April 16, 2014, 10:52:28 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 - Zv

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 69
181
Canon General / Re: Useless or absurd accessories
« on: December 12, 2013, 06:52:32 PM »
you performed a quadruple amputation on your unsuspecting Giottos. How cruel of you! LOL!
;D ;D ;D

Those 'legs/fins' are useless marketing ploys anyway, making it look like a rocket is not a plus in any way, IMHO. I've got two blowers that don't come with these silly fins, they're great. I've got a VisibleDust Hurricane Blower, but the Camgloss Tornado is something excellent.

Stops it from rolling off the table when cleaning lenses. Also for storage on a shelf it stands by itself, smaller footprint.

182
I have a (probably dumb) question. If everytime a new camera comes out and we need a new version of LR to utilize the RAW files, can we convert those files to DNG first and run the DNG file in a previous version of LR?

Is that why the Adobe DNG converter is free?? So you can do that?

183
Lighting / Re: Shaping the Lite
« on: December 12, 2013, 05:17:33 AM »
Nice. I used to use 24mm when using a mid sized shoot through umbrella but I find 35 or 50 a bit more efficient. Any thoughts on that?

184
Lenses / Re: 24 f2.8 IS or 28 f2.8 IS ???
« on: December 12, 2013, 05:09:00 AM »
Hello,

I would appreciate some user’s advices to choose a light go-to length for discretion, street photos, architecture, landscape.

I am FF (5D mark III), and already own 17-40, 24-105, 40 STM and 50f1.4. But I look for something wider than the 40, and more discrete than the L zooms.
I don’t consider the 35 f2 IS as being too close to the 40. I indeed hesitate between the 24 f2.8 IS and the 28 f2.8 IS. The pros of the one are the cons of the other.

My intention is indeed to have a very light kit with the wide prime, the 40 STM, and the 50 f1.4 for interior and low light.

Any insight ?

Thanks by advance.

For buildings wider is always better. That's my pref though, you might find 28mm is more suited to your style. Tbh there's not much between these two lenses. If I had to choose I'd get the 24mm and crop the image to suit.

I'm actually thinking of getting the 24IS myself for similar reasons.

185
Lenses / Re: Which 70-200?
« on: December 12, 2013, 05:03:26 AM »
I see you have all crop bodies, f/4 can be limiting in low light portraits and events. I found myself using mine at f/4 all the time (works well wide open btw) with ISO 1600 on a 7D when indoors. I could have used f/2.8 for sure.

Full frame is a different story and I have no problems with f/4.

I highly recommend IS for telephoto lenses. Even if shooting at 1/focal length and above it makes the viewfinder stable and composing images easier. The IS on the Canon is phenomenal. You can easily get 4 stops out of it. Makes the lens twice as useful because you're less likely to need a tripod.

I wouldn't worry too much about copy variation but test it out before buying if possible. The IS is noisy btw, this is normal! The f/4 IS is built solid and I wouldn't worry about the condition it's in if used. That thing can take a beating.

186
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Get a new camera every 150,000 pictures?
« on: December 11, 2013, 11:27:30 PM »
I sold it and I got a new T3i. The difference in picture quality is dramatic. I am not sure if there was dust in the sensor or the camera was just worn out, but the old one was producing poor pictures. Great move on my part.

Let me get this straight - so you replaced your old but still functioning T3i with a new T3i because the old one had a high shutter count? And now you see a difference in image quality and blame it on dust?

Why didn't you just clean the sensor? And if you did decide to buy an new camera why did you get the exact same model? Why not a T4i?

I did not look into the T4i, but the T5i does not make better pictures according to one site I read. I am waiting for the new 1DX to come out. If it will have over 20 MP, I will probably get it.

As for the sensor cleaning, I am not sure if that was the problem or what. However, I am still new to DSLRs. My first camera was an old Canon with maybe 3MP. In 2007, I got the Canon TX1. In 2010, I got the Canon SX210 IS. In 2012, I got the T3i. The flagship is next.

I will check out cleaning my sensor in the future. I simply never heard of anyone doing before.

It's very easy to do. Remove the lens and then switch on the camera. Go to menu settings under one of the yellow tabs is an option for sensor cleaning. There's an option to do it manually and it basically flips up the mirror so you can see the sensor. You can do an easy blow air into it method via compressed air or use a cleaning kit if it's really filthy. When done just switch the camera off and the mirror flips down.

It cost's like $10 - 20 to have it cleaned at a shop. They do the exact same thing.

There are Youtube videos for how to do it.

To check wether you need to clean it first just take a picture of a white sheet of paper (make sure the paper is spotless!) and set aperture to f/22. Try defocusing using MF. Then upload to your PC and check every part of the image for dark spots. Zoom in to get a better look. Dark spots = dust and grime.

It goes without saying but I will anyway - make sure the lenses are clean and you are not using a filter.

187
Software & Accessories / Re: My New and Improve GIOTTOS Blower-for sefety
« on: December 11, 2013, 11:15:43 PM »
Unbelieveable!! That is the funniest airport security story I've heard yet! I kinda want to try it and see if my rocket blower can fly!

This made my day! Thanks for sharing! ;D

188
Lenses / Re: What to do about my messed up 24-105mm F/4 L IS lens?
« on: December 11, 2013, 11:06:49 PM »
Having already thrown $400 at the lens I wouldn't get it repaired if I were you. Buy a white box version and sell the old one on Ebay or CL with full disclosure. If you're lucky you might get a few people who are interested. It works right? Just a bit soft wide open at 24mm or all focal lengths? If only around 24-35mm f4-5.6 this is quite acceptable for this lens. However you mentioned the centre was soft too, is that also the same when stopped down?

Could be a decentered or slightly off element. If that's the case someone will prob buy it from you and get it fixed. That person might even make a profit!

People buy all kinds of junk. It will sell. I would aim at $400, an amount that get's your initial repair fee back. Put that money towards the replacement. Maybe buy a used one for even less than the white box deal? I bought mine used and it's fine, no issues except the 24mm end!

189
Lenses / Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]
« on: December 11, 2013, 08:52:12 PM »
Just a thought, but how many people (especially unhappy 17-40mm or 16-35mm owners complaining of soft corners) would be please if Canon replaced the 20mm f/2.8 USM with a 20mm f/2.8 IS or 18mm f/2.8 IS for around the same street price as the 17-40mm (not initially, but eventually drift down like the 24/28/35mm IS primes)?

I know 20mm is much longer than 16mm or 17mm, but I'm sure a new IS prime would be incredible sharp, and still fairly small.  Sounds like the perfect solution for video (widest stabilized lens in Canon EOS mount) and tripod-free nighttime landscape photography (theoretically handholdable at 0.8 sec).  What does the CR community think of such a replacement?

I would take a 17 or 18mm prime with IS or not if it was available and then sell my 17-40. I see that lens as a 17-24mm lens in reality as over 24mm IQ starts to fade. I would gladly take a non L 17mm f/4 prime under $1000.

20mm is a tiny bit longer than I like but if it was in the same league as the other IS primes I could see it being very popular as a travel WA lens. It would also make a close to 35mm lens on crop bodies.

190
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Get a new camera every 150,000 pictures?
« on: December 11, 2013, 08:35:04 PM »
I sold it and I got a new T3i. The difference in picture quality is dramatic. I am not sure if there was dust in the sensor or the camera was just worn out, but the old one was producing poor pictures. Great move on my part.

Let me get this straight - so you replaced your old but still functioning T3i with a new T3i because the old one had a high shutter count? And now you see a difference in image quality and blame it on dust?

Why didn't you just clean the sensor? And if you did decide to buy an new camera why did you get the exact same model? Why not a T4i?

191
I leave my WB set to Daylight to record the scene almost as you see it. The scene changes of course and you'll get different WB as it does but you can easily change it in post by applying the change to similar photos via sync or copy function in LR.

I usually find that when the sun has set I prefer cooler tones to bring out the blue and reds in the sky more. It's all down to personal pref though.

192
Canon General / Re: Useless or absurd accessories
« on: December 10, 2013, 11:04:05 AM »
Those cheap lens cleaning tissues, solution and mini blower that's too small to actually blow anything off the lens. Yeah that was a smart purchase!

Then I bought a slightly bigger blower.

Then finally the rocket blower.

It's like tripods but with blowers.

Yup - I bought the Canon lens hood for the 50mm f/1.8 II as well. Never used it and gave it away free when I sold the lens.

193
Canon General / Re: Useless or absurd accessories
« on: December 10, 2013, 01:29:14 AM »
Someone once said (may have been my Father), when you have a great idea, wait awhile, it generally goes away.

The attached is one of the most useless pieces of equipment I've ever had a good idea about.

I think in these Images the "joints" must have been super glued.

Haha that is one ridiculous image. Anyone (incl me) who owns these jobys (another word for turds where I come from funnily enough) can testify to the fact that it can barely hold an iPhone without falling over.

I bought the middle one, the Hybrid, for my EOS M and same story as everyone else. Worst accessory ever.

I also remember buying 2 third party rubber lens hoods for my 18-55 kit lens (can't even say that without laughing now!). Pointless garbage. Also bought one of those lens caps that have a string attached so you don't lose it. It just flaps about annoyingly and gets in the way instead! Pointless!

UV filter instead of a clear filter. Stupidity.

Two tripods of mediocre quality. One that is just far too bloody heavy to use and get's left behind for the the much smaller, much cheaper, much less stable SLIK sprint thing I got as a gift. Idiotic!

And probably the dumbest of them all (only in Japan) - a small pillow or "zabuton" for my camera. I don't even know what it's meant to be for but I bought it when I was a newbie. I think it's supposed to be put under the lens as a kind of soft support but that only works on a flat surface, maybe if you place the camera on a wall? I use it as bag filler to make my bag more secure now!

194
EOS Bodies / Re: A New EOS M with EVF Second Half of 2014?
« on: December 10, 2013, 12:57:05 AM »
New lenses? Great. Just when I gave up and bought two FD lenses! I've been using the FD 50mm 1.4 and it actually doesn't look all that big on the M. It's a little front heavy but I like the weight and you can grip it better with your left hand cradling the lens.

I also bought an FD 100mm 2.8, just waiting for it to arrive.

Since we already have a wide angle zoom and general purpose zoom it stands to reason we'll see a tele zoom for the M. That would be very interesting. Perhaps a prime to go along with it? I hope it has IS as the M really needs it.

This is promising news for the M series, I'm glad Canon haven't decided to scrap it totally.


195
Lenses / Re: Canon 24-105 vs canon 24-70 ii
« on: December 08, 2013, 08:17:49 PM »
With the current rebate program on the 24-70II it's the best time to upgrade your 24-105L. Seems like a no brainer to me.

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 69