I hope to be a first-time dad in 7 months; my heartfelt condolences to you and your family.
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.
Output suitable for :
Advertising – web, brochures, magazine and ideally posters to about AO size. Photo sharing & Contra deals
70% inside salon on tripod with good light – mostly close-ups. I have 3meters max to play with.
30% outside &/or on location, backstage and behind the scenes – hand held, mostly wider action or full length shots but also some head and shoulders too.
I would also love to here people's thoughts on which of these commonly mentioned and slightly contradictory statements would be more valid for my situation and budget?
1. All things being equal, a superior result will be achieved using a full frame camera.
2. It is better to skimp on the camera and get the best lenses one can afford
ultimately i just dont think it had a sensor performing the way it should.At the same time I do not find the sensor in my to be "terrible" at all. I am quite pleased with sharpness as well as overall image quality I get ..
Maybe you really got a sub-standard camera.
Canon won't be able to arouse any of my interest in their products until they fix their low ISO dynamic range.
Having no knowledge of Magic Lantern, what can I except this to offer me for someone who doesn't shoot video?
I have mostly been a Canon-guy, I have had several PowerShots, my Rebel XTi, and an s95, so I do really like Canon. I've never owned a Nikon, but I don't know what to make of this:
Do you all believe it?
you're right. nobody is going to buy it now because the guy they hired used canon and clearly that makes the d800 no good.
EF 100mm F/2.8 Macro USM. Understanding that one of the primary differences between the "L" & non-L version is the Hybrid IS and that I use a tripod and light boxes - do you feel that the "L" version will produce noticeably higher quality photographs?
would the additional range in F-stop be visually significant enough to entice me/you or would I have to make the jump to the F/1.2 to really get that benefit?
I was considering the EF 28-135 F/3.5-5.6 to cover a greater range for my walk-about lens - however I am open to suggestions.
canon will get f£$ked by interviews like this one, well all is dommed now, good luck guys im jumping to the Nikon boat.
That is all a bit misleading. A JPG is simply a converted RAW file, if you're getting two more stops of ISO performance in JPG, then you have to be getting that in RAW as well.
My question is: does it worth to a person who needs a camera like 60D this summer to wait for the 70D? and Is the speed of the Digic5 processor that much fast that makes people and photographers feel upgrading their old "Digic4-equipped" camera
Come on... Someone forgot his preproduction iphone in a bar... Sigma lost a lens... If there shows up a Detailed review in the next time its just viral advertisment