Messages

46

Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM

« on: May 09, 2013, 06:40:36 AM »

EOS 1D X, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM @ 47mm, 1/250 s, f/6.3, ISO 400

Great lighting and tonal quality.

She looks like a little human grub, which, analogy wise, I suppose she is 

47

EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]

« on: May 09, 2013, 01:20:06 AM »

^ ^

As we do with everything else ! 

48

Canon General / Re: The best camera is the one....

« on: May 08, 2013, 05:36:20 PM »

I didn't have to pay for myself

49

Street & City / Re: San Jose Street Photography

« on: May 08, 2013, 04:53:14 PM »

Hello Brandon,

Very nice B&W. I love the second one.  Great job!

+1

Yes, that's an earner

50

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Help with 5d Mark III

« on: May 08, 2013, 04:39:16 PM »

^

Yes, warning to those that don't know. Brushing focus screen with a lens brush can charge the screen with static and turn it into a dust magnet. 

Also regarding dust: rule of thumb: if dust spec looks blurred through viewfinder it is likely to be on the lower ( outside ) surface and may shift with blower. If dust looks very sharp through viewfinder it's most probably inside ( upper surface ) of screen and can't be reached without removing the screen.   

Dont you just love user interchangeable screens 

51

EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]

« on: May 08, 2013, 04:24:31 PM »

^
I wouldn't be so confident with that last paragraph. Eight years on, here in the UK, the 1Ds mkii is still selling for 20% of it's original headline RRP, and about 30% of what it quickly gravitated to after the initial launch.

As you suggest, if technological advancements do slow, a ten year old 1Dx may be worth an even higher percentage of it's original purchase cost.

52

EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]

« on: May 08, 2013, 02:08:50 PM »

Give a cheap violin to a violin master and they will still make beautiful sounds with it. Give a Stradivarious to a begginer and the reverse will happen. It's not the camera but the photographer's skill and talent...

Give the cheap violin to the beginner and the output won't get worse. Give the Stradivarius to the master and the sounds will get significantly more beautiful.

Why is it so hard for people to grasp that while skill is the most important factor, the tools do matter.

I get so sick and tired of this "it's all the photographer and not any of the equipment" garbage too.  There's a reason that every SI shooter on NFL sidelines have a 1Dx and 400 f/2.8L II IS lens.  Because it matters.

There's also a reason I can do a heck of a lot more clean 8x10 printing NOW versus IN THE PAST for indoor sports.  It's because of my 1Dx and only because of my 1Dx.  The prints I'm doing now I just didn't do in the past because sensor was limiting with noise/IQ loss.

Is there something in my skill and technique that I was doing wrong before I bought my new camera that prevented me from doing so? Sure, sports photography has been going on for a long time, it's just now with better equipment, it's better.

Remember in the days before AF a sports shot of fast action, isolated with tiny depth of field was a rare and valuable picture. I can well remember one of a footballer heading a ball, picked out in razor sharp focus with the rest of the field a subtle blur. It was in all the papers and became an iconic shot.

Now those pictures are common place - in fact, expected, and that difference of course is due to the equipment.

53

EOS Bodies / Re: Bye Canon?

« on: May 08, 2013, 12:39:22 PM »

Perhaps the most salient point is this:

With film, MF quality was most often noticeably higher than 35mm, and the price difference was 'x'.

With the latest digital technology the quality difference is much closer, but the price difference is 'x' times 10.

As far as FF is concerned, a good reason to bye 'Buy Canon' 

54

HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Post your HDR images:

« on: May 07, 2013, 08:37:53 AM »

A little experiment in trying to match the overall luminance of the scene to how we actually see things.

The harshness in the neck hood is because the damn horse wouldn't keep still long enough for the drive of a 5D 
so I had to use part of another frame.

55

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS

« on: May 06, 2013, 10:43:28 AM »

I am getting very favourable reports from photographers who are using this lens.

I can only assume that Canon have intended this lens to offer better 'IQ' than the 24-105, though not all early testing has confirmed this. It's interesting to note that here in the UK the RRP of each lens is only £20 different, but the actual selling price of the 24-105 has fallen to the £850  ( about $1,300 ) region, still much more expensive than in the States, whereas the 24-70 f4 has only dropped to £1299. ( Bearing in mind that gear such as this is proportionally much more expensive in Europe than America ).

We may be purchasing one for Building Panoramics, so if we do I will post images and further thoughts on the lens. ( We are aware of the RSA issue).

As has been pointed out many times, there's more to image quality than test charts 

56

EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]

« on: May 06, 2013, 09:37:31 AM »

I'm losing interest in Canon ... but then, on the other hand, they seem to be losing interest in photographers like me.

But not me 

57

EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]

« on: May 06, 2013, 09:36:33 AM »

Or be like me and watch your savings account grow!

Well, that's no fun - you can't take pictures with a savings account!   

True! But you can take screenshots of your account statement and smile

  I love the humour humor on CR

58

EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]

« on: May 06, 2013, 09:32:22 AM »

It may be good new for current 7D users.

I suspect the 7Dii will be a very different beast at substantially higher price point.

 . or  . or even  depending on your point of view

59

Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!

« on: May 06, 2013, 07:34:58 AM »

I can't match the amazing light on eml58's beautiful Java shots, ( anything shot on a 1Dx )  but here's one of mine.

I've been playing around with tweaking some pictures after sizing for the web and I think it produces a better result for viewing at a small size.

5D + 40mm @2.8

60

1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx

« on: May 05, 2013, 04:17:55 PM »

Last One

1Dx 70-200f/2.8 II, Shot @ f/5.6 & 1/800th ISO200

Really stunning shots