Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 »
 61 
 on: Today at 10:47:43 AM 
Started by Chris Barrett - Last post by Craig Lamson
What about the new Canon 11-24? That thing looks amazing and supposedly betters the Nikon buy a good margin and is almost as good wide open at F4 as it is at F8-F11. I'm looking longingly at one at the moment.

That one looks pretty good to me as well.  I just might be convinced should I move to a higher pixel count camera from my 1DsIII, 5dII and 6 d

 62 
 on: Today at 10:47:20 AM 
Started by Rajan Parrikar - Last post by francois
My wife and I were quite comfortable camping in Iceland in 1974.
It was late June, and we had good Icelandic sweaters, mittens, and hats, plus down parkas, and long rain shells.
Actually, in Akureyri we had a heat wave. A couple of days with truly summer-like temperatures, blue skies, and sunshine.
But the weather all the rest of our three weeks was photographically exciting, even in the rain.


Without the rain and wind, camping in Iceland is wonderful. The last time I was there, mid-June if I remember correctly, we had a couple of beautiful days then 7 straight days of rain with very strong wind gusts. Although I was wearing Gore-Tex salopettes and parka, I was completed soaked. After those 7 days, we decided to find an hotel - finally a dry place. Had I been alone, I would have spent the rest of the trip camping in the rain (but risking divorce is a serious matter)

 Cheesy

 63 
 on: Today at 10:42:54 AM 
Started by CezarMart - Last post by CezarMart
Quote
Completely disagree about ballheads for landscapes. Ballheads are for when you need to recompose quickly. But you can't adjust each axis independently and they can sag slightly on tightening, ruining your fine composition. With landscapes, you need precise composition, but have all the time in the world to adjust it. A good pan-tilt head is far better. I use the Arca-Swiss C1 Cube.

I have several heads and I must admit those sophisticated pan-tilt heads drive me crazy. I always get confused which of the three aspects I am adjusting and for me the ballhead is the best solution. Simple and quick.
And I must disagree about having all the time in the world in landscape Smiley. I lost many great scenes because I wasn't fast enough.

As to the lenses it all depends if I shoot from the car or from a hiking trail. I can have all heavy arsenal in the car, but when backpacking being lightweight is critical. At 50+ yrs you need to preserve your energy as much as you can Smiley. One universal 28-300 VR is my best friend. And light Manfrotto tripod easily attachable to the backpack.

 64 
 on: Today at 10:38:49 AM 
Started by Chris Barrett - Last post by ACH DIGITAL
Antonio, how do you like that zoom?  I've heard great things about it.  I'm just about to order one from Hartblei that comes as a tilt/shift kit for the Sony.

CB

Well Chris, before I went Nikon I had Canon and my lenses were the 24S-E and 17TS-E. Now that I own a Sony too I regret selling those lenses and mostly the 24 TS-E which is the best wide angle I ever had.
The Nikon is a very good lens. As a zoom lens it is a compromise design wise, it suffers from a bit of barrel distortion between 14mm and 16mm. It The construction is very good and I use it mostly from 18 to 24. Just try to avoid strong light in front of the lens because it flares.
Now I got the Kipon Tilt Shift adapter for the Sony A7R and the tough E mount from Fotodiox, so just the last days I been able to try several lenses on this adapter.
With the 14-24 you have enough movement for interiors. My lens has the original lens hood which the Hartblei had been shaved so it might be suitable for exteriors shots where plenty of movement is needed.
I did a full size stitched from 3 horizontal shots taken at 18mm with 10mm shift up and down. you can download the 3 raw files from this link. Let me know your thoughts.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10120389/14-24mm.zip

 65 
 on: Today at 10:37:13 AM 
Started by Chris Calohan - Last post by Chris Calohan
And it doesn't fly...but no one ever makes that comment about Glen Bartley's birds...

 66 
 on: Today at 10:36:13 AM 
Started by Chris Calohan - Last post by Chris Calohan
To leap, or not to leap--that is the question:

Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the

gnarls of outrageous hunger or to take arms

against a sea of tourists and by opposing eat well.

To eat, to sleep evermore that is the answer...

 67 
 on: Today at 10:35:04 AM 
Started by James Clark - Last post by HSakols
If you choose to visit Portland make sure to check out Edgefields for a bite to eat.  I give yourself time to enjoy the art.  http://www.mcmenamins.com/54-edgefield-home

 68 
 on: Today at 10:34:23 AM 
Started by FranciscoDisilvestro - Last post by Guillermo Luijk
I think what MarkL was referring to (and I've wondered the same thing in the past) is pulling back exposure in LR, which is dependent on what demosaicing algorithm is used and what camera colour profile is used.  And then, as you say, you can get their attempt at rebuilt highlights if one or more channels has clipped.   Essentially, it seems as if the "exposure" slider in LR isn't a simple linear function.  Or perhaps it's linear over most of the range, but non-linear near the highlights.

It's possible but that would be a LR issue. In the example I posted the dark areas were pulled down by 4 stops (i.e. RAW linear values were divided by 16.0), and colour is perfect.

 69 
 on: Today at 10:32:21 AM 
Started by kengai - Last post by kengai
you know that? I would like to use it with Sony A7 . Alternatively seeking a tripod light, compact, solid.

 70 
 on: Today at 10:32:11 AM 
Started by bjanes - Last post by bjanes
The current opinion seems to be that autofocus is of limited utility in closeup and macro photography and may actually be a detriment, since the focus throw of most macro lenses is short. This short throw makes manual focus using the focus ring more difficult since a small movement of the ring causes a large change in focus. However, with the advent of live view and electronic control of focusing, the situation has changed. Autofocus in live view is more accurate than that achieved via the optical viewfinder, since it is achieved through contrast of the image on the sensor. With the optical viewfinder, focus is via phase and depends on accurate alignment of the reflex mirror and autofocus sensor, which is usaully at the bottom of the mirror box.

Electronic control of focus may be achieved in very small steps and the focus throw of the lens is no longer relevant. Live view focusing can be aided through the use of an external monitor. One can use HDMI, a USB connection, or Wi-Fi. Helicon remote implements focus stacking via the USB connection and can be used with a laptop or Android device. One merely chooses near focus by tapping the closest subject area on the screen and the far focus in the same manner. The software automatically takes the required number of shots for the stack. The Camranger also has a focus stacking option.

Various software controllers are available for Android, iOS devices and laptops. The tablet is more useful in the field than a laptop and may be used via USB or WiFi. Unfortunately, USB is not an option with iOS.

Personally, I would not consider buying a macro lens lacking autofocus. An ultrasonic motor rather than a mechanical autofocus linkage is highly desirable. For Nikon this means an AFS lens and USM for Canon.

Bill

Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 »