August 27, 2014, 05:13:46 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 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 80
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon naming policy
« on: January 18, 2014, 08:46:10 PM »
Canon EOS naming scheme on Wikipedia:

Yeah, sorry. Totally don't agree that the 5D line is "prosumer". It is extensively used by literal professionals in the wedding and portraiture arenas. There is no question that the 5D is professional. The 7D, while not as often used by professionals as a primary camera, is frequently used by professionals as a backup. Additionally, the feature set wise, the 7D has the closest featureset to the 1D line.

I have to agree with the manufacturer. I know a lot of pros use the 5D, it is a great camera, but it also extremely popular with consumers, especially here in Asia Pacific, which by definition makes it prosumer. Nothing wrong with that, it is an amazing camera.

As for the OP, I think 7D mark II as a name, works well.

By that logic, the 1DX could be classified 'prosumer'.  There are many people on this board that own the 1DX, but aren't "professional" photographers.  Hell, there are those out there(you know who I'm referring to  ;) ) that classify ALL 35mm cameras as consumer.

The 1 series is the pro body in Canon's line up. The 5 series can't also be pro it can be advanced or prosumer. Maybe the 5D3 is closer to "pro". The article isn't up to date.

Medium format and Large format folk are looking down upon us and laughing as we argue over some numbers! 

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom for iPad Coming Soon
« on: January 18, 2014, 08:23:45 PM »
Will it work with RAW, and how to get RAW transferred onto the iPad? 

Importing RAW onto an iPad works the same as importing JPEG.  I assume you'd use the USB or SD card - dock/lightning adapters to connect the camera and import them into LR just like you do with the iOS photo app.

Surprisingly the iPad seems to handle RAW files just fine. I use the USB to lightning cable and then connect the camera directly to the iPad. Upload is simple. No additional codecs or upgrades required (unlike windows) it can display the RAW file as a JPEG preview. The issue will be memory space. Even the 128GB versions will fill up soon so it's really only good for light editing and then transfer the files to your PC / MAC. I've never tried that though but it should be a case of just plug in and drag and drop.

Also the question remains how those files will sync with your existing library? You could have a separate Lightroom mobile catalogue that you click on. Then you could merge or import that catalogue to your existing library? Or will it have some kind of cloud sync?   

Dear Friends
After I read this Post , which start by Mr. DaveMiko, The More I read, The More I understand my self----NO, I am not and will not BE THE PRO. As My Understand that " THE PRO buy their equipment as need to serve their Duty/ Functions as they  make their living from the products by that equipment. And the equipments that they buy must in their  budget and made profits for them too.

For me( and Some minority of CR. Members ? ) always buy the new equipment after the company  improve their  new products/ equipment, just  10  cents of It's  better Quality, and WE HAVE A HEART TO SPEND $ 1000 US DOLLARS MORE , for the equipment that  ALMOST THE SAME QUALITY OF OUR OLD EQUIPMENT AND HOPE TO GET BETTER AND SHARPER PHOTOS---YES, We have  90% Pure Heart but only 10% BRAIN, to create our happiness but less money in our pocket.
Just want to have FUN to talk with you.
Have a great weekend.

Well said. But I don't mind spending my money on what I want, I know it won't improve my photography. :(

Let's face it for some of us it's just the new toys that make us happy! And it's our humdrum 9-5 office jobs that pay for them!! Haha!  :P

Maybe it's just an inherent flaw that we all have as photographers that we are never content with our gear?? We always want what we don't have (that's a normal human trait).

Can anyone really say they have everything they always wanted? Maybe not for long as technology keeps advancing eventually your gear will become outdated.

The best we can hope for is a "for now" satisfaction level. As in I have all the gear I need for now.

Nah, actually that's rubbish I want it all!

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom for iPad Coming Soon
« on: January 18, 2014, 09:55:30 AM »
Seems a bit pricey unless we get the full version which I guess might work on the new iPad air but the older versions might struggle. For an app that is a lot. And you have to pay that yearly too. I have an iPad but am not that desperate to have post processing on the go. My iPad is 64GB so if wouldn't even hold a fraction of my library or catalogue anyway. Do they provide some kind of cloud storage to go with it??

Throw in tethered shooting functionality and half the price and it might have a use.

Note Snapseed is free and does a pretty decent job.

Lenses / Re: Canon 135mm or Tamron 24-70mm
« on: January 17, 2014, 07:19:41 PM »
2. I can totally get the not-sure-where-to-go-with-my-photography part. Same here. It's not a "real" job but still something I like on the side. And the little income here and there is really more for the satisfaction of it if that makes sense. Weddings? Yeah, they can pay really well comparatively speaking - I hear. Still doesn't interest me. Dealing with crazy mother of brides? Thanks. Been there done that back in the days as a DJ during college.
But if you decide to do so may I ask if you have proper liability insurance etc? If not spend your money maybe on that first before buying another lens...
LOL - no weddings for me, either, and I still don't know what kind of photographer I am, either.  I own a kit that's ideal for event/wedding photography but have little interest in it. I love nature photography.  I sell landscape & wildlife prints, but make most of my photo money shooting architecture & lifestyle stuff.  I love shooting portraits, but never seem to find the time.  I have lights but no studio, and the list goes on...  Someday I'll figure it out.  Until then, I'll just have fun trying to decide what I want to shoot :)

Me too, I dabbled in weddings but I don't see that as something I want to actively pursue. They are good practice though! The planning and execution is one thing but the thinking on your feet part and adapting to the changes part is fun too! Only prob is if you get it wrong it's your ass!

To OP - You need something in the general 24-something range, not only just for weddings but almost every other thing. I would say the Tamron is the best solution for you. Fast and has IS.

Like 7enderbender pointed out having Image Stabilization and a high ISO will take care of low light situations. The fast aperture is not that necessary anymore in my opinion too. My zooms are all f/4 and I prefer them to the 135L for "low light" because of IS. I can't shoot the 135 handheld at 1/60s without IS or tripod. Thus it limits it's usage to shallow dof effect only. And that is where it excels!

I think it's good to build up a zoom trinity first then buy your primes.

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM
« on: January 17, 2014, 11:16:00 AM »
A follow up to my post from yesterday. According to the info I have, this woman got her first camera in 2012 and she┬┤s shooting with a 135 2L lens. I got my first SLR 39 years ago and I would have been tremendously proud of a portfolio like this. Enjoy!

No question that those are gorgeous images but there's a lot of post processing involved there.

In this one: for example, look at the area that's in focus on the ground between the dog and the child.  Then look at the ground near the child's heels.  It's on the same plane and should be in focus but is blurred.

Again, there's a lot of skill evident on those photos but it's not all "in-camera" skill.

Could be a composite. Two images blended together. I like the moody atmosphere of these shots more than anything. I wish I had mad processing skillz like she does! 

Lenses / Re: Lens nicknames
« on: January 17, 2014, 04:35:16 AM »
Here (China) the 70-200s are nicknamed "Xiao bai" litterally "Little white". Cute.

Yeah I heard about that. Thanks for sharing!

I remember saying to myself about 3 years ago that I had all the gear I need when all I had was the T2i + kit lens!  ;D

Trying to not buy anything this year but I feel that Sigma has other plans for me!!  :P

Lenses / Lens nicknames
« on: January 17, 2014, 02:05:31 AM »
I know it's been done on other forums (prob this one too) but I thought it might be fun to see what we all call our lenses!

Also, there seems to be some lenses that have no fixed nickname. Let's see who can come up with the funniest name!

Who's up for some Friday fun??

My pitiful attempt -

Samyang 14mm f/2.8 = Samshroom
17-40 f/4L = Diet Coke Bottle
24-105 f/4L IS = Genralux
70-200 f/4L IS = Meatgrinder
135L = Pipe Dream

Am sure you guys can do better than me!!

Lenses / Re: 7D user - advice on my best option for a 'go to' lens?
« on: January 16, 2014, 11:25:46 AM »
I've used both on a 7D and I reckon the 17-55 is the better choice. The extra stop is essential on the 7D. Also the 17-55 is tack sharp at f/4 whereas the 24-105 is a little soft. On crop f/2.8 is good for portraits, you get some shallow dof with a little margin for error. F/4 is nice too when I want more detail.

The only adv for the 24-105 is reach. However, I would opt for a cheap tele like the 85 1.8 as it would compliment the 17-55. Together you'd cover the portrait range (50mm - 135mm) quite nicely.

To be honest am not a big fan of the 24-105, it hasn't impressed me after selling my 17-55 for it. Seems mushy at the ends and f/4 is not that great. Very limiting on a 7D when you have to stop down to 5.6 or 8. 35-70mm is good though (those are good portrait lengths on crop too funnily enough).

Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: January 15, 2014, 10:24:38 AM »
A 16-50 f/4 IS would be just the ticket.
I like the idea of that, but would still love something really wide like the Sigma 12-24 II I used to own.  I fear that Canon considers our dreams of a super wide covered by the 8-15 f/4.  A lot of their articles have pitched it as a wide angle lens, but at least to me, I don't care for the fisheye distortion even if it can be minimized with a perfectly level shot.

Oh totally! They need something in that ultra wide range other than the costly 14L. Their foolin no one with the 8-15 fisheye! I opted for the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 instead as I got fed up waiting. It's a pity I can't use filters with it though. Blasted bulbous ends! Haha!

What is the widest you can get without going bulbous end? Is it 16mm? I imagine a 12-24 or 14-24 would be quite expensive anyway and wouldn't take filters.

I may get rid of my 17-40l because I use my Sigma 15mm fisheye instead.  To me, it's a better solution in almost all circumstances.

I've also considered selling my 17-40L but it has some things that I like - my copy is fairly sharp from 17-24mm f/5.6 + and that's where I use it most. Fast AF. It takes 77mm filters so I can CP-L it and ND it for waterfalls and long exposure stuff.

For just sheer wide angle fun I use the Sammy 14mm f/2.8.

EOS Bodies / Re: A New Rebel for CP+? [CR1]
« on: January 15, 2014, 10:13:06 AM »
I almost bought the Canon Rebel t2i over my 50D. Rebel is nothing to sneeze at. It's a damn fine camera. Any Canon DSLR. I was at Best Buy the other day and playing with their SL1.  I would love one of those little guys!

Oh not at all, the rebels are fine cameras, no ones sneezing at them or anywhere near them it's just the way that they are "upgraded" is very humdrum and not worth getting excited about! We'd rather hear about a 7D replacement than a new rebel. Just more curious about the higher end specs.

I started out with a t2i myself. Gave it to my GF to use when upgraded. Still work flawlessly after years of service. I have nothing but respect for my humble rebel. I learned a lot from it. I actually get annoyed when people under use it or never use anything other than the kit lens. It's so cheap that almost every ones got one. Trouble is they don't all get the most of this amazing machine! Shame really as it can take stunning pics. That's how I feel about the EOS M too. I reckon in the right hands it can do wonders.

Those are really good cameras when in the right hands, indeed. I just feel they are a little too small for my hands. To be honest, I fail to see much advantage in the reduced size of the SL1, since it will not fit in a pocket anyway.

Ultimately it was the small size of the rebel that made me want to go for a bigger model. Taking 1000 shots in one day gave me cramp! The first time I held a 7D was like finding a perfect fitting glove! The 5D2 feels good too but man the 7D just begs to be held! And then there's the shutter sound. Rebel is like a cat sneezing. The 7D is a deep satisfying cough!

I'm weird about stuff like that! But hey if you're not comfortable with your gear you won't wanna use it right?

Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: January 15, 2014, 07:36:30 AM »
I opted for the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 instead as I got fed up waiting. It's a pity I can't use filters with it though. Blasted bulbous ends! Haha!

Actually, there is a (very expensive) Hitech Lucroit Filter Holder.  It was originally designed for the Nikon 14-24, but they made adapter rings for other lenses, including the Samyang.  It can be found on their site and places like B&H, Adorama, & Amazon.  You'll also probably need to buy new large, expensive filters to go with it of course.

Also I believe Samyang posted something on their FB page about working on their own filter holder for it.  As I recall they were hoping to release it around now. 

There are also a number of home-made filter holders I've seen, you can google them and see if they look like something you'd like to try to duplicate.

Cool thanks!

I'll look out for the Samyang ones. They'll likely be cheap!

Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: January 15, 2014, 12:52:30 AM »
Oh totally! They need something in that ultra wide range other than the costly 14L. Their foolin no one with the 8-15 fisheye! I opted for the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 instead as I got fed up waiting. It's a pity I can't use filters with it though. Blasted bulbous ends! Haha!

What is the widest you can get without going bulbous end? Is it 16mm? I imagine a 12-24 or 14-24 would be quite expensive anyway and wouldn't take filters.

Zeiss' 15mm takes filters -- 95mm filters.   :o

The TS-E 17 takes filters, 145mm filters.

You say that like you can just buy those at the dollar store! I mean sure I bet the Hubble space telescope takes filters too!  ;D

(I meant what regular folk consider a filter - 77mm / 82mm max.)

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 80