October 22, 2014, 09:52:34 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 - V8Beast

Pages: 1 ... 53 54 [55] 56 57 ... 68
I thought I read somewhere that you can trigger the shutter remotely with the new 600EX/STE3 combo. For instance, with the ST-E3 mounted on the body, I believe you can trigger the shutter on the camera via radio with a 600EX. Can anyone confirm or refute this? I really like the Odins, but this feature would be a nice perk. 

EOS Bodies / Re: 5DM3 HDR Article
« on: March 15, 2012, 07:07:06 PM »
I for one have forayed into RAW but as stated previously, don't have the time or ambition ATM to bother... JPEG works and my clients have all been exceptionally happy.  JPEG has paid for all my cameras to date so to dismiss it because it's slightly lacking would make me an idiot...  horses for courses.

I'm in the same boat. I know people like to go poopoo on jpegs, but if that's what a client asks for, that's what I'm going to give them. Unless they specifically ask for raw or TIFF files, or I'm shooting something that I know will need substantial manipulation in post processing, jpegs suffice for my needs most of the time. IMHO, jpegs still offer far more latitude that what was possible in the days of film. I completely understand the reasoning for shooting raw if you need to extract every last pixel of detail and produce images at a very high level, but too often I see it used as a crutch for poor technique.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5DM3 HDR Article
« on: March 15, 2012, 07:01:29 PM »
Wow, those samples look terrible, but then again I hate HDR. Hopefully the feature will be of more merit when in practice in the hands of those that take a more tasteful approach to HDR.
The landscape/water picture looked pretty cool to me.  I think I'm one of the rare guys that actually likes HDR.

I'm disappointed that so many of the samples were of a wedding dress near marble columns. All my favorite HDR images involve the landscapes, city scapes, etc.  I bet I'm not alone in thinking, "It would be nice if this camera put those shots in my hands."

Dont get me wrong i absolutly love HDR just not the cookie cutter tonemapped type :D

+1 I like the type of HDR where it lookd like s standard picture except fr the DR is clearly much greater - where thetr is detail in blacks and whites

Me too. I just don't like images that look like cartoons.

I'm sure if you guys put the Queen on your money, all will be forgiven.  ;D

Americans would be more than up for this notion once Kate Middleton takes the thrown, but aren't there two old hags in line in front of her ;D?

While you two ladies go at it, I have another social observation that's troubled me for quite some time. Why is it that the Brits and Aussies, or Brits and South Africans for that matter, seem to have a closer kinship that with we Americans? Aren't we all products of Mother England :)?

You took our tea - and we haven't forgiven you yet. One day you will come grovelling back and beg us to teach you cricket  ;D ;D ;D

Who needs cricket? Just send over Naomi Watts and Sienna Miller, and my fellow countrymen and I will be happy campers. We'll even ship Russell Brand back to the U.K. as part of the deal  :D


oh yeah the aussie team is really hitting their straps and coming together nicely there is some seriously good talent in the aussie side now and that last test series was wonderfull to watch especially since the ashes debacle as brian so kindly pointed out :P

It is only the winning you remember, I had 30 years of failure to forget :D

yeah but one of your supermodels took our best spinner and turned him into a handbag!
OK you win! :P

She was just an average English girl. We are going to send 15 stunners over just before the next ashes match to emasculate the Aus team :)  We will need every bit of help we can for our own handbags. Perhaps we can import some more players from South Africa :D

While you two ladies go at it, I have another social observation that's troubled me for quite some time. Why is it that the Brits and Aussies, or Brits and South Africans for that matter, seem to have a closer kinship that with we Americans? Aren't we all products of Mother England :)?

Oh boy, not the 7D Gestapo! Unless you wanted to get smited into oblivion, don't you dare even hinting that there might be some advantages in IQ of a full-frame sensor over a crop.

Here's a hint: the problem's not with the opinion (they're like arseholes - everybody's got one), it's the pompous, condescending, "I-know-better-than-you", elitist, arrogant way it's usually presented.

Smite away...

Brian was right. I started with the 7D Gestapo thing as a light hearted joke. I'm a little sarcastic by nature and it's not easy to detect tone over the net. We (myself included) all have to learn not to take the internet too seriously.

I ran into a Medium Format MI-6 agent at the pub the other day. He was surprisingly polite and well-mannered.

EOS Bodies / Megapixel wars: Where do we go from here?
« on: March 15, 2012, 04:04:10 PM »
First off, this isn't another 5DIII vs. D800 debate. It's just that megapixels seems to be a hot topic lately, so I stared pondering the practical advantages of resolution. Perhaps I'm more fortunate than others, because while many have expressed the need to print 30x20 enlargements, I don't. For editorial work, a typical two-page spread measures 16x10, and there are only one or two of those per story layout.

In the early days of digital, resolution was a huge factor. The 8 megapixel 20D was the first affordable body that could be interpolated up to produce file quality sufficient for a two-page spread. The next quantum leap came with the 1DsII, which produced gorgeous 17x11 files at 300 dpi. Since then, however, the 21 mp files from the 1DsIII and 5DII have been somewhat under-utilized in the editorial world. Larger files certainly give art directors more flexibility for layouts and cropping, but the instances where you need to crop excessively  or turn a horizontal composition into a vertical (or vice-versa) are few and far between. Uploading 21 mp TIFF files onto a publisher's FTP server when you're on a tight deadline can get quite cumbersome as well. Don't get me wrong. I'll take as many megapixels as a manufacturer will give me, but the current lineup of bodies certainly offer more than enough for my needs. 

So, where do camera manufacturers go from here? The market is in an interesting position right now where the megapixel count of point-and-shoots is approaching that of flagship bodies, and a $500 T2i puts out as much resolution as Canon's $6,800 1Dx. How's a first-time DSLR buyer, who equates overall image quality to megapixel count, supposed to make sense of this?

At the prosumer level, I suppose the reception of the 5DIII and D800 will give an indication of the real-world value of ever-increasing resolution. Obviously, the D800 has proven that you can have phenomenal resolution and phenomenally low noise. At the APS-C level, however, I'm curious to see how things pan out. It looks like we're well on our way to having 30-plus mp sensors on crop bodies, primarily for marketing purposes. Are there ever going to be ad campaigns to attempt to educate consumers of the other factors affecting IQ and overall camera useful, or will manufacturers perpetuate the strategy of cramming as many megapixels on a tiny sensor as possible?

EOS Bodies / Re: D4 vs D800 vs 5D mk III: ISO 100 & 12800........
« on: March 15, 2012, 03:32:36 PM »
So what we have here are three outstanding cameras that exceed the abilities of many, many photographers. What's new :)?

If your looking purely on image quality, it may or may not be worth your upgrade, but as the overall camera goes, it's almost in a different class compared to the 5d2, which I'm intrigued with.

Very true. IQ aside, the dual card slots, weather sealing, and vastly improved AF and FPS make is a much more versatile tool, and much better suited for professional use. IMHO, the 5D line has been an experiment in progress for Canon. If you think back to 2005 when the 5DC was announced, it was a game changer. Full-frame bodies were the holy grail of DSLRs back then, and the only option up until that point were $7-$8K 1-series bodies. Full-frame bodies were  big bucks, bulky and simply inaccessible for most photogs. No one dreamed the day would ever come when you could buy a small-form, full-frame body for $3,300. It was a stunning move to say the least.

That said, I think Canon has always viewed the 5D line as a consumer grade product even up until the MKII, and the build quality and feature set has reflected this sentiment. Perhaps Canon underestimated how popular the 5D line would prove to be, but I think the number of 5Ds used professionally far exceeded its expectations. As such, Canon has integrated many pro-grade features into the 5DIII that people have been demanding for a long time.

Sure, Nikon has developed an amazing camera in the D800 for $500 less - and I'm very grateful that competition like this puts pressure on Canon to up its game - but that doesn't change the fact that the 5DIII has many improved features over it's predecessor that I'll put to great use on every single shoot.

But it's funny, because when my jaw drops at an amazing image in the galleries on fredmiranda.com, I don't start drilling down to the pixel level to figure out why. I think, "Amazing light, great composition, outstanding quality." I don't think, "Oh, that must have been taken by Nikon or Canon" but instead, "Why is that photographer so much better than I am?"

Precisely. I just don't see either of these bodies giving their handlers a big enough edge over the other where the tech specs would be what separates a mediocre image from a great image.

For all the "switchers" out there (or pretend switchers), I can't fathom that you would dump your glass and familiarity with a UI to make a change from Canon to Nikon (or vice-versa), when both tools look to by quite exceptional.

I'm guilty of this myself, as I pre-ordered a D800 when the rumor mill was swirling with some very underwhelming 5DIII specs. Then Canon shocked me by putting a near-1Dx caliber AF system and a 6 FPS burst rate in the 5DIII, addressing my two biggest gripes with the 5DII. The dual card slots, weather sealing, and improved ISO are just icing on the cake. Before the 5DIII was announced, I thought the D800 would blow it out of the weeds. However, after seeing some real sample pics between the two, the difference in IQ between them is so  insignificant for my shooting needs that I'm reconsidering my plans to test both bodies out side by side, and may just cancel my D800 order outright. My 5DIII pre-order is probably going to show up on my doorstep first anyway :)

For this round of the mid-range DSLR war, I'll concede that Nikon appears to have delivered the overall winner. Even so, the D800's advantages aren't that substantial for my style of shooting and Nikon hasn't distanced itself enough from Canon to put up with the hassle of switching systems,   

EOS Bodies / Re: 5DM3 HDR Article
« on: March 14, 2012, 10:06:42 PM »
Wow, those samples look terrible, but then again I hate HDR. Hopefully the feature will be of more merit when in practice in the hands of those that take a more tasteful approach to HDR.

EOS Bodies / Here we go again: 5DIII vs. D800 raw files head-to-head
« on: March 14, 2012, 07:46:18 PM »
Now we finally have a somewhat scientific side-by-side comparison of the raw files from both bodies, courtesy of Imaging Resource.

5DIII samples:

D800 samples:

To make this comparo as precise as possible, I thought it made sense to compare the Nikons NEF files with no noise reduction applied to the Canon's CR2 files. Truthfully, I had a very hard time distinguishing the the 5DIII images from the D800 images. The noise, DR, and overall IQ are just so freakin' close. Maybe the 5DIII starts to edge ahead after ISO 3200, but it is the slightest of advantages. I tried to compare them at 51,200 and 102,400 as well, but IR must have forgotten to test the D800 at those ISO speeds   ;D 

DR wise, there is a noticeable advantage in the Nikon's shadow details, but again, it's only the slightest of advantages. Call me crazy, but I actually think the extra DR makes the Nikon's files look flatter. I also prefer the 5DIII's color reproduction, and the files look a tad sharper granted that might be attributable to the lenses. On a purely subjective level, to me the 5DIII's files just look better, but again, under identical shooting situations the two cameras produce nearly identical images. 

After pixel peeping for about an hour, it really put into perspective what terrific tools each of these bodies are for creating fantastic art. It also put into perspective how silly it is to argue about the pros and cons of each body when it requires an hour of pixel peeping to attempt to distinguish any differences in IQ between them.

That's just my worthless opinion. Discuss :)

EOS Bodies / Re: I touched it, and it was awesome!!!
« on: March 14, 2012, 04:44:30 PM »
Your title reminds me of what my wife said to her friends after our first date  :D

Now this is the way to thread jack! LMAO! +1 for creativity  :P

I didn't mean to thread jack. There's just been so much tensions on here lately over the 5DIII/D800 debate that I wanted to try to lighten the mood  :)

EOS Bodies / Re: I touched it, and it was awesome!!!
« on: March 14, 2012, 03:38:36 PM »
Your title reminds me of what my wife said to her friends after our first date  :D

That's not what she told me.   ;)

What are you talking about? I thought we were there together?

Pages: 1 ... 53 54 [55] 56 57 ... 68