Messages

181

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?

« on: April 02, 2013, 09:09:11 AM »

@privatebydesign; interesting point about using ETTR with Canon. This may be why I find many Canon users feel they get better results from ISO 50 (L), as that is essentially exposing to the right.

@ankortwat; a really good example of post processors having a desire to lift shadow detail to a totally unrealistic level. If you did this with your Sony sensor file it would undoubtably have less noise, but the result would look just as crap 

182

EOS Bodies / Re: Lost and Found - Not an April's Fool joke

« on: April 02, 2013, 03:00:05 AM »

I remember reading somewhere about a Rebel being found by divers on the ocean floor, not in any housing, and the card could still be read. They traced the owner from the pics and returned the camera - all be it a rather damaged camera !

Turned out the owner had dropped it from a boat

This one: http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/11/canon-rebel-1000d-lost-at-sea/

That's the one ! Of course I must have read about it on Canon rumours - I mean where else 

I guess a SD would stand more chance of working after being underwater than a CF due to fewer contact points.

183

EOS Bodies / Re: Lost and Found - Not an April's Fool joke

« on: April 01, 2013, 03:43:18 PM »

@lintoni, I've had a look at your link; another interesting story, but I'm pretty sure this isn't the same one as I read about. Just goes to show how many get dropped in water ! I'm amazed the cards still work.

184

EOS Bodies / Re: Lost and Found - Not an April's Fool joke

« on: April 01, 2013, 02:49:03 PM »

I remember reading somewhere about a Rebel being found by divers on the ocean floor, not in any housing, and the card could still be read. They traced the owner from the pics and returned the camera - all be it a rather damaged camera !

Turned out the owner had dropped it from a boat

185

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35mm f/2.0

« on: April 01, 2013, 04:47:37 AM »

Wow, never seen the 35 f2 receive so much attention !

Is this like great artists or composters ? Their work is never fully appreciated until they are dead 

186

Canon General / Re: Goodbye Cruel Canon

« on: March 31, 2013, 02:54:41 PM »

The noble thing to do is donate your gear to charity

187

Portrait / Re: First paid photo shoot - DATE: 23 March 2013

« on: March 31, 2013, 02:52:25 PM »

This thread has reminded me why I have never ever photographed a wedding despite having been in photography for over 30 years.

The OP's pictures are also a good example of how a successful photo has little to do with the equipment it's shot on, it's the person using it who must create the picture.

By far the best advice given in this thread is go and assist an experienced wedding 'tog' at a couple of weddings.

But the OP's brave for sharing his first attempt, and with the good advice given we can all look forward to the second one 

188

Lenses / Re: Is my 24-105mm f/4 L unreasonably soft?

« on: March 30, 2013, 02:54:58 PM »

@iKenndac, apologies if I have misunderstood your data, but there is no way the 24-105 is anything like as sharp as the 40mm at f4, so there is something very wrong with your focal result.

189

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35mm f/2.0

« on: March 30, 2013, 02:39:40 PM »

If you're on crop and 40 is too long then I generally wouldn't hesitate to recommend the 35/2, but if your primary use for that lens is to use it f2-2.8 you may be dissatisfied with results from a dense crop sensor.

190

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?

« on: March 30, 2013, 12:44:35 PM »

At the very outset I offer my apologies for wading into this rather heated discussion. This is a shot I took with the 6D. Please let me know how a Nikon camera would have helped with this.

I'm just a hobbyist and humble student of photography ... HELP!

You haven't played fair: you're supposed to underexposed by at least four stops, then pull your shadows up to equal the highlights, then post a 200% view and complain about the noise. 


P.S, you may know how to expose but you're horizon's off, a Nikon would have corrected this.
Exposing correctly b*****ks the whole thing up and takes the fun out of it.

191

Canon General / Re: 24-70Mk2 fell off my 5DMk3 and smashed

« on: March 30, 2013, 09:28:25 AM »

To dislodge or remove the lens from its breach-lock system mount you need to deliverately press the release button and twist the lens barrel counter-clockwise.  Any veteran canon user knows this.

You can knock-off the lens if it was half-hazzardly mounted and not hearing that re-assuring click.

I know I shouldn't be picky, but the Canon FD system was a 'breech-lock'. The EOS system ( and virtually all other systems ) use a bayonet mount. 

192

EOS Bodies / Re: Favorite or Preferred Film body?

« on: March 30, 2013, 05:24:36 AM »

I don't own a 1 series film camera, so can't comment on those.  But I own a lot of others.  The Elan 7e and the Eos 3 are my favourites.  I've had my 7e for over 10 years and it has been a great camera.  Last year, I purchased an Eos 3.  Overall, I'd agree that it is better than the 7e.  Since buying the 3, the 7e has lived on the shelf.

For what its worth, my favourite film camera is a Mamiya 6, which is my no 1 camera.  Also, despite some drawbacks, some of my favourite photos have been taken with a Mamiya RB67 Pro S (WOW - Didn't know there were so many other Mamiya people on this forum!).  And I think this is where it gets interesting.  Why would you want to shoot 35mm film given the superiority of digital over that format?  Plus you've also got to consider the hassle of developing it.  And the cost of buying film.  If you shoot Large Format (or if you're not hard core enough, medium format like me), at least you can argue that you're on a similar quality level.  And many large format cameras offer movements / adjustments that can give your photos a very unique look.   The benefit of medium format is that you have very large negatives to play use.  This makes developing and printing at home a lot easier.  And serioulsy, given the prices right now, I'd be looking at a Hasselblad.  And not that its that relevant, but for some reason, girls find guys with Hasselblad's very sexy.  (Look at the advertising for a lot of premium brands and you'll be surprised how often these cameras appear).

ROFLAO 

that's where I went wrong ! All those years I shot with a Pentax 6x7 

Seriously though, I remember that in the 'old' days, those wanting to shoot 'glamour' were recommended to use cameras with waist level finders as generally the models were more comfortable with photographer looking down rather than straight at them.

To the OP, if you're going to include FD mount cameras I'm surprised you haven't included the wonderful F-1

193

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?

« on: March 30, 2013, 04:03:23 AM »

I don't understand how somebody can claim to not post their best work on their retail website? I fully understand not posting your work in forums, I only post test shots and snaps that illustrate a particular point, but to claim you are better than your retail website sounds a bit of a stretch.

Just out of curiosity; why not ? As long as the files are very small.

194

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?

« on: March 30, 2013, 03:59:29 AM »

Ahem, my samples have subject matter which you obviously discount. Which none of your sample's have.

I'm not seein' any such merit over mine in these examples, and not that it matters.
The interesting point is they were shot with Canon bodies.  I exposed mine to render the incredible sunset color gradient that evening and yours...
Well, they just sit there.  Artistically boring, but they might make good stock images where that doesn't matter.
Do you think you could have exposed and processed any of them differently to make a more compelling image?
I do, despite the Canon limitations on the sunset shot.

 

195

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]

« on: March 28, 2013, 09:12:57 AM »

I wonder if the GPS and WiFi will result in a plastic top plate. If it doesn't it will prove the plastic top plate of the 6D was to differentiate it from the 5D