February 07, 2016, 09:07:48 PM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 [10]
91
Lenses / Re: Portraitlens for headshots.
« Last post by Pookie on Today at 11:51:49 AM »
If you can't connect to your subject get a lens with gimmicks, it will distract people long enough, if you can connect with your subjects, or want to learn, get a lens that does without them.

I've noticed that if you don't personally own the lens you're like a petulant child... you don't need it, gimmicks, you can use a cheaper lens. Sure you don't need them but if you have the means to buy the tools then do it and don't fear using them in any situation. As for the fish being being used as a gimmick and not being connected with your subject... that just shows your complete lack of familiarity with a lens you don't own. If you do own a fish then pull it out and try, you'll see it can be used quite effectively. You have to be quite connected with your subject to pull off these types of shots as you are right up in their face. I do agree the fish is a special lens but to never use it for portraits is as asinine as your statements regarding it.

I feel a bit nervous commenting here given all the experts.

I love the 85L, however my advice would be the reverse, use the 85L for Adults and 135L for kids.

Why?

AF speed.

The kids is not always gong to sit still while the 85L slowly AF's.

Having said that, they are both excellent lenses.

I think my point here is "rules" about the use of any lens for this application only or that one, or... is really doing no one any service. Any lens can be used in any situation; kids running, portraits, action, stills, etc. The only limit on their actual use in the real world are the limits you place on them yourself. I just choose not to limit myself...

Just to make a point about the fish and portraiture. I took this shot a few years ago while shooting strangers at the beach. Read my description of this shot. Part of the biggest aspects about taking portraits for the 100 Strangers project is connecting with people, pictures come second. I know this because I was the admin for this group for years. In order to take this photo I had to talk with this woman and explain why I needed to be right up in her personal space. She agreed, loved the results and actually hired me to do ads for her yoga studio later. She is still a client. That doesn't happen when you're not connected with your subject. Sure there is distortion and it's not safe. If that worries you so much that it hinders your creativity stick with Hurley, safe and follow.

92
Lenses / Re: Portraitlens for headshots.
« Last post by privatebydesign on Today at 11:48:13 AM »
I feel a bit nervous commenting here given all the experts.

There is no need to be nervous, your opinion is as valid as anyone's. 'Good', 'better', 'nicer', etc, are all subjective terms that may or may not align with the readers.

'Experts' are as likely to be as narrow minded as non experts, as far as I see it there is a place for 15mm portraits, and f1.2 portraits, but only if and when they add to the subject, the one actually being portrayed.

The problem, as I see it, with getting a lens with such characteristics is you use it for those characteristics rather than using those characteristics where appropriate for your subject. It makes the difference between 'I love portraits taken with that lens' and 'I love that portrait of that person, it makes them look so -----, what lens did you use? (when it is normally actually about the lighting).
93
Landscape / Re: Please share your snow/ Ice Photos with us in CR.
« Last post by nineyards on Today at 11:42:30 AM »
Thanks Keith
Love seeing when people bring out the cold beauty in our part of the world
Accentuate the positive I always say
94
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: new 6D - a little help
« Last post by neuroanatomist on Today at 11:36:58 AM »
The post-capture image on the back display is generated from the processed JPEG image, not from your RAW image.  Depending on the settings (picture style, etc), the processing could vary somewhat.

True, and the same applies to the histograms displayed on the camera. 
95
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Preorder: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II
« Last post by neuroanatomist on Today at 11:32:30 AM »
It is showing lit focus points in tracking. It is just keep on focusing nearest object without missing. At the end it is even moved on to small card at the very beginning.

Sorry, but 'focusing on the nearest subject' isn't tracking...or phrased differently, it's failure to track.  Moving to the new subject in front is a fail for an AF tracking system.  Would you want your camera to switch focus from the player on the field to the waterboy who walks in front of the camera?
96
Should I pre-order the 1DX Mark II or wait for the 1DX Mark III?

[/sarcasm]
97
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Preorder: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II
« Last post by ritholtz on Today at 11:22:47 AM »
DPR said that about the 7DII - I wonder how they'll describe the D5.   ::)

Dynamic updating with real-time constant feedback to ensure the finest accuracy in AF available.

I'm considering submitting my cv  ;D
and matching with latest focusing capabilities offered by mirrorless.  ;D

98
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Preorder: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II
« Last post by ritholtz on Today at 11:21:01 AM »
Here is Nikon's D5 AF teaser below. I really want to see the new iTR tracking on the Canon with the whopping 360,000 RGB metering sensor.

I am having difficulty interpreting what this little video is telling me.  It is difficult to maintain the aim of a camera by watching video on a phone held up to the viewfinder.  Nevertheless, I see the camera AF points wandering off to the left of the original target but the camera is not really focusing on anything until it locks onto a flash unit in the foreground at the end.  Is this a tease or an epic fail?  I wonder what the AF settings were.
It is showing lit focus points in tracking. It is just keep on focusing nearest object without missing. At the end it is even moved on to small card at the very beginning. There are so many points litting up on focus. Looks like Nikon shows all the focus points (selectable and unselectable) during servo tracking.




99
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Why only 20.2 MP for the 1DXMarkII ?
« Last post by AlanF on Today at 11:15:07 AM »
Because a camera aimed journalism will require ISO 6400 with low noise?
Because megapixel reduce the image transfer speed?
Because a double page print magazine requires 16 megapixel?
Because humans do not distinguish details above 300DPI?

+1

also people have been starting to suggest you need 1/(2x fl) (or similar) minimum speed for the 5Ds(R)

if you're shooting with a 400mmfl in somewhat low light do you really want a minimum 1/800 speed?..   you've just lost half your photons, and that's before we look at the ability of the sensor to turn photons into bytes.

This is a sports/wildlife camera not a landscape camera.

"1/(2x fl) (or similar) minimum speed for the 5Ds(R)" is for lenses without IS.
100
Great question, really interested in feedback you get, hope you get lots!
I wonder if a good setup would in any way be similar to nightclub photography.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 [10]