April 16, 2014, 08:11:53 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 - jdramirez

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 121
241
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 25, 2014, 03:00:00 PM »


The philosophy down here is buy better glass before upgrading the body.

Roger Machin, head of Canon South Africa gave me that advise.

I heard that too long time ago... but did I listen... nah.  I had my heart set pin the 60d and because of my lack of glass I always used my 50 f1.8.  The funny thing is that when I upgraded to the f1.4, I never used it because it wasn't the best lens in my arsenal.

Now... all my lenses fight for time on my body & I feel sad when I have to leave one behind.

242
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 25, 2014, 12:26:03 PM »
But would anyone crop boobs?

Shockingly yes.  I had a friend who had them reduced and it felt like she got a gift from good and then proceeded to return them for store credit.

The wife also had a friend who reduced, or cropped if you will, and I got to see them and I was unimpressed.  Just... seems sad looking. 

And the sister in law... but I'm not going to talk about that.

243
Lenses / Re: Hard choice the 50 1.4 or 85 1.8
« on: February 25, 2014, 10:17:01 AM »
Well... things changed a bit... I've gotten a bigger bonus at work then expected. So now it will be bothe the 50 and the 85, and selling the 40 later.

But I'll get the 85 first :)

good idea with good new 50's coming soon i would not bother with any current 50
and also consider the sigma 85 f1.4 its closer in performance to the 85 1.2L than the 1.8 if you can stretch the extra $

I saw the rave reviews about the sigma 85 but I've stayed away from it because of the auto focus issues that have plagued the other lenses in the sigma line... any idea if the 85. Is better in that regard?

244
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 25, 2014, 10:04:55 AM »
First and foremost should be the subject being interesting... then maybe being enhanced.. but just like boobs... going from an a cup to a c cup is good.... a to a double f... just kinda weird.
Nice analogy - LOL - and I feel the same way about HDR and over saturation.

Can we start a thread called: double f stops or bigger.

245
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 25, 2014, 09:52:36 AM »
I don't want to muddy the waters here, but it sounds like this conversation is heading towards artistic expression versus technical know how... and I would just like to say... high dynamic range. 

I see so many boring photos that have been hdr'd with crazy color saturation and extreme contact that in no way shape or form Lloyds normal. 

I played with it for a while and I'll use it periodically if I need the added dynamic range because the lighting circumstance is difficult to contend with... but I stopped making the mundane psychedelic.

First and foremost should be the subject being interesting... then maybe being enhanced.. but just like boobs... going from an a cup to a c cup is good.... a to a double f... just kinda weird.

If you can take amazing pictures, then that makes you a photographer. Post-processing makes you an editor, and although thats what it takes to be photographer nowadays i.e. be both photographer & editor... It wasn't like that back in the day. And you have to agree...

Nope. Don't have to agree.

A photograph is a thing. The person who makes the thing is a photograph-er. The thing is not made until the image captured by the camera is made visible on the paper or other viewing surface. This "making" consists of the entire process from choosing/arranging/lighting the subject, adjusting/aiming/operating the camera and doing what one will to get it onto the paper. Ansel has already been mentioned as an example of a "back in the day" photograph-er who certainly made use of his dark room, his enlarger, and whatever other tools he chose, to create his "art". The photographs thusly made have  been greatly admired by many, and few of the admirers fail to call him a "photographer", rather than an "editor". (Ansel the dodger/burner?)

Adams and the numerous other "photographers" one could mention as widely recognized and acclaimed, used the tools available to them in their time, just as we do today. I don't doubt that they would envy us our new tools.

It hardly seems appropriate to try to differentiate a carpenter from a measurer, a sawer or a hammerer. Perhaps we should further distinguish him as a laser level technician, an adhesives  applier, or a plumb(vs. apple)-bobber.

Are we having fun yet?  :-)

Larry - I need to totally disagree with you. Photography is the skill of producing photographs. There is a big difference between a photograph and digital picture.  "digital art" produces stunning pictures - which more often then not do NOT reflect anything real.

Photography as I understand it - is about recording a real moment or object in the most accurate way.

Yes I understand that some tweaks can be allowed - but these should be minor and unnoticeable. The "photo" should remain something real that the photographer saw. Photography is about VISION - NOT about enhanced photoshop / lightroom skills.

My 2 cents

Your understanding, as per my understanding, is totally wrong. Will find a photo I saw yesterday on this forum on a TS lens which was beautiful and far from accurate. Will find it and post next so you can see better.

246
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 09:09:28 PM »
Hi everybody  :)

So as I move into my 3rd year of photography, I find my 500D isn't able to help my take my photography to the next level and its beginning to feel like my L series lenses are begging to shoot on a full frame body.

I've never had the chance to shoot full frame so most of what I know is pure theory derived from reading reviews etc online.

With South Africa's economy in a bit of trouble, I can get a hardly used 5D mkii for a reasonable price so I'm considering taking that.

Just what can I expect in terms of image quality and noise performance? Is the IQ of a full frame substantially better than a crops? Will I be able to take relatively noise free images at say ISO 3200?

The reviews seem to indicate that the native system for L series glass is full frame. Does this mean that I will experience a dramatic improvement in IQ?

The more I read, it seems that crop bodies have a singular advantage over full frame and that is the increase in focal length.

Can you guys chip in and throw some opinions and facts my way please?

Thanks in advance everybody.

You will love full frame cameras, but you won't like how much the lenses cost.

There are some value ef lenses... but if you get a nice body, it is just a waste to put on mediocre lenses. 

Even then... if you just go with primes like the 40mm, 35 f2 is, 100 f2... you can get by.

not to mention the decent 3rd party options...

Speak of the devil and he'll try and sell you a tamron.  Kidding... I swear.

247
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 09:02:42 PM »
Hi everybody  :)

So as I move into my 3rd year of photography, I find my 500D isn't able to help my take my photography to the next level and its beginning to feel like my L series lenses are begging to shoot on a full frame body.

I've never had the chance to shoot full frame so most of what I know is pure theory derived from reading reviews etc online.

With South Africa's economy in a bit of trouble, I can get a hardly used 5D mkii for a reasonable price so I'm considering taking that.

Just what can I expect in terms of image quality and noise performance? Is the IQ of a full frame substantially better than a crops? Will I be able to take relatively noise free images at say ISO 3200?

The reviews seem to indicate that the native system for L series glass is full frame. Does this mean that I will experience a dramatic improvement in IQ?

The more I read, it seems that crop bodies have a singular advantage over full frame and that is the increase in focal length.

Can you guys chip in and throw some opinions and facts my way please?

Thanks in advance everybody.

You will love full frame cameras, but you won't like how much the lenses cost.

There are some value ef lenses... but if you get a nice body, it is just a waste to put on mediocre lenses. 

Even then... if you just go with primes like the 40mm, 35 f2 is, 100 f2... you can get by.

248
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 04:36:57 PM »
Those who think that an image should be perfect from the camera have clearly never worked with film. Negative film was all about the developing and printing. Those on this thread who call post processing 'editing' and not photography are way off the mark. Post processing ( aka developing and printing) has ways been an integral part of photography.

"But transparencies were straight from the camera"! Not so in the professional world. When I was in my teens and used to assist some pretty well known London photographers even transparencies were 'post processed'. Test strips were developed from a shoot, and then the developing process (generally time) was adjusted depending upon what the initial test clips had shown. Colour was added by duping; that is re photographing the transparency with selective colour. 

Processing is as much photography as firing the shutter; always has been.

I think what Stella is meaning is that as a photographer you can become complacent about exposure when always shooting RAW. There was a staunch advocate of shooting RAW on CR about six months ago, who I think has now left, and he stated that a full stop difference in exposure was neither here nor there. That's a mistake in my opinion. Nailing the optimum exposure for a scene makes for better IQ in the image - thank goodness. I hope that will continue.

I contend that the shroud of tourin was the first raw image... and that definitely was in need of post production.

249
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 04:35:04 PM »
Ansel Adams was known for saying "50 % of the creative process happens in the darkroom"

That was his pickup line at bars...

250
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 09:15:44 AM »
Typical photographer progression:  shoot JPG for a while...hear about the benefits of RAW, shoot JPG+RAW for a while, processing RAWs for a few 'select' images and keeping just JPGs...fully understand the benefits of RAW and switch to RAW only...wish you could go back and properly process some images for which you have only the JPG and regret not shooting RAW only from the start.
Ouch! that hurts ;D ... just like truth hurts ...oh, how I wish I shot RAW from the beginning ... but most of the time, one only learns from making mistakes. :-[

That was me to the tee... but I didn't have a program to read raw... so I give myself a pass.

251
Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: February 22, 2014, 10:54:06 PM »
If you start doing meth... your will probably care less about getting gear... then you will probably start selling off your gear to buy more meth... so that's one way to battle GAS.

252
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 22, 2014, 10:23:40 PM »
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

I so totally disagree.

I think he said that so that you are limited to just you and the camera. Zero Post-processing. If you can take amazing pictures, then that makes you a photographer. Post-processing makes you an editor, and although thats what it takes to be photographer nowadays i.e. be both photographer & editor... It wasn't like that back in the day. And you have to agree... Seldomly, do we all take good pictures anymore, we all take half-assed pictures then throw it in lightroom to correct it, then crop it so they frame it better and lastly do a bunch of touch ups to make it clean and/or artsy.

then why bother using auto focus.  Isn't that cheating?  How dare you allow the camera to follow your subject.  You should either find the plane at which you want to take the photo and wait for your subject to get there or try and track your quickly moving subject while turning the focus ring and then track him the old fashioned way all while getting in the proper position, finding the right angle, exposing correctly, and applying the rule of thirds.

Good lord.  This reminds me of the conversation about everyone should learn with film.  Film film film. 

Gear isn't everything... but to refuse to use the new technology to make ones job easier is just silly. 

253
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 22, 2014, 09:01:20 PM »
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

I so totally disagree.

I'm not sure about the whole jpeg issue... I shot in jpg for the first 3 or 4 years with an SLR because I didn't like the file size of raw and I didn't have a program that would read a raw file.  But in retrospect... I really like shooting in raw because of the added data and I feel as though I can bring out more of the shot than what a normal jpeg would be able to offer.  Sure over saturation is a risk or over contrasting...

254
Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: February 22, 2014, 08:58:20 PM »
This is old new... but I buy and sell gear all the time at a small profit which builds up.  The other day I noticed I had about $2000 to spend on gear.  Great... but what the hell do I want... so I have cash burning a hole in my pocket and few needs.  It is unsettling. 

255
Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: February 22, 2014, 01:30:12 PM »
When I had all I really needed I started buying stuff for my daughter.  Just go with the flow and buy for less than you can sell it for.  That way people are paying you to hold onto the gear.

Did you know ... Good, sensible practical advice counts for nothing when it comes to GAS?  ;D ;D ;D

Sometimes I just buy stuff with the knowledge that I'm going to sell it... but in the mean time I get to play with it.  I get to satisfy the urge to buy stuff... I get to play with new gear and when it sales, I get some extra money in my pocket to buy more stuff.

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 121