October 01, 2014, 12:26:04 AM

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's 2.300$ D750 said to best 5DIII
« Last post by jdavis37 on Today at 12:23:31 AM »
No issues or complaints with my 5D3.. before I bought it I rented a D800 after getting fired up over how messed up Canon was. I actually bought the on line hype but luckily a friend of mine suggested I at least try the 5D3. I rented both and on first shutter click and focus fell in love with the 5D3. The camera simply worked. Maybe some things were just my ignorance of Nikon but I could not find a way to give me BOTH 1 finger access to changing ISO AND 1 finger access to using exposure compensation. It seemed it was an either or thing.

Anyhow, good news is the competition is good for all of us and hopefully these companies wil continue building tools that we can enjoy. Here is a good article about the D750 written by Thom Hogan:

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/d750-too-little-too-late.html

John
2
Looking at some posts about dslr beginners reasoning what camera bodies and lenses to buy, I'm asking myself: Does it really matter if you start with a 7d1 vs. 7d2 or 5d2 vs. 5d3? Do you need a 16-35L/4 instead of a 17-40L/4? Or isn't it smarter to save the money, learn a lot and then buy the next better model in a couple of years?

I know for me, "just" buying a 60d was a smart choice - a 5d2 would have been wasted. With the €1500 saved back then, I now bought a 6d basically for "free" and can even profit from it as my skill is up to it by now.

What about you? If you would have had top gear right from day one, would have it been "worth it"?
Better gear does not either solve poor composition and/or technique or makes you a better photographer, however, it offers better performance in low light situations (ISO) and resolution (IQ and sharpness)
3
Post Processing / Re: Digital "Enlarger"
« Last post by Shootitalready on Today at 12:15:24 AM »
I did a Google search and got this link.
http://www.de-vere.com/products.htm

I am sure you can find more if you google.

Great stuff! Thanks very much for the link  :)
4
Yes low light would have been much better. Also IS would have worked wonders. So voting for a 'yes'.
5
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Last post by IslanderMV on Today at 12:08:49 AM »
sandhill crane shot with 70d+300L f/2.8II+2x III makes a great combo

Great shot
6
Street & City / Re: London, day and dusk
« Last post by MrFotoFool on September 30, 2014, 11:59:48 PM »
The third one is very nice.  :)
7
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 6D video for sports
« Last post by dash2k8 on September 30, 2014, 11:55:20 PM »
im new in taking video using dslr.

i got a 6D.
How about auto exposure. from darker scene to brighter scene or vice versa.
Does 6D or other dslr got this feature?

I never heard anyone mentions about this.

Thanks.

You can set the ISO to auto and everything else manual. I don't recommend full auto mode since the camera will often guess wrong.
8
Better low-light performance would have certainly enhanced a lot of stuff taken after the sun has set.
9
Post Processing / Re: Digital "Enlarger"
« Last post by MrFotoFool on September 30, 2014, 11:53:01 PM »
Never heard of that Devere enlarger, that is interesting. Still I think you would be hard pressed to find many people that agree with you the old way is better. And those that do I imagine would also think film is an integral part of the process.

As you may already know, a lot of digital prints done at commercial labs and even drug stores are in fact true, developed photographic prints. (I work at a photo lab that serves both consumers and professionals). However the prints are not projected through an enlarging head as you are describing. The machine uses either colored lasers or colored LEDs to draw a picture of your picture on the photographic paper, which then gets developed in chemicals. Of course this is all done by the machine, so you are not moving prints from tray to tray.
10
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Video Editing Work Flow?
« Last post by eninja on September 30, 2014, 11:52:51 PM »
I got one good question.

Lets say I want to use external audio recorder.

It is possible to remove audio component of .mov file, is it? (never mind I can google for this)

If YES, wow.. they can actually do that..

This thought just open my imagination, that the .mov is actually a container, with different data inside, and a "timing driver" much like a "director" of a movie coordinates the synchronization of data (audio, video, maybe other things unknown to me, as well).

If YES, are we dealing with different file like .psd file for photoshop to save all these environment data.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10