September 22, 2014, 10:39:11 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 ... 39 40 [41] 42 43 ... 157
601
Photography Technique / Re: Missed opportunity
« on: April 08, 2014, 11:09:04 PM »
"Still a nice memory recorded. "

When photographers (and I am not saying that you are one just using your post as an example) say "nice memory" I want to drive to their house and throw a Nikon through their window... Detest that phrase..

Just saying is all...

also nice snapshot for 1/125

John

funny....i kinda like the phrase. 8)

I agree, and I'll take it one step further: in the vast majority of cases, "nice memory" photos will far outlast  "art" photos.  All but a handful of "art" photos will die soon after the photographer, if not before, while memory photos live on.  Abstract photos, in particular, have a very short shelf-life.  Think of photos of significant people or events of the 1800's: in most cases, the image quality is crap, and the posed shots are often laughable by today's standards.  It's their historic value that breathes life into them. 

There are certainly a few art photos that still give me a "wow" reaction, but I'll generally take a good (not great) memory photo over "art," so long as it comes with a good story.

I try to take "art" photos, as does nearly every photographer.  I am well-aware, however, that these photos are primarily for my own enjoyment, and there may be no one else who finds them the least bit interesting.

Is "art" code for "dick pics"... because yes... I agree 100% with your above statement.

602
Lenses / Re: Wait for Sigma 50mm Art or purchase Canon 135 f2L.
« on: April 08, 2014, 11:07:02 PM »
50mm 1.4 < 135L 2.0 for most portraits.

50mm > 135L for everything else.

I'd say the 135L is better for indoor sports photography... and you could definitely get some quality images outdoors as well... but I guess we can see how the AF system holds up. 

Actually for outdoor sports... I wouldn't want to get too close and the 50 would be too close for comfort... so... but that is a small segment of your argument... and I agree... mostly... except for the canon 50's which I don't care for wide open... well... not the L... but I haven't used that one.

603
Photography Technique / Re: Missed opportunity
« on: April 08, 2014, 10:52:26 PM »
I'd probably start by buying a hummingbird feeder.  I know that's cheating... but it is probably easier to entice them to come to you rather than you go and find them.  Then when I have regulars... I would set up a dual off camera flash using hss and obviously flash modifiers... and I'd shoot with the 135L... or if they fly away if you get to close, a 200 f/2.8, and shoot at 1/2500 which I believe there would still be a little bit of blur, or 1/6000 for no blur... but I think you want blur... and an aperture of f/4.  Because you are running ettl through the satellite flashes... you can shoot at f/8 and they will compensate... which is a real plus.  Iso... 160. 

604
Lenses / Re: Wait for Sigma 50mm Art or purchase Canon 135 f2L.
« on: April 08, 2014, 06:39:45 PM »
If money is no obstacle, buy 135mm L now, and at the end of the year to buy Sigma 50mm Art with discounted price.

Agreed... but if you buy it used, you might not lose any money.  I bought it for $650ish... and sold it $840ish... That is obviously atypical... but if you buy it for $850... you can probably sell it for $850.

JD, you live in some parallel universe (read: you are incredibly resourceful with second hand lens buying and selling).
Wish I had your skills in getting me a 35L...  :)

I had a chance to buy a 35L for $900... but the new 35 art just came out and I wasn't sure what I wanted to do.  I regret that one... Then last December I had a chance at a 35 art for $700... and I didn't pull the trigger.  There's something about the 35's that just cause me waffle.


605
Lenses / Re: Wait for Sigma 50mm Art or purchase Canon 135 f2L.
« on: April 08, 2014, 06:05:48 PM »
If money is no obstacle, buy 135mm L now, and at the end of the year to buy Sigma 50mm Art with discounted price.

Agreed... but if you buy it used, you might not lose any money.  I bought it for $650ish... and sold it $840ish... That is obviously atypical... but if you buy it for $850... you can probably sell it for $850. 

606
Lenses / Re: Wait for Sigma 50mm Art or purchase Canon 135 f2L.
« on: April 08, 2014, 06:03:14 PM »
If I could only choose one lens to do photography with, it would most likely be a 50mm f/1.4, and ideally the upcoming 50mm f/1.4 ART.

However, the truth is I am blessed to be able to choose any lenses I want to. And the fact is that I have used the current Canon 50mm f/1.4 almost never in the past three years, despite shooting half a million photos each year of a wide range of subject matter. There is simply something more effective for almost every niche and specific photographic circumstance than the 50mm.

When I look at the lens lineup that you have right now, I believe that the 135mm f/2L will add much more photographic power to you than would the purchase of a 50mm f/1.4, even the ART. So the 135mm f/2L is my strong recommendation to you, especially given your penchant for portraits.

In fairness to the 50mm focal length... the current canon 50mm f/1.4 isn't good wide open... and I used to shoot it only at f/2.8 and the like... so at that range and that aperture... it is boring.  The bokeh is ok... but it isn't as good as the 50L (per Dylan).  So we all know that canon 50 f/1.4 isn't SPECIAL (though it could be special to some), but that really shouldn't completely eliminate all 50's thereafter. 

607
Lenses / Re: Wait for Sigma 50mm Art or purchase Canon 135 f2L.
« on: April 08, 2014, 05:51:57 PM »
You forgot the portrait KING, Canon 85L II

Last night I dreamt of discovering I owned an 85L. It was pretty sweet until I woke up  :'(

Can anyone offer any advice to help me seal the deal ?

Just got the 135L and love it already. If you have a crop sensor camera, you should probably avoid the 135mm.
In any case, shouldn't you wait until the lens is announced (along with the price)?

Envy you for the 35L by the way, it is a sweet focal length/aperture combination.

I had a dream like that once... it wasn't a 85L... but it was a 5D mkiii... I was soooo happy.  It was such a great surprise... and then I realized it was a dream... and I didn't care... I was going to embrace the fantasy... then I woke up... kinda happy still and finally disappointed.

As for the 50 v. the 135L... I'd wait until you hear about the bokeh.  From other 50's... I have come to the impression that @ that focal length, it is balance between bokeh and sharpness... and with the Sigma being so sharp... it might... might have a pleasing magic bokeh... But I know the 135L DOES have a magic bokeh... so if I were to suggest going with one over the other at this exact moment... I'd lean 135L... which I did own... but not for nearly that long.

609
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Should I buy 6d or 5MkIII?
« on: April 07, 2014, 11:08:23 PM »
Wow - thanks for all the great feedback - much appreciated.

I'm leaning towards the 6d with the Canon 16-35mm UWA using Aperature for post editing. I've read tons to support the extra cost over the 17-40mm is well worth the investment. The quality of pics are used primarily for online marketing but much more high res than for MLS purposes. Pics have to be uploaded in high res for full screen slideshows.

Is there a specific uv filter that will give a good all round use for interior and exterior shots to suit stills of rooms?

Thanks again!

For real estate shooting f8 and smaller, there is absolutely zero benefit of the 16-35 over the 17-40, indeed the 17-40 has a better zoom range as 35-40 is more useful than 16-17, trust me on this one, the 17-40 is a better lens for you (and me).

Even full sized tv screens are only 2 and a bit MP, a computer screen a bit more. A 4K screen, which almost nobody has is a mere 8MP, so keep perspective on what you actually need IQ wise, these forums do have a lot of people very gear and ultimate IQ orientated, overkill is expensive!

As for the software, I got on much better with Lightroom than Aperture, and everybody that makes imaging software plugins makes a version for Adobe, whereas Apple and independent developers seem to let Aperture slide too often.

Depending on the results you are after Aperture and Lightroom might not give you the capabilities you need, if you link to some images you would like to achieve I'll tell you what techniques were used to do it, this will help you plan your overall strategy.

I don't use UV filters, with such varying light sources encountered in real estate, and the fact that it is not a demanding climate (dust, dirt, ran, sea spray etc) they can only diminish your output. A polarizer can be a very useful filter though for controlling reflections and glare on wood floors, counter tops etc.

I was reading the 4K sony post earlier with the 12mp camera... and I believe they were saying is that 4K=12mp because it was a 1:1 ratio... pixel for pixel. 

I don't care.. but I want to make sure it is right before I lock 12 MP = 4K before I lock it into my memory.

610
Some people have very good reasons for not linking to their work. Some people just don't want to. Some people are camera and gear collectors and aficionados, and they might very well not have any images they'd like to link to, and as far as I am concerned there is nothing wrong with that. Many people primarily shoot their family and friends and don't want those types of images posted on open sites. Many people don't have cohesive bodies of images that they'd like to share, especially if they are mixed in with thousands they wouldn't like to share.

There are many reasons why people don't link to images and galleries, and that is all good with me especially as this is primarily a Canon rumours and gear orientated forum website.

I don't link my work because it isn't special.  It is good.... but it is derivative of what has come before... good portraiture... good sports... etc... but nothing I really feel proud of... which I hope is simply me being the biggest critic of my own work rather than me actually being incredibly mediocre. 

611
uggg...maybe i should not reply to things when i haven't read all 11 pages...uggg...11 pages....I want to sue all of you now!.....
Strange, how does it show 11 pages for you?  It only shows 4 pages for me.   ???

Regardless of pages, it is a loooong thread.  I'm a little surprised that it is still on the leader board after all this time.  Just goes to show how attracted most people are to soap operas vs. geeky tech shows.   ;)

Your display settings are probably different.  Maybe 50 posts per page versus 15...

I don't think this is a soap opera... feels more like a public stoning.

612
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Should I buy 6d or 5MkIII?
« on: April 07, 2014, 10:16:49 PM »
Wow - thanks for all the great feedback - much appreciated.

I'm leaning towards the 6d with the Canon 16-35mm UWA using Aperature for post editing. I've read tons to support the extra cost over the 17-40mm is well worth the investment. The quality of pics are used primarily for online marketing but much more high res than for MLS purposes. Pics have to be uploaded in high res for full screen slideshows.

Is there a specific uv filter that will give a good all round use for interior and exterior shots to suit stills of rooms?

Thanks again!

I use hoods rather than uv filters... and the 16-35 comes with a hood... You might want to onsider a cpl filter for exterior shots... but I wouldn't suggest a UV... though others may suggest otherwise...

613
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Not sure which Canon body to get
« on: April 07, 2014, 09:28:26 PM »
Hi JD.
I think there is at least one person on here that can prove the reverse of that statement, a poor photographer can get lesser results using adequate gear! I am of course talking about myself!  ::)
Struggling to become a better photographer.

Cheers Graham.


The fact of the matter is that a good photographer can get more then adequate results using lessor gear... and while the 6D is probably the best option, money wasn't described as a constraint.

When I first took up golf... I had a crap set I bought for $100... I played the crap out of the clubs and I did pretty well with a patchwork set.  I'd compare that with my XS and 50mm f/1.8.

After a few years... I upgraded my clubs to a $300 driver (which was 15 years ago... so after inflation... $500ish) and a set of irons from Taylormade and a putter and wedges...

I wanted the gear not to be the reason I had a crappy shot... So... my 5D mkiii and lenses are comparable to that.  When I screw up a shot... I KNOW I'M TO BLAME.  It sucks... I liked when it was my XS or 60D that were the problem.

614
Lenses / Re: Which lense now?
« on: April 07, 2014, 08:40:43 PM »
Why not the 18-135 stm?  Take advantage of both the dual pixel functionality, the touch screen, and the STM lens. 

615
Lenses / Re: Which lense now?
« on: April 07, 2014, 08:38:06 PM »
I'm not going to be much help on this one... but I have the 24-105L and I use it for video.  Especially hand held, the IS helps a bunch, and it is light, so the 70-200 is going to be too heavy...


Pages: 1 ... 39 40 [41] 42 43 ... 157