or photography gear) insurance without either home-owner's or renter's insurance.
I know there is stand-alone insurance for photography gear in the UK, is there something similar in the US (for non-pros, that is)?

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 46