April 19, 2014, 09:42:05 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 - Grumbaki

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 18
If the image for this thread came from a document sourced from Canon, does Canon own the copyright to it and does this website have permission to reproduce it? I'm all for leaking information a la Snowden, but you need to be intelligent about how it is done. Another aspect of the Snowden issue is that all documents produced by the government are not covered by copyright as they're "owned" by the people - they're just subject to official secrets acts, etc - and can thus be reproduced freely without limit. That doesn't apply to documents produced and owned by corporations.

Sorry but that's a very poor legal argument and analogy.
Snowden docs were protected by defense statuses, something far more serious than copyright.
In most western country, the right to inform, even just for consumers rights, is superior to copyright.
Just to make a ludicrous point, if I patent murder, do I prevent you to blow the whistle as a witness? :D

Go on leaking as long as there is a point about it, you'll be fine.

Man up and Snowden the sh*t out of the documents.

Lenses / Re: Philosophical question about Sigma Lenses - Why?
« on: April 04, 2014, 11:54:03 AM »
despite all relevant comparison already mentioned, I think I'd point out the Sega story. Better make money with other companies than die trying to force your proprietary system on consumers. (before all the others 80's kids come down on me, I have to say I was a a Sega boy ;) )

Tripod (considering you are shooting aspc and will want night shots)
Bag (comfortable and carry on)
Memory cards (with practice you'll know you needs: ie for me it's roughly 4gb per day in average)
Batteries (at least one)
Battery grip (if your hands feel confortable on it, with the added bonus of the battery life)

That's the very core IMHO. Filters (specially polarizing) come next. That will be necessary for your trip f you want to go beyond snapshots.

As to the inevitable lenses.
1- Try the old method of "locking" a zoom into one focal lenght for a day and see if you like it. That may give you a taste for primes. Some are cheap and efficient (shorty forty comes in mind, 85 1.8, sigma 35 to some extend depending on your definition of Cheap)
2- Depending on your taste of photography and your finances, determine if you will upgrade your body in the not so distant future. If so, skip the mid range and aim straight for L glass. Glass before body is the name of the game.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dissuade me to get a Rolleiflex
« on: April 04, 2014, 08:41:36 AM »
@Tolusina: No worries. It's true that if I hadn't make my homework, Rolleis are a field for rip off due to the wide range of price. Sweet story about the grandpa!

@Sporgon: Yeah and I still say it because that's not really a useful expense but, as I can afford it, I struggle with a bad GAS.

@Don: Nice attempt. Time is actually my biggest constraint. Need to work quite a few hours to afford that beauty...

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dissuade me to get a Rolleiflex
« on: April 04, 2014, 05:16:42 AM »

Thanks but it's a bit "apple and oranges".

Because this is not a Canon item I'll give some context: 2.8F Planar in B condition go for 1.6k+, A is generally between 2.2 and 2.5K, truly mint or special serial numbers go for 3K+. Yeah I know I can get a Lubitel replica for 50$ to satisfy my point about the form factor...but that's kinda not the point. Been there done that. Lubitels are pedal cars where Rollei's are Rolls Royce.

Bet you never use it  ;)

I have shoot roughly 50 rolls on a Lubi replica. But the things is so random and poorly manufactured that this is just for fun. But the way to shoot is addictive.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dissuade me to get a Rolleiflex
« on: April 04, 2014, 05:06:23 AM »

Thanks but it's a bit "apple and oranges". Outside of cosmetics, 2.8F with Planar (models 1 to 3) are the pinacle of the form factor. Plus you add the condition (we are talking 40 to 50 years old stuff here) and the choice is much narrower adn the prices much higher (I guess that was your point?).

Example: http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw=Rolleiflex&_osacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2045573.m570.l1313.TR12.TRC2.A0.H0.XRolleiflex+2.8F&_nkw=Rolleiflex+2.8F&_sacat=0

Third Party Manufacturers / Dissuade me to get a Rolleiflex
« on: April 04, 2014, 04:11:43 AM »
Went to my usual shop today for some CF cards.

Since my last visit a Rolleiflex popped up in their Vintage section. 2.8F, visually and optically mint. Asking price of 2300 USD (in local currency). Can probably be bargained down quite a bit (around 10% would be a reasonnable aime just for principles).

Just one comment....now THAT is a viewfinder!!! Why the hell does no company keep making this kind of camera??? The form factor is truly excellent!

I was so troubled that I forgot to ask for the accessories accompanying it and got the wrong serial number (taking lens not camera). I was in a rush to get my bank card away.

Anyone to dissuade me? Or will there be some GAS propaganda?

I disagree that F2 is only for one person and you need to stop down for multiple people

I use 1.2 for group shots all the time sometimes as much as 30+ people, wide open, DOF is always more than sufficient

You are forgetting the "distance to subject" side of the DoF magic triangle.

EOS Bodies / Re: Evolution or the murder of art?
« on: March 19, 2014, 06:36:56 AM »
Eye, brain and location will still be the 3 main factors.

But maybe i'm overly into photojournalism.

Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm F/1.4 Art listed in Belarus for $790
« on: March 19, 2014, 06:29:22 AM »
Sigma has a tainted past...

That's why I believe they can be inclined to hit a big one while renouncing part of the margin. 35 art was the trial and the initiation of the new move, this can be the reputation changer and the step into the "big"league (they'll still be 3rd party and not Zeiss :D ).

790 USD, even tax free, is still a bit low...now make that 790 EUR + taxes and you get above the 35L but still under the competition to score that big hit. (why the hell would a belarus list in either currency don't ask me!)

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Which one should i trust?
« on: March 19, 2014, 05:03:59 AM »
From what I read, Mophie Juice Packs are the best quality on the market. Their stuff frequently gets positive reviews on Ars and Wired. I'm in the market for a good one too as my generic chinese cheapo one is dying on me.

Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm F/1.4 Art listed in Belarus for $790
« on: March 19, 2014, 03:00:09 AM »
How much is VAT in Belaruss? That might be the tax free price which puts it close to 1K in most western EU countries. Just saying.

Lenses / Re: Visit Guilin, Mountain Range, in China - Lens selection
« on: March 17, 2014, 09:37:52 PM »
Grey sky and fake western/euro architecture. Welcome to China!

Joke aside the grey sky is a real pain in the pigu (yeah that's the chinese word for it). First because it's grey but even more because if fucks up exposure when it's sunny (behind the clouds with low EV on the ground and burnt sky. Grrrrrr. Where I live we are statistically considered to have 20 blue sky days a YEAR.  >:( >:( >:(

But no I won't move out just because of that.

Sorry for the other readers for hijacking the thread but a debate about art is relevant on a photo forum. (that's my best excuse).

Da Vinci's Vitruvian Man is a master piece and it required artistic skill ...
So artistic skill can only be a manual skill (drawing, sculpting...) and not the ability to conceive a work of art? Even if so, what is the threshold of "quality"? Is Basquiat an artist?

I see plenty of reapeated patterns in your pics. Wich would qualify more as artisanship than art as in traditionnal sense. Monnet painting is art. Monnet copying one of his work is craftmanship. Even you qualify it as an industry.

chose a very cheap, low life, crude & disgusting approach.
Which is why part of modern art is called Shock art. Punk is still music. very cheap, low life, crude & disgusting approach can be necessary to pass on a message.

Actually the message should please you. Institutional art buyers would litteraly buy sh*t if it comes from some famous artist. You actually agree with him.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 18