March 03, 2015, 06:27:35 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 - jdramirez

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 183
16
Photography Technique / Re: How to frame a good bird/animal shot
« on: February 13, 2015, 11:43:40 PM »
Maybe this, I still like to see more eye.
Larger print you would see it.

my personal preference is somethig like this... but crop a little more of the left out... get rid of the tree in photoshop (and I realize that isn't the easiest... but I don't like the tree...), and I still think that put the bird too square in the middle... it's a puzzler. 

17
Lenses / Re: Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art announced..
« on: February 10, 2015, 11:05:31 AM »

For me it's mostly price. If I'm spending in the range of the Canon 85L then I have lenses like the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS or the Canon 24-70 II. When Sigma didn't announce an 85 ART in September I went ahead and bought the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS. I'd say around $1000 is about the max I'd be willing to pay (not that that is what it should cost just what I'd be willing to pay on sale). I bought my 35 ART for $780 and it's been a great lens. Primes are great but they obviously have a more limited use than zooms so I just can't justify spending $2000 on one when I could put that towards something else. Just my take on things.

That is fair. I got the 85 L mkii and it became my favorite lens, so much so that I tried to show horn it where it didn't belong, sports mostly & a little walk around.

I have four lenses at the moment, each with its specific duty. And I find I'm manually focusing a ton with the 85, that I might as well consider an otus.  But I'm happy with it.

18
Lenses / Re: Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art announced..
« on: February 10, 2015, 09:39:48 AM »
Would it be wrong to have a 24, 35, 50 and 85?

Why.  Sigma makes a fine product... But that would be a heavy bag to carry around.

19
Lenses / Re: Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art announced..
« on: February 10, 2015, 09:37:21 AM »
Why do people want the 85 art so much?  It's the presumption that it will be even sharper than the 85 L mkii?  It is it that it still be half the price?... our a faster auto focus system... sure there are plenty of reasons to want it, but it seems like the original sigma 85 isn't that old, and it is already pretty costly... So would an at version only be an extra $100?

20
I think the lesson learned... for me at least... is that the light flicker from flourescent lighting not only affects the white balance in regards to blue-ish and redish hues, but also to perception of exposure (with some being brighter and consequently looking like they are more exposed than other WB levels).
Just buy 7D Mark ii and the problem will be solved with the activated anti-flicker feature. :)

No...I'm content with my 5d mkiii & fixing in post.  But I guess when I upgrade to the mk v, I'll get that feature.

21
I have (almost) only bodies, lenses and bags, and if lenses are not considered to be "accessories": I'm still on the safe side.
If lenses counts, I exceeded the cost when I bought my 2nd lens.

Lenses are so integral that I don't really consider it to be an accessory... but that is up for interpreation.  I would say a cpl or nd filter are... a rubber hood, a lens bag, maybe a teleconvertor...
No! No! No!  It's only the sensor that matters! :)

I laughed... because it is just so sad that this conversation continues.  I was thinking the other day... how long have the Canon sensors been behind the competition... it doesn't seem like it has been generations... just the past few years... and god forbid someone else takes the lead for what maybe a momentary blip on the timeline of the technology.  But... I don't want to turn this thread into THAT topic of conversation.

22
Yupp, it's bloody hard to get a good shot without a lens, or a memory card for that matter.
I bought my first dSLR after realizing that during 1-2 years I had spent more on photographic magazines than what a decent standard lens would cost. I was very determined to make my choice on what to buy after getting the best/most possible information. So, very rarely do I buy any item just because it looks good, but I could easily (if I had the money) spend loads on various accessories that I could make good use of.

You could use a pin hole lens.  You have your SLR, a body cap, drill a hole into the cap, then tape foil over the hole and then prick a pin hole.  It looks awful... but it is still on par with the kit lens... :)  Just kidding kit lens enthusiats.

I found a deal for two Nikon zoom lenses... it was a price mistake from Sears and I got two 55-200's or somethng for 38 bucks... So I was going to get a Nikon body... probably the d3000 because it was reportedly user friendly for a beginner... then I saw a deal for the XS and I  was sold... and consequently sold the two nikon lenses.  So I was THAT close to being a jerk. 


23
Photography Technique / Re: Aquarium shooting advice please
« on: February 08, 2015, 11:37:46 AM »
How close do you want to get... I've been to sea world several times and that splash zone is pretty big... so you wind up sitting outside of the splash zone and you sit far from the action.  Any chance you can buy/rent a waterproof case like this?

http://www.amazon.com/Dicapac-USA-Inc-WP-S10-Waterproof/dp/B00169HXW2

Then you can get up close to the action... maybe @ eye level where the stands and the water meet.  Then when you are shooting the plane of the water is perpendicular to the plane of focus. 

135 doesn't seem like a ton of reach, but if you don't mind cropping, I'm sure the images will come out fine.  Hopefully it is a sunny day and you can stop down the lens to around f/8 so the images come out nice and sharp. 

24
I think the lesson learned... for me at least... is that the light flicker from flourescent lighting not only affects the white balance in regards to blue-ish and redish hues, but also to perception of exposure (with some being brighter and consequently looking like they are more exposed than other WB levels). 


25
http://petapixel.com/2014/12/15/tip-use-magical-match-total-exposures-feature-lightroom-quick-fix/

Should fix it right up.  Yes, the lighting is flickering, almost as bad as neon :)

Awesome... I owe you a bourbon.  I thought I would have to adjust the white balance and exposure individually but this worked beautifully. 

I "exported" the files to photoshop as a smart object (maybe because I'm using elements).  Then I was able to layer them onto each other.  I was using a monopod with feet because I was shooting in a walkway, so the backgrounds aren't perfectly matched up, but I don't think it is overly noticeable. 


26
I have (almost) only bodies, lenses and bags, and if lenses are not considered to be "accessories": I'm still on the safe side.
If lenses counts, I exceeded the cost when I bought my 2nd lens.

Lenses are so integral that I don't really consider it to be an accessory... but that is up for interpreation.  I would say a cpl or nd filter are... a rubber hood, a lens bag, maybe a teleconvertor...

27
I like looking at the old 1d line for sheets and gigs... and I look at the 4mp 1d and I think... wow... and people paid top dollar for that thing. 

Then I get to the 8mp 1d mkii selling used for only $300ish dollars and I think... why the hell are people throwing hard earned money on a $300 T3 when they could be getting a 1d body.  Sure... finding a reasonable kit lens isn't super easy... but I originally spent $462 on my first slr and 2 lenses... so maybe if I were to start all over again with the exact same amount of cash...

I would buy a used 1d mkii, a 50mm f/1.8 or a 40mm f/2.8 pancake and I would be a happy camper... because I basically used the XS and the 50mm for 90% of my shots (the 55-250 for the other 10%) and then when I ugpraded to the 60D I still used the 50mm for about 65% of my shots before I upgraded...

Honestly... I know the used 1d mkii market wasn't that soft 5 years ago... but I kinda wish that is what I did. 

A while back I bought my daughter an xti, then upgraded to an sl1, and then again to a t4i... but I'm mulling over selling the t4i for for a 1d... but probably not...

28
If you didn't have camera, would you still the pc?  If you didn't the camera, would you have softbox/umbrella/flash/tripod.  The software/external hard drive maybe are an accessory, but I could not live without the computer...

Where does the cost of the PC and its software load factor into the question?
Is the PC a part of the camera or an accessory?
 
I'd argue that since a digital camera is pretty much useless without a PC for file management and editing, the PC is part of the camera and skews the camera's cost much higher than the body alone.

Yet, obviously, a PC does so many more things than just support a camera.
And to counter that ^, my current PC as well as those of many others here on CR was purpose built to support cameras, everything else the PC is used for is frosting.
 
I'd not count a commodity PC's cost as part of the camera if it's the sort of PC that struggles with editing, color management and such, that'd be a basic home use machine that just gets by.
Purpose built, yeah, part of camera cost, but is purpose building and accessory in itself?

29
It is never a good idea to look how much money you sunk into your hobby. If you are a professional (defined as somebody who makes money from photography) then it does not matter.

Just enjoy it.

I have a reasonably accurate spreadsheet which tells me constantly how much I have in gear... so it is hard to avoid... but if I ever need to sell it all and buy a small car... I know I will have the cash to do so.

30
Many of us had humble beginnings... only to be addicted to L glass and full frame camera later down the road.  But I was looking at my pile of gear... and I was thinking that my umbrellas alone (I haven't ventured into softboxes yet) cost more than my first SLR, which was the more than adequate Canon XS. 

So I decided to do the math...

I purchased the XS with the kit lens and a medicore 75-300mm lens.  I sold the 75-300 for a $100 and the kit lens is worth $75... so that makes my XS initial cost $237.88.

And I'm looking through my purchases... and it was mostly lenses... I even upgraded the body before I picked up accessories.  I'm actually surprising myself.  I bought my first speedlite, a used 430ex ii for $112... but that seems more like a necessity than an accessory...

But if we count the speedlite, it would have been in September of 2013 when I went nuts and bought additional tripods, umbrellas, brackets, etc... The body was purchase in December of 09... so almost four years.

So in the last 1.5 years... I've gone nuts... monopod, tripod, backdrops and frame, wireless shutter release, umbrellas, bags upon bags upon bags, 3 600ex-rt and the st-e3-rt, a white balance card... it is all quite overwhelming.  So maybe I throttle back a little it... but it is interesting to look back and take stock of what I used to have... and what I have picked up along the way.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 183