May 25, 2016, 07:01:54 PM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10
61
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« Last post by dpc on Today at 01:43:01 PM »
Morning sun shining on forest of larches on mountain spur.

That is very, very nice.  An elegant image!


Thanks, Dustin! I appreciate it. I can't say it's the best picture I've ever taken, but I do like it a lot. Just one of those times atmospheric conditions and the light seemed to work for me.  :)
62
Lenses / Re: How does Canon deliver a new 85mm lens?
« Last post by j-nord on Today at 01:35:39 PM »
Right, thats why I was very specific. For portrait, being the 85 f1.8 is geared towards portrait, DOF/ Bokeh is far more important than light gathering. The 135 f2 on FF will give much narrower DOF and better bokeh than the 85 f1.8 on crop even though the f1.8 is faster (2.0 t-stop vs 2.3 t-stop on the 135 f2).

The basketball, wrestling and volleyball reporters scoff at your marginalization of their needs.   They are crying through their therapy sessions about how their staple get-it-done lens is 'only for portraiture'.  ;)

- A

ohh noes I wouldn't want to marginalize indoor sports reporters!  ::)
63
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« Last post by Click on Today at 01:34:42 PM »
Morning sun shining on forest of larches on mountain spur.


I really like this picture. Well done, dpc.  :)
64
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« Last post by TWI by Dustin Abbott on Today at 01:27:30 PM »
Morning sun shining on forest of larches on mountain spur.

That is very, very nice.  An elegant image!
65
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Being Tested by Photographers
« Last post by ahsanford on Today at 01:16:01 PM »
Along those same lines, one wonders how DXO's absurd black box transfer function scoring system punished Nikon for the D5's 3.2M ISO claims, which renders all images into murky chromatic turdstorms.

It doesn't.  The Biased Score metric comprises three factors: DR at base ISO, color depth at base ISO, and the ISO at which a fixed SNR threshold is reached.  So, an astronomical ISO will not impact the scoring. 

However, they do not provide the relative weightings for those three factors, nor do they provide assurances that those weightings are kept constant for all sensors tested.

So you mean it's not scientific?  Not in the least bit?  But, but...I...wanna...believe...

Using their own goofy metrics, the D5 was arguably no improvement (sensor-wise) over the D4S (it lost a stop of dynamic range at base ISO) and a 2 year old D810 outclassed it in all three of their summary metrics, yet DXO still had the nerve to call it "a worthy successor".

#dxo #fairandbalanced

- A
66
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 DC Art
« Last post by danski0224 on Today at 01:15:16 PM »
Sigma has a couple of new Foveon cameras coming up...
67
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma service in the U.S.
« Last post by chrysoberyl on Today at 01:12:48 PM »
Ouch.  If that's representative of Sigma's customer service, that's awful.

Surely it isn't...there are a lot of Sigma users in this forum and most are clearly too picky to put up with poor customer service.  I am hoping that others have found different and more effective approaches.  But even so, I'll not use the service center I contacted.

John
68
Canon General / Re: So what is it about Canon?
« Last post by dak723 on Today at 01:04:31 PM »
I am clearly a minority when it comes to the typical user profile for this forum.  I don't believe, however, that I am that different from the majority of folks who buy and use DSLRs.

I have absolutely no brand loyalty to Canon.  My first SLR was an Olympus - and I still love Olympus cameras, and own an E-M1.  My first Canon Rebel was bought around 1995 and I have owned Canon cameras since.  Reasons I like Canon cameras:

Reliable.  I have owned 5 Canons (2 pre-digital and 3 digital) and never had a problem with any of them.  Unlike many gear-heads, I see very little difference in the photo quality from one generation to the next and in fact owned my 6 MP 300D for 9 years before buying a 6D and then an SL1.  I hope my 6D lasts 9 years, too.  I can't afford buying a camera every couple years and see absolutely no reason to.  Every generation of every brand of camera has only small evolutionary changes, despite the gear heads claims.  Many of the new bells and whistles are mainly toys to play with - not things a photographer really needs, in my opinion. 

IQ.  I think the color and tonal curves of the Canons give a better result than Sony (which I have tried) and Nikon (which I have seen).  People love talking DR, but contrast is more important in my opinion.  I shoot almost only in daylight and found no discernible difference in DR between my 6D and the Sony A7 under those conditions.  I post process minimally and have never once had a problem lifting shadows adequately with the 6D - even when compared to the pics I took with the A7.  The tone curves, however, gave me better differentiation between areas of light and shadow on the 6D, which is one reason I kept the 6D and returned the A7.  My intent was to replace the 6D.

Ergonomics.  Obviously, much of what a person like about ergonomics is what they are used to.  The fact that the zoom rings rotate the opposite direction makes Nikon and Sony something I will probably not try again.  The EVF on the Sony was also a negative (nowhere near as good as the EVF on the E-M1) and the kit lens was awful.  Which leads to the final reason I like Canon...

Lenses.  They are high quality.  The inexpensive kit lens and 55-250mm lens for the SL1 are very sharp and perhaps the best lens deals you can get.

Reliability, excellent color and contrast, good ergonomics and high quality lenses.  Those are my reasons for using Canon cameras.
69
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma service in the U.S.
« Last post by neuroanatomist on Today at 01:02:08 PM »
Ouch.  If that's representative of Sigma's customer service, that's awful. 
70
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Being Tested by Photographers
« Last post by bdunbar79 on Today at 01:00:13 PM »
Along those same lines, one wonders how DXO's absurd black box transfer function scoring system punished Nikon for the D5's 3.2M ISO claims, which renders all images into murky chromatic turdstorms.

It doesn't.  The Biased Score metric comprises three factors: DR at base ISO, color depth at base ISO, and the ISO at which a fixed SNR threshold is reached.  So, an astronomical ISO will not impact the scoring. 

However, they do not provide the relative weightings for those three factors, nor do they provide assurances that those weightings are kept constant for all sensors tested.

So you mean it's not scientific?  Not in the least bit?  But, but...I...wanna...believe...
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10