April 01, 2015, 04:00:10 AM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
Software & Accessories / Re: Camera Bag Reccomendations
« Last post by pjn0629 on March 31, 2015, 04:34:38 PM »
Look at Think Tank Retrospective.

+1 on the Retrospective line.

They look just like a regular over the shoulder bag but hold gear securely. Problem is they'll never hold all the gear the OP mentioned.

those retrospectives look nice, my only immediate takeaway is that they don't have a carry handle... I think what I'm going to do is get one of those inserts for my day-to-day messenger bag as a "runabout" kit, such a cheap and great idea.... so much better than a stringbag.. but I still need a solid "go bag" for when I have no idea what the location is going to be like and the correct answer is bring EVERYTHING
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon buy Yongnuo
« Last post by dcm on March 31, 2015, 04:32:31 PM »
Hmm, even though it might sound plausible, it is April 1 somewhere by now...
it seems to be all right here in this microremote to microtape cable


"This connection provides power from the basestation to the microTape (through the basestation accessory port) and also provides upwards compatibility for future capabilities."

As for cost, RRM makes one of the least expensive quality remote lens drive systems on the market. The Sonar unit seems very reasonably priced as well. But, I think that in the gimbal market, something like Dual Pixel AF with an STM lens on a C100 makes way more sense than something like this that is really designed for cinema lenses. I can barely carry my ronin/c300)17-55 2.8 for more than a minute or two. I can't imagine adding a cinema lens, and a RFF and a sonar unit plus power to that package, just to get something that canon can do with a pancake lens (and have face recognition to boot).
I'd just be wanting to use this on my 5D3 with my normal EF "L" lenses......
Lenses / Re: Need lens advice mostly for landscape
« Last post by kirkcha on March 31, 2015, 04:25:49 PM »
Funny how life goes!
I went on a workshop with a very famous Landscape Photographer to Snowdonia, Wales who prefers to use primes but said if you only take one lens make sure its the EF 24-105mm f4L for full frame. On the three days of the workshop I used it 90% of the time, with the EF17-40 f4L and the EF100 f2.8L used about 5% each. I never used the 70-200 or the 70-300 I also had on the trip.
Checking the files the photographs were fairly evenly split between 24 - 105mm and certainly not biaised to the wide end obviously subject matter affects this and it was a mixture of vistas, rivers & waterfalls and specific details. What it did tell me however is the EF24-105 f4L is truly a versatile lens and for good reason sometimes the only lens people buy for full frame cameras.

If I could only take one I would probably choose the 24-70 2.8 II or f4. I think I could probably crop the 70 to 105 and get good results while having a better 24mm.

For me I need at least two lenses. I find the 24-35 of the 16-35 f4 quite a bit better than my copy of the 24-105 and the 70-105 of the 70-300L at least as good if not better than my 24-105. Don't get me wrong, I liked the 24-105 a lot but if it just sits in the bag I think there are better options for me now. In addition to shooting wildlife I find the 70-300L very useful in compressing the landscape so I always carry it.

Really appreciate all the advice. I think I am now leaning towards the TS-E 24mm for all the possibilities and IQ and adding the 100L macro in the near future. Now if I can find a refurb or used one since the rebates just expired. I have yet to catch a TS-E 24 in the canon refurb site so I might just have to bite the bullet as I need by June.

Lenses / Re: EF 11-24mm f/4L: Our First Impressions
« Last post by TWI by Dustin Abbott on March 31, 2015, 04:19:45 PM »
Great looking image.  I do plan to review this lens at some point, but I have to confess it isn't all that exciting to me.  I simply don't need a lens that wide, and I suspect few photographers actually do, too.

The new Tamron 15-30 or the 16-35mm f/4L IS make more sense to me.

P.S.  The point made about thousands of great landscape photographers using the 14-24mm despite its bulbous front element is a valid one.  A bulbous front element is not so great an obstacle as we sometimes make it out to be.  It hasn't stopped me from adding hundreds of images to my catalog from the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 that I'm very proud of.
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Import 1Dx worth the risk?
« Last post by mackguyver on March 31, 2015, 04:16:31 PM »
It's been ordered.  Thanks for the feedback!!
Congrats!  If it's your first 1D series body (as it was for me), you'll love it! 
« Last post by keithcooper on March 31, 2015, 04:15:18 PM »
That said, I feel that learning to use a shift lens hand-held has worked wonders for my visual perception of verticals and composition ... YMMV ;-)

I started photography using large format mostly so when I shoot landscapes I personally get better results working slow. When I shoot quickly I don't like what I get as much as when I use a tripod and work more deliberately. But I do shoot street/landscapes with the 45mm TS-E handheld too and like what I get using tilt for selective selective focus.

But for architecture I work with slow shutter speeds so its usually a tripod and I'm fine with that.
Yes, likewise for the architectural work.

I've heard of the 'more deliberate' thing for landscape for a long while but whenever I've tried it, it just irritated me more than helped... :-(

I guess it's because unless I'm waiting for light, all my favourite (daylight) work has had an element of immediacy. Almost like street photography, but on a 'bigger scale'.

I realise that's not the received wisdom in this area, but never mind ;-)
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Import 1Dx worth the risk?
« Last post by FTb-n on March 31, 2015, 04:13:41 PM »
It's been ordered.  Thanks for the feedback!!
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Disappointment
« Last post by 3kramd5 on March 31, 2015, 04:08:59 PM »
Like I said, past making sense.

To whom? I think you are confusing "makes sense" with "says what I want it to say" (something like: you're right, no one should recommend canon since all their cameras are susceptible to mysterious deaths that they'll suggest may have occurred due mythical phenomena).

The fact of the matter is: nobody knows whether it failed because of something they did wrong, something you did wrong, or just bad luck. They met you half-way on a repair when they had no obligation to do so, and to me that's good customer service.

Only on this tread cameras break very often because of condensation.

It's a well understood and recognized failure, hence the specific instructions on how to avoid it. Where was stated that it's a common failure?

I do not think I have strong condensation in my house.

If you have air in your house, you have vapor in your house. However, there is no reason to assume that any vapor which may have condensed in your camera came from or did so in your house unless the camera never left your house.

Personal Conclusion,...Condensation does not happen very often, under normal circumstances, except on this tread.

Preposterous. Go outside and look up. Condensation happens all the time. That doesn't mean it leads to damaged electronics all the time. You may have been unlucky.

350$ means more then it did before.
Let me repeat, before I had kids, I had no kids.

So don't fix it now.

If the circuit is bad, even if it's out of warranty, it's the manufacturer's fault.

Also preposterous.

If it came to you bad, of course it's either their or a middle man's fault.  If that is the case, by all means show them.

For me, that's not enough, if what they sold was bad to begin with.

The operative term is *IF*
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]