November 24, 2014, 09:03:02 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 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 ... 170
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D or wait for update...
« on: August 09, 2014, 07:16:48 PM »
Here's the formula I use everytime I make a purchase.

((purchase price)-(price eventually sold @))/years used.

If you buy a 7D now... you know the image quality, the low light performance, the fps, the good... the bad... If you buy a 7D now around $800 new or $700 used (in great condition), you are probably looking at a sale price of $500 in 4 years...

Plugging in the numbers (700-500)/4=$50 per year.  That's a steal of a price.

If you wait for the 7D mkii... you are looking a price (maybe between the 6D and the 5D... let's say $2200 because if you are an early adopter of the mkii, you will pay the early adopter premium).

After 4 years, the sales price will be around $1100.

So 2200-1100/4=$275 per year... for a camera with comparable image quality to the 70D...

I'd lean to the 7D... but maybe the mkii will be revolutionary... I suppose the possibility is to buy a used one... sell it if the mkii is crazy amazing... and only lose a $100 in the process... give or take.

Lenses / Re: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8
« on: August 08, 2014, 06:21:01 PM »
I should qualify that... shallower depth of field depending upon your subject and how close you get to them... obviously at 1.8 v 2.8 and the same framing... 1.8 will be shallower.

Lenses / Re: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8
« on: August 08, 2014, 06:16:14 PM »
No reason to get the 85 1.8 unless you want more background blur. Difference between 100L and 85 1.8 is nominal. You need to go 85L or 135L to see a real difference over the 100L in terms of background blur. 100L destroys the 85 1.8 in sharpness and color. I would take the 100L over the 85 1.8 every day of the week. 85L isn't overpriced, simply expensive. If I could only have one lens forever it would be the 85L, and it wouldn't even be that hard of a decision to make. My 2nd choice would be the 100L, as it so happens. Food for thought!

That's what i'm looking for... more near subject background blur... but slightly wider than 100L.

just get the 85 USM.  to answer your original question no there is no specific reason why you would get the 85 USM over the 100's not as a studio you can control the light so f 2.8 versus F 1.8 isn't going to make a difference..additionally the depth of field for the 100 L will be shallower than the 85 USM. but we do you have an inch it will not be satisfied with anything other than what you desire

Lenses / Re: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8
« on: August 08, 2014, 05:34:39 PM »

i'm not... i'm just giving my thought process and seeing what options are... he didn't recommend the 1.8 but said it would be better to save up for the 1.2...  i was just justifying why i didn't think the 1.2 would be a good choice as far as value and quality... thats all.  From what i've seen the 1.2, when it does get a great in focus shot, it is really hard to beat... but getting to that shot, for a working photographer on a budget, just doesn't seem worth it, dontcha think?

The 85L is a portrait lens... generally your subject isn't going to be running around... so auto focus should really be a non factor... shooting at f 1.2 is a challenge, but since minimum focusing distance is 3 ft... y are dealing with smaller dof with the 100L.

If you plan on shooting at f1.8, ok... but you can still quite easily miss your subject... if you are shooting at f8, it is hard to beat the 100L.


But to each his own.

Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: August 08, 2014, 12:27:03 PM »
The worst so far was when I brought home my current car which was a somewhat extravagant purchase.  I ended up saying it was her birthday present knowing full well that she'd never drive it.  She was all excited but as I thought - a few days of dealing with two seats, limited trunk space, and really harsh suspension took care of her desire to drive the car.  It's been my 'daily driver' ever since ;D

Don't keep us in suspense ... what did you buy?
A Porsche, but nothing fancy compared to other members of this forum.  I told my wife I was going to buy something sensible this time around like a Honda Accord or something...but I love cars 8)

I'd have to put my gut in the passenger seat effectively making the car a 1 seater.. 

FOR SALE Photo Equipment / For sale... stuff... all kinds of stuff...
« on: August 07, 2014, 09:38:41 PM »
I do sell lenses and bodies (mostly of the entry level variety) but at present, I only have stuff... I'll post pictures when I meander upstairs.

*New* Sandisk 16 GB SD card, class 10 - $10

*New* Lexar 16 GB SD card, class 10 - $10*New* a small SLR bag from Amazon basics - $10*New* small SLR by Case Logic -$10*New* Vivitar 58mm filter kit (UV, CPL, ND8) - $10 Lexar 8GB Compact Flash Memory Card Professional 800x UDMA 7 - $15. I upgraded to a 32GB 1200x card

Used Lexar 16GB SD card, class 10 - $10. Canon Branded bag - $10

Lenses / Re: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8
« on: August 07, 2014, 07:26:50 PM »
2.8 L

When I got my 70-200 mkii, I sold my 100L assuming that it was redundant... enough at least. I then bought an 85 1.8.  I liked the 85, but it has 3ft min focusing distance... and that was problematic  because I didn't want to be 3 ft from my new born daughter. 

So I bought the 100L again because it has a 1ft mfd and that made a huge difference... being able to engage with my subject...

The 85... was good... and many of the first photos of my daughter are taken with the 85... but the 100L is WOW.  When the focus was right (and we are dealing with shallow depth of fields and a little pain in the butt that is constantly moving), the eyes were just as sharp as can be... I can see the umbrella clear as day in the catchlight...

So I lean towards the 100L for portaits... yes it can be too sharp... but i just soften that up in post. 

As for the bokeh... I like the 100L... I acknowledge the 85L is better... but I'm not sure I would say the 85 usm is better.



Gear nerds will wish for better IQ and DR.  Casual users won'y, and that is the vast majority of the entry level market.  DR really only makes a difference for post processing - and yeah, how many causal users actually do any post processing?  If they do, are they shooting in RAW?    I'd dare say that most entry level users are shooting in jpeg, have 1 memory card that never leaves the camera.  Connectivity will be the thing that breathes life into the market.  I'd look for wifi, and simple file sharing (either through better phone to camera action, or direct from camera!) to be in rebels.  dual Pixel will trickle both up and down - and IQ and DR will follow, but in a trickle down manner.  New sensors aren't being made directly for rebels, the new tech will be in the pro bodies first.  We may see some of that in the 7d2.  But any of this tech is most liekly being designed with FF sensors in mind first!

Either way, I know we geeks would love to think that everyone values the same stuff as we do, but in reality - we geeks are the minority.

Even when it comes to pro shooting - like weddings - how many times are the crisp, post shot gets overlooked by the client in favor of a slightly out of focus/ overexposed/ poorly composed candid of the bride and groom laughing, or a hug...sometimes emotion trumps IQ and technical correctness!

I dare say I'm a reasonably seasoned photographer at the moment, but when I first got my xs I shot in aperture priority after a month...

I probably didn't post process until after a year or so... and I didn't start shooting in raw until three years in...

Off camera flash a few months after...

Backgrounds shortly thereafter...

Dynamic range STILL ISN'T AN ISSUE FOR ME... though I'll cheat and use hdr if the lighting is a real challenge.

My point was adding more & more features is not what is going to advance or maintain DSLR camera sales the market is already confusing to many and even basic point & shoot cameras offer manual, shutter priorty, aperture priority, programmed & full auto. My point is the key to survival will be better image quality and the weakness currently is dynamic range 12-14 stops is well below the human eye, and streamlining products.

Already car companies are looking to lower the number of variants on models because now they have confused car buyers just look at VW group, BMW etc. whereas Apple are hugely successful selling two versions of the iPhone.

That reminds me of Silicon Valley... when they are having the discussion about lessor formats winning out... like beta max over vhs... I forget what example they used... but I dare say it was funny.

Mark my words: the next Rebel will feature an 8-12 mp rear-facing camera for taking selfies while taking portraits of others.  "This is what I look like when I'm taking photos!"

There appears to be no cute shorthand or portmanteau for "photos one has taken of another person."  Othersies?  Someday we will have to have a word for it.

We kinda do it now... with our thread... photos of other photographes.

In the end of the day we want sharp, naturally saturated as possible photographs. Why are smartphones taking over? partially because they are simple to use not stuffed full of menus Canon & Nikon et al. need to go back to basics with a DSLR at the entry level. Yes have programmed & then just manual leave everything else out, minimise the buttons and major on composition, lighting etc.

In the middle add more features for serious amateurs and then finally an all singing all dancing professional camera. Job done. Think AT-1 / AE-1, A-1 & F1 and drop APS-C then its simply EF lenses.  Everything else is a complication.

I think people think they are going to get better... so they want the bells and whistles there... how often have we heard... I didn't know my camera could do that... so... yeah.  Oh and my second point is that people never do get really proficient... so they don't have to be there.. but as a consumer you want to know they are stuffed to the gills because they think they will take the time to learn...

I'm going to throw in the Canon 1.4 mkii... get it used... get it cheap... and it works beautifully.

I didn't pay attention to this announcement in April, but recently I bought a second hand Canon 24mm f/2.8 to get a taste for 24mm primes, and... fell in love with it. And now I want more!
Congrats and welcome to the 24mm fan club :)  It's my favorite which might explain the four lenses I own that cover this focal length which could be just a bit excessive...

Not to be a dissenter... but 24mm hasn't appealed to me at all.  Mind you, I've only shot at f4... so maybe at wider aperture it looks better... when I do use 24, I think... probably could go wider... I can't imagine having a prime lenses at 24... and I'm saying this with all due respect...

Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: August 04, 2014, 02:13:03 PM »
While it's a much-debated comparison (and I'm not sure there's any definitive answer), 180º sounds far wider than the usual human field of vision. Stare straight ahead, don't move your eyes and head, move your hands apart until they disappear. For me it seems not much more than 90-100º.

That's interesting :). Some say that 99% of what we see is produced by brain. Everyone's brain developed a bit differently, we are all unique. So, we don't have to agree on one number here :).
How wide can you see with one eye, while staring straight ahead? From center to the edge. I think it is ~85º. We can't be that much different. Tell me it's at least 70º :).

Yeah, 85º seems right for each eye alone. Since they overlap a lot, the two together can't be 180º then, right? Even if they didn't overlap at all, it would come to only 170º.

We need a circle to put it heads into... it isn't 180, but it isn't only 85 degrees per eye. 

Ok do a rudimentary test while in here in the bathroom stall... with motion, which is current than without motion.

Right eye... looking straight ahead... I have around 155 degrees of vision... looking straight ahead...

Ditto the left. 

No it isn't all in focus, but I can see what is too the right and left.

Provided my total angle of vision is 170 degrees, that means there is 20ish degrees that isn't over lapped when looking straight ahead.

Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: August 03, 2014, 02:57:44 PM »
I think that human vision is closer to 10mm really, a lot wider than 40mm.
If not, then maybe I'm not human :o.

Around 80mm, what I see in the viewfinder is the same size as what I see in my other eye... but in regards to my angle... I almost have 180 degrees of coverage... so I think that makes me more of a herbivore than a carnivore...

Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 ... 170