|
Tony Montana posted:Just wanted to add my respect for this picture. It is awesome. I agree  Any more details/EXIF on this? You mentioned cropping for composition, so I guess this is taken at quite a distance (based on the DOF) at f/8 or higher?
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 07:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 23:23 |
|
|
Definitely the best pig-racing photo I have seen this week.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 09:29
|
|
|
deaders posted:Definitely the best pig-racing photo I have seen this week. its probably in my top 20-25. serious post though, I did some shooting on the weekend with my 18-270 and discovered i enjoy 35mm quite a bit. is the sigma 35mm ART twice as good as the 30mm ART to justify the double cost? for the 35 I could get the 30mm and still have money to get another lens.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 12:05
|
|
|
I wouldn't bother with the 35 on crop. The 35mm is pretty much perfect though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 12:49
|
|
|
Post more pig race. Every time I look at that picture something new delights me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 13:13
|
|
|
Piquai Souban posted:Post more pig race. Every time I look at that picture something new delights me. This, except not in the form of a polite request. Post more pig race. Promptly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
            Thanks guys! Exposure for all the action was 1/2000th at f/5.6 @ ISO 200. Bright sun helps a lot. Here is un un-cropped frame:   I notice I was at 135mm to 200mm depending on the pig's position on the track. Having the versatility of the zoom allowed a lot of shots that a prime would have been too close for. I was also shooting for the bend around the last corner and most of those shots suck compared to the jumping photos. Carrying both a crop body and full frame is something I did a long time ago with the 30D and 5D but I always preferred 5D's sensor/viewfinder and thus the 30D was only used to keep my telephoto zoom handy to switch onto the 5D. mrlego fucked around with this message at 01:04 on Jul 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
Look at this lazy guy. These are great!
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
Ahahaha, these are all amazing. Thanks for sharing!
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
Amazing, and all the more better by how you just nonchalantly slid the first pig picture in there. Man, the wood chips they kick up, and #7 barely clearing his jump.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
Now I need to find a pig race to shoot. Here's a question: Is the 5D Classic incompatible with the Yongnuo 565EX flash for High Speed Sync? For the life of me I can't get it to work If that's the case, is there a flash that would let me use HSS with this body?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2014 02:27
|
|
|
This further proves my conviction that as long as you ignore the politicians, Alaska is the best place on earth.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:Now I need to find a pig race to shoot. That flash doesn't have HSS. If you want a YN with HSS, you need the 568 or 500 , they are the only ones that support it. If you use the 622c triggers, they have super sync/hypersync that let's you adjust timing for a full dump to hopefully coincide with the whole exposure (works better with some flashes than others), on non HSS supporting flashes (and strobes)
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
Thank you for the cute pig pics 
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2014 10:07
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:That flash doesn't have HSS. If you want a YN with HSS, you need the 568 or 500 , they are the only ones that support it. Haha oh, well that would explain that! For some reason I had just assumed that the rear curtain button was HSS
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2014 14:22
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:Haha oh, well that would explain that! For some reason I had just assumed that the rear curtain button was HSS The 500 is only a hundred bucks (it's about the size and strength of the canon 480EX2) so if you want something with HSS to play with..
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2014 15:11
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:The 500 is only a hundred bucks (it's about the size and strength of the canon 480EX2) so if you want something with HSS to play with.. Does the 568 do anything more than the 500 besides Wireless Master? If that's the case I'd probably just buy another wireless receiver, I've been wanting to get into multiple strobe photography anyway
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2014 15:39
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:Does the 568 do anything more than the 500 besides Wireless Master? If that's the case I'd probably just buy another wireless receiver, I've been wanting to get into multiple strobe photography anyway 568 has slightly higher GN (58 vs 53), 2.5mm sync instead of PC port 568-2 has wireless master
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2014 15:48
|
|
|
Has anyone tried removing dust with static electricity/magic?  http://www.amazon.com/D-SLR-Sensor-Cleaning-Brush-Sensors/dp/B001B9RI5O/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2014 08:09
|
|
|
I've read that using brushes are inherently risky because you use the same surface on the sensor over and over. Eventually you could scrape the sensor with particles lodged in the brush from previous cleanings. I used this guide to learn how to clean sensors. Extremely thorough, you'll come out an expert at cleaning sensors. http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/ Edit: I use Kimwipes on a cotton swab to clean my sensor. Kimwipes are a common product in the semiconductor industry and Canon uses them when assembling their cameras. Best part is they cost next to nothing. http://www.amazon.com/Kimtech-Science-KimWipes-Delicate-Wipers/dp/B00F462T3Q/ rcman50166 fucked around with this message at 13:38 on Jul 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2014 13:33
|
|
|
That's why you blow the bristles with an air blaster after every single pass. This both cleans the brush out and builds a new static charge. That said I don't think they're super effective, just blasting the sensor and swabbing with cleaning solution seem to do a better job.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2014 14:53
|
|
|
This is why Arctic Butterflies exist, so it spins the everloving poo poo out of the bristles for a full 30 seconds before you wipe the sensor, then you do it again after to get all the crud off it. Shockingly really effective. Also the hilariously big warnings about "DO NOT loving TURN IT ON WHILE IT'S IN YOUR CAMERA".
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
gently caress, those pegs are adoreable Hey Canonailures, I'm wrapping it up (with the last of my Canon gear) in the buy/sell thread: a Sigma 12-24. Has a bit of internal fungus I found looking through it held up to the light, but it doesn't affect pictures. Hasn't grown any in the three years I've been here in Japan (hot/humid, basically mould paradise).
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 01:24
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:gently caress, those pegs are adoreable Hey go away with your broken Honda motorcycle. Just walk around Japan because our gear is actually reliable
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
Why is there a lot of hate against the Canon 35mm f1.4/L? I just purchased one and thought it produces fantastic photos. Albeit I am on a T5i... I am waiting to see if the 7d Mk2 comes out in September, or will probably drop on a Canon 6d...
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
The Sigma 35mm is infinitely better and half of the price. EDIT: That's hyperbole obviously but the new Sigma 35 is widely considered a better lens than the Canon offering and it's quite a bit cheaper as well. Whirlwind Jones fucked around with this message at 05:41 on Jul 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 04:58
|
|
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:The Sigma 35mm is infinitely better and half of the price. Buying one of those sweet ART lenses is something I haven't been able to bring myself to do yet haha. I'd love to, but I feel like it's one of those things I should do only if/when I actually bring in some money with my photography.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 15:48
|
|
|
Yeah, I don't think anyone will argue that the Canon 35mm is lovely by any means, it's just that the Sigma version has come along and edged it out in just about every measurable way. On a full-frame camera, 35mm is great for catching your subject and their surroundings. I started saving pennies to buy the Canon after using a photojournalist friend's, and then the reviews of the Sigma started coming in. I haven't had a chance to test them head-to-head, but I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything, plus I got a newer design and saved a couple hundred bucks. Since then, used it for lots of events, weddings, parties, concerts... it's a fantastic piece of equipment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 16:31
|
|
|
I'm still kind of new to the word of lenses, so I'm curious... how much of a difference is there between the Canon 40mm and 35mm? I'm on a full frame.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-40mm-f-2.8-STM-Pancake-Lens-Review.aspx Not much.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
Canon refurbished has the EF 300mm f2.8L IS II in stock if anyone's looking to drop some crazy cash on an awesome lens: http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/lenses-flashes/refurbished-lenses/ef-300mm-f-28l-is-ii-usm-refurbished Edit: gone already Star War Sex Parrot fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Jul 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:I'm still kind of new to the word of lenses, so I'm curious... how much of a difference is there between the Canon 40mm and 35mm? I'm on a full frame.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:I'm still kind of new to the word of lenses, so I'm curious... how much of a difference is there between the Canon 40mm and 35mm? I'm on a full frame. In terms of focal length, not much. In terms of lens size, weight, etc..., there's a lot of differences.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:The Sigma 35mm is infinitely better and half of the price. The Rokinon/Samyang 35mm managed to do a good deal of the same in terms of image quality already and at a fraction of the price of even the Sigma but I guess nobody cared because its manual focus oh wait I have one for sale right here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3649669
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 04:09
|
|
|
Ugh, just bought a canon 24-105L IS for my vacation to pair with a 60D. It'll be my second L lens next to my trusty 70-200mm f/4L IS. What have I done? The next step into this madness will probably be full-frame in the next few years. drat this expensive hobby!
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
The 24-105L f/4 is pretty amazing as a travel lens. I got to play around with a first gen 24-70 f/2.8, and while it was a sweet lens, it weighed twice what my 24-1105 does.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 10:45
|
|
|
It's a nice photo, but my eye keeps getting drawn to the blue analog cable coming out of his laptop. Dude needs to get a laptop that isn't poo poo. Particularly as it strikes me as 'boss man and his tech' portrait, because I don't know the guy. edit: this is probably because I am a geek edit2: \/\/ this may be true but bossman is sitting at his desk being boss, he ain't giving no presentation. Analog = not the boss of me Tony Montana fucked around with this message at 12:29 on Jul 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 11:08
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:It's a nice photo, but my eye keeps getting drawn to the blue analog cable coming out of his laptop. Dude needs to get a laptop that isn't poo poo. some people need to project things with lower-tier projectors, stop goddamn analogshaming
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 11:21
|
|
|
Maybe it's a work-assigned laptop and he has no control over it. Maybe his work screen doesn't have hdmi. Why are you looking down on someone just because they aren't staying on the cutting edge of technology? Personally, based on what little I know of you two, I'd say he's the smarter man since it would appear that he knows his laptop is good enough and that there is no reason to blow a bunch of money on something he doesn't need. Also there is nothing to indicate he is a boss.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 23:23 |
|
|
TheLastManStanding posted:it would appear that he knows his laptop is good enough and that there is no reason to blow a bunch of money on something he doesn't need
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 01:46
|
|